Henry’s uncle, Edmund, duke of York, came to regret his support for Richard II, despite Richard making him his heir. His change of allegiance in 1399 ensured that Henry’s revolution was almost bloodless.
Jean Creton’s chronicle contains a number of contemporary illustrations of the events of 1399. Here he shows Henry (in the black hat) presenting the captive Richard to the citizens of London.
Pontefract was one of the greatest castles in the kingdom and an important base for the Lancastrians. It was also the place where Richard II was finally imprisoned, and where he was killed on Henry’s orders, almost certainly by enforced starvation.
The spectacular ruins of Conway Castle still brood over the town as they did at the end of the fourteenth century. It was here in August 1399 that Northumberland persuaded Richard to meet Henry, taking him prisoner soon after he left the castle.
Parliament assembled around the empty throne shortly after noon on Tuesday 30 September 1399. Henry (in the tall black hat) sits in the seat of the dukes of Lancaster, with his eldest son, Henry, beside him.
Henry and his eldest son, as king of England and prince of Wales respectively, from the Great Cowcher of the dukes of Lancaster, painted about 1402.
Thomas of Lancaster, duke of Clarence, was Henry’s second - and probably favourite - son. Governor of Ireland at the age of fourteen, he became the epitome of a royal warrior. He married his uncle’s widow, died in battle in 1421, and was buried near Henry at Canterbury.
Ralph Neville, earl of Westmorland, was Henry’s right-hand man in the north. The effigy of his second wife, Joan Beaufort (Henry’s half-sister) lies nearest the camera. Note their Lancastrian livery collars, and those of Thomas and John.
Henry Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, was the second of Henry’s three half-brothers. His arguments with his nephew Thomas and Archbishop Arundel proved extremely divisive. His effigy in Winchester Cathedral shows him in a cardinal’s red hat, which he was awarded in 1426.
John Beaufort, earl of Somerset, was Henry’s eldest half-brother. Although favoured by Richard, he surrendered to Henry in 1399, and thereafter remained unswervingly loyal. He now lies with his widow and her second husband, Thomas, his nephew, in Canterbury Cathedral.
Henry’s seal as duke of Hereford (left) was based on earlier royal seals, such as that of the Black Prince (right). Note, however, that Henry’s seal bears the motto ‘so/ve/rey/ne’ on the feathers. It is possible that the motto was added in July 1399 and relates to his assumption of sovereign power, or regency, at that time.
Henry’s second great seal is acknowledged as one of the two most magnificent royal seals from medieval England (the other being Edward III's Brétigny seal).
This exquisite enamelled gold swan livery badge was found in Dunstable in 1965. Henry’s own accounts for 1391-2 mention him having just such an enamelled gold swan of his own.
This spectacular crown was originally made in Paris about 1380. It probably came to England with Anne of Bohemia, on her marriage to Richard II. Henry gave it to his daughter, Blanche, when she left England to marry Louis of the Rhine in 1402.
The coronation of Henry’s queen, Joan of Navarre, in Westminster Abbey on 26 February 1403.
Henry’s effigy, in Canterbury Cathedral, is the best likeness we have of him, and the benchmark for assessing all other representations shown of the king. His widow, Queen Joan, lies beside him.
Thomas Arundel, archbishop of Canterbury, shown here preaching in 1400, was Henry’s cousin, lifelong supporter and probably his closest friend.
Battlefield Church, near Shrewsbury, marks the site of Henry’s great victory of 1403. The figure above the chancel window represents Henry in armour.
Lancaster Castle gatehouse was Henry’s sole major secular building project. Ironically, today it is named after his father, John of Gaunt.
NOTES
Short titles or abbreviations in the notes are fully described in the select bibliography. All manuscript references relate to documents in The National Archives (TNA) unless otherwise stated. All places of publication are London unless otherwise stated.
Author’s Note
1. Goodman, John of Gaunt, p. 67.
Introduction
1. CH, iii, p. 7.
2. LK, pp. 6–7.
3. Manning (ed.), Life and Raigne of King Henrie IIII, p. 19.
4. CH, iii, p. 9.
5. CH, iii, p. 5.
6. CH, iii, p. 74.
7. Ramsay, Lancaster and York, i, p. 142.
8. CH, iii, p. 74.
9. Edward V – king for just two months – is the only king to have been the subject of just one biographical study, but he was not crowned. Nor did he hold a parliament. At the time of writing, Henry is the subject of Kirby’s book, and his life up to 1399 is the subject of Mary Bruce’s, The Usurper King. Every other post-Conquest king of England has been the subject of at least two serious biographies.
10. Kirby, p. 42.
11. LK, p. 7.
12. LK, p. 20.
13. LK, p. 133.
14. Henry IV by Bryan Bevan (1994) has little literary merit and less historical understanding. The other, The Usurper King by Mary Bruce (1986) is much better but it deals only with Henry’s life up to 1399. Bruce rarely strays from traditional assumptions about Henry and Richard, quick to repeat post-Shakespearian orthodox judgements against him for his ‘usurpation’ and slow to question the traditional, more sympathetic view of Richard II.
15. Chrimes, Ross & Griffiths (eds), Fifteenth-Century England, xii.
16. Since writing this I have heard from Professor Anthony Tuck that he has recently completed a political biography of Henry IV.
17. This statement is based on the assumption that Henry I had no part in the death of William II, and that John’s claim to take precedence over his nephew, Arthur, was lawful.
18. Eric Homberger, Times Higher Education Supplement, 9 October 1987, p. 11, quoted in CB, v. The McFarlane quotation following this comes from the same source.
19. The quotation comes from Philip K. Wilson, Surgery, Skin and Syphilis: Daniel Turner’s London (1667–1741), Clio Medica 54 (Amsterdam, 1999), p. 5, quoting Raphael Samuel, Theatres of Memory 1: Past and Present in Contemporary Culture (1994), p. 4.
20. The quotation comes from P. A. Johnson, Duke Richard of York (Oxford, 1988), preface page. It is reminiscent of McFarlane’s own ‘the formal records alone survive; behind them lies a tangle of human motives … and these are not revealed.’ CB, v.
21. ‘The Limits of Medieval Biography’, conference at the University of Exeter, July 2003. This ‘conclusion’ is drawn from my notes of the paper delivered by the keynote speaker (Professor Pauline Stafford), which was endorsed by almost all those who took part.
1: The Hatch and Brood of Time
1. KC, p. 209.
2. SAC, p. 419.
3. EHD, p. 132.
4. Saul, p. 70.
5. SAC, p. 431; see ibid., p. 419, for the heat of the day and the drinking.
6. KC, p. 211, says two hundred. Walsingham, however, says six hundred men-at-arms and six hundred archers. See SAC, p. 423.
7. EHD, p. 135; Saul, p. 68.
8. SAC, p. 425.
9. This specific reference dates from many years later. See Kirby, p. 19. For references to Ferrour as retained in the king’s service, see CPR 1377–81, pp. 126, 586.
10. EHD, p. 135. See Saul, p. 65, n. 39.
11. Dunn, Great Rising, p. 102.
12. See Appendix One.
13. For more on Richard II’s view of the past, see Ormrod, ‘Richard II’s Sense of English History’.
14. Smallwood, ‘Prophecy of the Six Kings’. For an early version, prior to the revised text written in the Brut (written probably on an annual basis up to 1333), see Taylor, Political Prophecy, pp. 160–64.
15. These elements of the prophecy are taken from the transcript of British Library, Harley 746 in Taylor, Political Prophecy, pp. 160–64, not the later versio
n (c. 1333) in Brut, i, pp. 72–6
16. Brut, i, p. 75.
17. Froissart, ii, pp. 678, 709. Because of the timing of this anecdote, it seems probable that Burghersh was blaming the eventual rule of the lamb on the immorality of the woman whom the prince had married, Richard II’s mother. Either the lamb was a consequence of the union, or the prince would be judged for marrying an immoral woman.
18. Revolution, p. 140.
19. Morgan, ‘Apotheosis of a warmonger’; PK, p. 394.
20. Keiser, ‘Edward III and the Alliterative “Morte Arthure”’.
21. PK, pp. 427–9.
22. PK, p. 266.
23. Alison McHardy, ‘Personal portrait’, p. 11.
24. McHardy, ‘Personal portrait’, p. 12.
25. Froissart, ii, p. 166.
26. The Poetical Works of Geoffrey Chaucer (Aldine ed., 1845), v, p. 283. The last line has been modernised slightly, from ‘Nas sene so blissfull a tresore’.
27. Goodman, John of Gaunt, p. 46.
28. Wylie, iv, p. 331.
29. Goodman, John of Gaunt, p. 46.
30. Goodman, Katherine Swynford, p. 11. He suggests that Blanche, being so named, might have had the duchess as her godmother. If so she must have been born before 1368, and been older than Thomas. However, it is possible that another Blanche stood as her godmother, or that she was named after the late duchess by her mother. Given-Wilson & Curteis, Royal Bastards, p. 148, notes that John stood godfather to her, but states that she was younger than her brother.
31. Goodman, John of Gaunt, p. 49. He had married Constanza in September 1371. He was authorised to use the Castilian royal title in January 1372.
32. As noted in Goodman, Katherine Swynford, p. 11, John’s return in November 1371 – the same month as Sir Hugh Swynford died – almost certainly rules out the often-mentioned possibility that they started their affair during her husband’s lifetime.
33. For example, Register 1372–76, i, pp. 208–9, 211.
34. ODNB, under ‘Mowbray Thomas (I)’.
35. For Richard’s character see McHardy, ‘Personal portrait’; Saul, chapter seventeen.
36. At the age of seventeen Richard built a small lodge on an island in the Thames near Sheen Palace, which one can only see as an attempt to remove himself from court life and find either privacy or isolation. See Mathew, Court, p. 33.
37. In 1372 and early 1373 John spent practically all his time either at Hertford Castle or his London palace, and so would have spent many weeks in Henry’s company. His register has him at Hertford throughout March, in August and from October through to early March 1373, with occasional visits to the Savoy. He spent Holy Week 1373 at Hertford prior to departing with an army to France.
38. Register 1372–76, i, p. 169.
39. The dates of birth of the Beauforts are open to doubt. The dates 1373–7 for all four, put forward by Simon Walker in ODNB (under ‘Swynford, Katherine’), seems to be far too compact a range, especially given John of Gaunt’s absence in France for over a year, not to mention the fact that John’s liaison with Katherine was illicit. Armitage-Smith gives a more likely range of 1373–9. See Armitage-Smith, p. 389.
40. For the illegitimate child by Marie de Saint-Hilaire see Given-Wilson & Curteis, Royal Bastards, p. 147.
41. Register 1372–76, ii, p. 191. The gifts were to (1) his brother the prince, (2) the princess, (3) his wife, the queen of Castile, (4) his brother Edmund, earl of Cambridge, (5–7) Henry, Philippa and Elizabeth, (8) the countess of Cambridge, (9) Lady Poynings, (10) Lady Segrave, (11) his niece, the countess of March, (12) Lady de la Warre, (13) Lady Gourtenay (14) Lord Latimer, (15) Alan Buxeille, (16) Louis Clifford, (17) ‘Monsieur Richard’, (18) Nicholas Sharnesfield, (19) Simon Burley (20) John d’Ypres, (21) William Menowe, (22) John Clanvowe, (23) the queen of Castile’s lady, (24) the governess of his children (Katherine Swynford), (25) John Darcy (26) ‘Senche, a buttoner’.
42. Register 1372–76, i, p. 251.
43. Signet Letters, pp. 4, 51 (Latin and French), 148 (English), 152 (English), 191 (French), 194 (English).
44. See W. L. Warren, King John (1961), pp. 48–9 for the legitimacy of this.
45. Galbraith (ed.), Anonimalle, p. 83.
46. Bennett, ‘Edward III’s Entail’, p. 585; Froissart, i, p. 509.
47. SAC, p. 39.
48. SAC, p. 41.
49. British Library: Cotton Charter XVI 63.
50. Bennett considers the possibility that it is a fifteenth-century forgery and concludes that it is ‘inconceivable’. See Bennett, ‘Edward III’s Entail’, p. 584.
51. There is no indication of the date when Henry was given the courtesy title of Derby; the earliest reference to him as such is the 12 April 1377 writ for the preparation of robes for his knighting at Windsor. See Galway, ‘Alice Perrers’ son John’, p. 243. His father continued to use the title and to receive the profits of the Derby estates for several years.
52. There is no evidence to suggest Henry was in the royal household prior to 1376. However, it would appear that he had already left the custody of Katherine Swynford before 25 July 1376. See Register 1372–76, ii, p. 302.
53. Saul, p. 454, for Arundel. ODNB, under ‘Mowbray, Thomas (I)’ and ‘Vere, Robert de’.
54. Saul, p. 35.
55. For Henry acting as his father’s lieutenant, see Register 1379–83, i, xlvii.
56. McHardy, ‘Personal portrait’, p. 24.
57. DL 28/1/1 fol. 3v. This mentions gilded spangles purchased for the jousts in January 1382. While this payment does not necessarily relate to his taking part in the jousting, just his intention to be there, it has to be noted that spangles were also bought for the 1 May jousts at Hertford, at which Henry definitely did take part. The account includes a payment ‘for six lances for the lord on the last day of April for the jousts which were at Hertford on the first day of May 6s’ on fol. 6r, and goes on to record payments for armour and points for the armour used by Henry on this occasion.
58. Mortimer, ‘Henry IV’s Date of Birth’.
59. Montendre’s 1376 appointment appears in ODNB, under ‘Henry IV’; his wages amounted to a shilling per day in 1381–2. See DL 28/1/1 fol. 7r–9v
60. LC, p. 153.
61. Register 1379–83, i, p. 152 (no. 463); CP, iv, p. 325.
62. On 29 November 1380, at Henry’s request, the king pardoned Thomas Bate of Brynsford for the killing of a man. CPR 1377–81, p. 561.
63. On 7 November 1379 John wrote to his receiver in the county of Norfolk demanding that Henry’s allowance be paid to Hugh Waterton, Henry’s treasurer, for the last Michaelmas term. This shows that Henry’s own household had been established by then, but even so it could have operated to support Henry while he was with the king, in the same way that Henry had his own household and budget even when he was in his father’s household. Further evidence is required for us to be certain of Henry’s independence from Richard’s household by this stage.
64. For the minstrels see LK, p. 16. For the inclusion of the king in Henry’s list of annual 1 January gifts, see for example DL 28/1/2 fol. 17r; DL 28/1/4 fol. 18r.
2: All Courtesy from Heaven
1. See ODNB, under ‘Henry IV’, for the date of 5 February. The article in the same work on Thomas of Woodstock states that the marriage ‘undoubtedly took place in 1380’.
2. Kirby, p. 17.
3. Holmes, Estates, p. 24.
4. See Goodman, John of Gaunt, p. 276, for a discussion of Froissart’s reliability on the haste of the wedding.
5. Kirby notes that the Inquisitions Post Mortem relating to her father’s estate (he dying on 16 January 1373) give her age as two, three or four. On 22 December 1384 she proved herself to be of age (fourteen). See Kirby, p. 18 n. 1. In addition, Mary made an age-related Maundy Thursday payment in 1388 to eighteen poor women (DL 28/1/2 fol. 26r) It would appear almost certain, therefore, that she was born in late 1369 or early 1370, and so eleven years old at the time of her marriage
.
6. Alexander & Binski (eds), Age of Chivalry, pp. 501–4.
7. Summerson, ‘English Bible’.
8. Register 1379–83, i, p. 179.
9. Given-Wilson & Curteis, Royal Bastards, p. 149.
10. DL 28/1/1.
11. DL 28/1/1 fol. 5r. See also Appendix Three for a note on Wylie’s mistranscription of this.
12. DL 28/1/1 fol. 4v. These spangles were made of gilt copper.
13. LK, p. 22.
14. LK, p. 21.
15. For example, Edward III ordered 21,800 gold threads, costing £8 3s 4d, just for two jousting harnesses for a tournament at Clipstone in the first year of his reign, when he was fourteen. See E 101/383/3.
16. E 101/393/10 m. 1.
17. DL 28/1/1, fol. 5v.
18. For a photograph of Edward III’s handwriting, see PK, second plate section; also Charles George Crump, ‘The arrest of Roger Mortimer and Queen Isabel’, EHR, xxvi (1911), pp. 331–2. For Richard II, see Saul, illustration no. 7. The letters are relatively neat but awkwardly formed. For Henry, see C 81/1358 4b.
19. It is cautiously said that he could ‘at least quote a Latin tag’ (Summerson, ‘English Bible’, p. 111). But given the grammar-based education of the period, it is unlikely that he would have learnt to write so well if he had not learnt Latin. He also owned a number of books in Latin, and wrote pithy Latin statements in his own hand.
20. Summerson, ‘English Bible’, p. 113. The Greek gloss might have been supplied by a clerk who came with the emperor of Byzantium in 1400. Several Greek clerks were in the party which went to Eltham, where Henry kept his books, and they spent several months in England. Permission was given to thirteen Greeks, ‘lately sent to the king by the emperor of Constantinople’ to leave England on 29 March 1403 (Syllabus, ii, p. 547).
The Fears of Henry IV: The Life of England's Self-Made King Page 52
