It is with great pleasure that I welcome historian David Santiuste to History … The Interesting Bits, with an article about Owain Glyn Dwr’s daughter, Catrin. Over to David.
Catrin ferch Owain Glyn Dŵr
I was very pleased to be invited to write something for History… The Interesting Bits – a blog I have followed for some time. Above all, I have appreciated Sharon’s efforts to raise awareness of some fascinating medieval women, whose stories are too often neglected. Another such woman is Catrin, a daughter of the Welsh hero Owain Glyn Dŵr, who ultimately paid a heavy price for her father’s ambitions.
Catrin was born after 1383, when Owain, then in his late twenties, married her mother, Margaret Hamner. Catrin was almost certainly one of his oldest legitimate children, although in time she would become part of a large family. Owain and Margaret had eleven children who survived infancy, in addition to Owain’s sons and daughters who were born outside marriage (probably when he was still a bachelor).
Catrin’s early years were presumably spent at her father’s house at Sycharth (near Oswestry). It was described by the bard Iolo Goch as a beautiful and lively place – ‘the fairest timber hall’ – where Owain offered lavish hospitality. Nevertheless, while he had evidently established himself as a man of some status, much of his early career was typical of the minor aristocracy. Through Owain, Catrin could claim descent from Welsh royalty, but her upbringing was surely intended to prepare her for an adult life within the same kind of setting – probably as the wife of a local gentleman who had connections with her family.
Naturally Catrin’s life changed in 1400, when her father launched a ferocious rebellion against King Henry IV of England. Sycharth was no longer safe – it was later destroyed by the English – although Catrin would soon find herself in much grander surroundings, as the rebels took control of many of Wales’s castles. Owain was acclaimed by his supporters as Prince of Wales, and for a time it must have seemed that Welsh independence had finally arrived.
In June 1402 Owain won a significant victory at the Battle of Bryn Glas, and the English commander, Edmund Mortimer, was taken prisoner. Edmund was treated with respect, and he became incensed when King Henry refused to pay his ransom – possibly because he was afraid of the Mortimers, whose strong claim to the throne had been passed over in his own favour. Edmund therefore decided to join Owain, who agreed to help him assert his nephew’s ‘right’ in England. The alliance was sealed in the time-honoured fashion, and Catrin became Edmund’s wife.
Catrin and Edmund had four children – a boy, Lionel, and three girls – although little else is known about their life together. However, their circumstances must have changed from 1405 onwards, as the English began to gain the upper hand in Wales. Owain avoided capture (his last recorded appearance was in 1412), but ultimately some of his family, including Catrin and Edmund, were pinned down at Harlech Castle. From this imposing fortress the Welsh continued to defy the English – and Edmund’s own exploits were celebrated by the bards – but the defenders were eventually starved into submission. The castle was surrendered in February 1409, by which point Edmund had already died.
After the fall of Harlech, Catrin and her surviving children were taken into custody, as was her mother, and they were later held in the Tower of London. They were all still there in June 1413, shortly after Henry V assumed the English throne, but Catrin passed away before the end of the year. The accounts of the Exchequer include a payment in December for her burial in St Swithin’s Church (which, intriguingly, is some distance from the Tower), together with her daughters.
Several historians, such as Terry Breverton, have suggested that Catrin and the others were put to death on the new king’s orders. This is partly based on the assumption that young Lionel was imprisoned with Catrin and subsequently disappeared; it is fair to say that Lionel, with his mixture of English and Welsh royal blood, might have posed a considerable threat to Henry if he had lived. Nevertheless, the evidence is ambiguous, as it is by no means clear that Lionel was taken at Harlech. It seems equally possible that he had already died, like his father – and that he was never in the Tower at all.
The fate of Catrin’s mother is also very uncertain, and one of Catrin’s daughters appears, in fact, to have outlived her; this is explicitly mentioned by the chronicler Adam of Usk, who was often well-informed. Besides, while Henry V could sometimes be a ruthless man, the notion that he ordered the murder of Catrin, and at least some of her children, does not sit well with the leniency he offered to other members of the Mortimer family (and even to Owain’s eldest son). Perhaps the conditions of Catrin’s imprisonment might have played a part, but it seems most likely that her death was due to natural causes.
Catrin was not entirely forgotten. She makes an interesting appearance, for example, in the first part of Shakespeare’s Henry IV. Edmund tells her fondly that ‘I understand thy kisses and thou mine’, but Catrin and her husband remain hampered by the language barrier between them. There is also tension between Catrin and her father, as they exchange words in Welsh, and one begins to suspect that Owain is not always a faithful translator. At last she tells her father that she will sing. Somewhat mollified, Owain instructs Edmund to rest his head in Catrin’s lap: so that she can ‘sing the song that pleaseth you, and on your eyelids crown the god of sleep.’
It is no longer clear what Shakespeare intended: the direction simply states that ‘here the lady sings a Welsh song’. Owain hopes, it would seem, that his daughter will provide a moment of calm before the storms ahead, and in many productions this is the effect achieved. She has been presented rather differently, however, in one recent American production. While her exhausted husband does rest his head in her lap, in this case Catrin’s song is no lullaby. Instead she offers a powerful lament, regretting man’s propensity for self-defeating war.
In keeping with her father’s reputed gifts as a soothsayer, there is also an element of prophecy in the song, as Catrin rightly fears for the future of her ‘home’ (which is surely meant in a broader sense here). The text is adapted from a poem by Hedd Wyn a Welshman who was killed during the First World War, yet even those who cannot understand the words can still appreciate the sense of urgency and pathos. Previously denied the chance to speak directly to the audience, Catrin eventually finds a way to make her message plain.
Another writer to give Catrin a voice is Menna Elfyn, who has imagined her experience of captivity in a moving series of poems. At first Catrin is imprisoned with her children, but then her ‘chicks’ are taken from her: ‘without a farewell kiss, without wrapping them warmly’. ‘They were born to a traitor’, spits out one man, brusquely, although their fate remains uncertain (both for the reader and for Catrin). She pleads with the guards – ‘Take me too. There’s a knife in my heart’ – but she is left in her cell to meet a lonely end.
The medieval church of St Swithin’s was destroyed in the seventeenth century, during the Great Fire of London, and with it Catrin’s tomb. However, she is now represented by a modern statue, which can be found in a garden on the site of the church. The sculpture is intended not only as a commemoration of Catrin’s life, but also as a memorial to all the women and children who have suffered in war.
Terry Breverton, Owain Glyndŵr: The Story of the Last Prince of Wales (Stroud, 2009).
Chris Given-Wilson (ed.), The Chronicle of Adam of Usk, 1377-1421 (Oxford, 1997).
I would also like to thank Sara Hanna-Black for her help and encouragement.
All images from Wikipedia
About the Author
David Santiuste teaches history at the Centre for Open Learning, University of Edinburgh. His most recent book is The Hammer of the Scots. His other publications include Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses, as well as various articles.
David’s website can be found at davidsantiuste.com [insert link: https://davidsantiuste.com/], where he writes an occasional blog. You can follow him on Facebook at David Santiuste Historian or on Twitter @dbsantiuste.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Heroines of the Medieval World, is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018. It can also be ordered worldwide from Book Depository.
You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.
The Wars of the Roses were a tumultuous period in English history, with family fighting family over the greatest prize in the kingdom – the throne of England. But what gave the eventual victor of these brutal and complex wars, Henry Tudor, the right to claim the crown? What made his Beaufort mother the great heiress of medieval England, and how exactly did an illegitimate line come to challenge the English monarchy?
While the Houses of York and Lancaster fought brutally for the crown, other noble families of the kingdom also played integral roles in the wars; grand and prestigious names like the Howards, Mowbrays, Nevilles and Percys were intimately involved in the conflict, but none symbolised the volatile nature of the period quite like the House of Beaufort. Their rise, fall, and rise again is the story of England during the fifteenth century, a dramatic century of war, intrigue and scandal both at home and abroad. Many books have been written about individual members of the dynasty, but never has the whole family been explored as one.
This book uncovers the rise of the Beauforts from bastard stock of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, to esteemed companions of their cousin Henry V, celebrated victor of Agincourt, and tracks their chastening fall with the House of Lancaster during the 1460s and 1470s. The hopes and fortunes of the family gradually came to rest upon the shoulders of a teenage widow named Margaret Beaufort and her young son Henry. From Margaret would rise the House of Tudor, the most famous of all England’s royal houses and a dynasty that owed its crown to the blood of its forebears, the House of Beaufort. From bastards to princes, the Beauforts are medieval England’s most captivating family.
The House of Beaufort: the Bastard Line that Captured the Crown is a masterpiece of historical writing. Nathen Amin has written the story of a family from its very beginning, highlighting the heights of their success, and the depths of their failures. Covering almost exactly 100 years, the book provides a fascinating insight into a family who lived close to the crown, but looked like they would constantly be denied it.
From the love story of Katherine Swynford and John of Gaunt, through the successes and failures of the Hundred Years War, and the devastation of the Wars of the Roses, Nathen Amin retells the fascinating story of the Beauforts in an insightful, balanced manner, which highlights their weaknesses as much as it does their strengths.
As the fourteenth century came to its dramatic close, the Beauforts were well placed to take advantage of their connection to the new regime. John Beaufort, earl of Somerset and the king’s chamberlain, was in his late twenties and evidently adept at dealing with a wide range of political and martial issues. Henry Beaufort was around twenty-five years old and learning the ropes as bishop of Lincoln, while Thomas Beaufort had recently reached adulthood and was ready to put his body on the line for his king. Their sole sister Joan, Meanwhile, had settled into married life as the countess of Westmorland, establishing a Beaufort-blooded Neville hegemony in the north.
As siblings to the king of England, a promising future beckoned for the foursome. Provided they retained the good grace of their half-brother, they had reasonable expectations of widespread patronage that included money, manors and titles…
The author clearly demonstrates his enthusiasm for one of the most famous medieval families; however, this is not a fan book. Their weaknesses and failings are highlighted just as much as their successes. Actions are analysed and dissected to provide insights into not only the family, but the history and politics of England itself.
The House of Beaufort: the Bastard Line that Captured the Crown is beautifully written and reads like a novel of a family saga. And of course, as with all of us, each character in the Beaufort story has human traits that means their actions are not always understood or easily explained. The author clearly comprehends and demonstrates the fickleness of human actions and brings to vivid life this complex family who had such an influence on English history.
The entire Beaufort family will find their stories told in this book, from the first and oldest, John Beaufort, through his brothers, nephews and nieces, sons and grandchildren. The story of Joan Beaufort queen of Scotland, is told with sympathy and compassion, as is the original love story of Katherine Swynford and John of Gaunt. Characters who played a part in the lives and history of the family are also treated with fairness and compassion, such as their legitimate royal siblings and nephews, Joan of Arc and Richard, duke of York.
Any reader will have their favourite Beaufort, and one they love to hate. Thomas Beaufort comes across as the perfect and chivalrous soldier, whilst Henry is the devious but diligent churchmen. Thomas is my favourite, he’s the hero. However, I love that Henry is such an ambiguous character, he is probably the greatest recreation in the book. Nathen Amin has clearly thought through Henry Beaufort’s ambitions, motivations and his actions. He tells the story of a bishop who was not always in favour with the establishment, his personal ambitions putting him at odds with successive kings, despite the fact his abilities were impressive.
Nathen Amin’s passion for the Beauforts comes across in every page. His persuasive, perceptive arguments are all supported with ample evidence and explanation. These arguments and insight are balanced and reflective, even in the divided loyalties of the Wars of the Roses, there is no bias as the story is told.
Comprehensive and compelling, this is a book that should grace the shelves of any fan of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, of the royal Houses of Lancaster and York, and the Hundred Years War, or even for a simple lover of medieval history. This book will become a powerful research tool for anyone looking into the Beaufort family and their links to the crown of England and the momentous events of the Wars of the Roses
About the author: Nathen Amin grew up in the heart of Carmarthenshire, West Wales, and has long had an interest in Welsh history, the Wars of the Roses and the early Tudor period. His first book Tudor Wales was released in 2014 and was well-received, followed by a second book called York Pubs in 2016. His third book, the first full-length biography of the Beaufort family, the House of Beaufort, was released in 2017 and became an Amazon #1 Bestseller for Wars of the Roses. He is currently working on his fourth book, Pretenders to the Tudor Crown, for release in 2019.
Nathen is also the founder of the Henry Tudor Society and has featured discussing the Tudors on BBC radio and television, as well as in print and online media across the UK. He has a degree in Business and Journalism and now lives in York, where he works as a Technical Writer.
The House of Beaufort: the Bastard Line that Captured the Crown is available from Amazon UK and Amberley Publishing and will shortly be released on Amazon US on 1st November.
My book, Heroines of the Medieval World, is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.
You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.
Today it is my pleasure to welcome author Nathen Amin to the blog. Nathen has stopped by on the last day of his blog tour with an extract from his wonderful new book, House of Beaufort, focusing on the Siege of Rouen which took place between July 1418 and January 1419 as part of Henry V’s attempt to conquer Normandy, and ultimately claim the French throne.
The Siege of Rouen (Extract from House of Beaufort by Nathen Amin)
By the summer of 1418, the king’s army was camped outside the gates of Rouen, the final obstacle in reconquering the duchy. Although the city was the second largest in France, it had suffered from the intermittent civil war between the Armagnac and Burgundian factions and had been brutally occupied by both forces. Now, it was to be harassed once more, this time by the English.
In mid-July, King Henry dispatched his uncle Thomas Beaufort to seek the city’s surrender, accompanied by ‘a fayre manye of men of arms and archers’. The duke of Exeter had spent the first few months of the year in England but on 3 March received a summons from his nephew requesting his services once again in France. By May, the duke was back on Norman soil, attended by a force of 500 men-at-arms and 1,500 archers, and on 1 July was appointed Count of Harcourt after capturing the town’s castle. He was also given custody of Lillebonne Castle, situated halfway between Harfleur and Rouen and timely motivation for the exhausting task that lay ahead.
According to the Brut Chronicle, upon arriving outside Rouen, Exeter set up camp and ‘displayed his banner’ before sending ‘herodes into the toun, and bade them to yeld it’. If they chose not to submit, then the duke promised they would ‘deie an harde and sharped deth, and withoute eny mercy or grace’. A small skirmish occurred when ‘a grete meny of men at arms, both on horsbak and eke on foot’ emerged from the town, although Exeter’s resilient force managed to ‘ovirthew an hep of them’, capturing thirty prisoners in the process . It was clear the Rouennais were not going to yield to the duke, who promptly departed south to Pont-de-l’Arche to inform his king. An unimpressed Henry V swiftly mobilised the remainder of his troops and returned to Rouen alongside his uncle.
The siege began in earnest on 29 July 1418, with the city well defended by large numbers of crossbowmen and artillery weaponry. English siege equipment, which had proved effective throughout the campaign, was rendered useless as Henry’s soldiers could not get within range of the city walls to create any discernible damage. Since brute force was not an option, the king resolved to starve the citizens into surrender. Henry spread his commanders around the city to block any attempts by French relief forces bringing supplies, with himself based in the east and his brother Clarence in the west. Exeter was positioned ‘on the north syde, before the Port Denys’, and the three chief commanders were capably supported by John Mowbray, earl of Norfolk, James Butler, earl of Ormond, the lords Harrington, Talbot, Roos, Willoughby and Fitzhugh, and Sir John Cornwallis.
The English expected the Rouennais to surrender after a token resistance, whilst those within the walls stubbornly awaited the arrival of a French army to come to their rescue. Neither occurred. Although outbreaks of dysentery and disease afflicted both Rouen and the English camp, commanders of both sides refused to back down. At one stage, an Englishman known as Sir John le Blanc, Governor of Harfleur and a member of Exeter’s retinue, challenged a French captain named Langnon, the bastard of D’Arly, to a jousting duel. Langnon agreed to the contest and emerged from the beyond the walls with around thirty companions. Although the intention of both men was to run the joust three times, Langnon ferociously unhorsed his adversary at the first attempt, who was then dragged into the city where he succumbed to his injuries. The Frenchman was urged by the English to return le Blanc’s lifeless body, for which he was begrudgingly paid four hundred nobles, possibly from the purse of a presumably demoralised Exeter himself.
By December, the citizens of Rouen were feeling the effect of the siege, having consumed most of their provisions. By Christmas they had ‘nothir bred, ale, nor wyne’ and were forced to survive on horsemeat and the flesh of dogs, mice, rats and cats. The city’s despairing commanders ordered all women and children, along with any old or sick men, to be evicted from Rouen at once as they were deemed to be of no military value. Considering many of those expelled were related to soldiers left behind, it seems likely the commanders intended for them to be honourably received into English hands as prisoners of war, to be fed and watered until the siege was over. They had not counted on the ruthless disposition of the English king.
Although several of King Henry’s soldiers initially endeavoured to feed the evictees from their own rations, he dispatched orders that no assistance was to be provided to the pleading masses. His command was adhered to, and the beleaguered citizens were left to starve in ditches halfway between the English and the city walls, slowly perishing in full view of both camps. It was an utterly brutal decision and intended to demotivate the watching garrison of Rouen, who could only look on shamefacedly as those they had expelled screamed for help that was not forthcoming.
A chilling insight into the horrors of the siege is found in a lengthy poem written by John Page, an English soldier present during the sustained attack. Page’s compassionate poem barely conceals the anguish he experienced during the winter of 1418, or the significant pity he felt for the innocent women and children of Rouen. In one resonating couplet, Page records how he witnessed a starving, orphaned ‘chylde of two yere or three, go a boute to begge hyt brede, fadyr and modyr bothe were dede’, whilst he also came across ‘women holdyn in hyr armys, dede chyldryn in hyr barmys (bosoms)’. After the citizens were expelled, a despondent Page noted how ‘women with their children in their arms’ were begging the soldiers to ‘have marcy uppon us, ye Englysche men’.
There could be no mercy until the English king was placated, and as Rouen could not withstand the tenacious monarch indefinitely, dialogue was finally opened between the two parties after Christmas. The city accepted terms of surrender on 19 January 1419 when, after six months of ‘toilsome siege and many assaults’, Thomas Beaufort was handed the keys to Rouen. The duke galloped into the city, ‘a valiant captain mounted on a goodly courser’, to formally seek the submission of the council. Trumpets, clarions and pipes heralded the duke’s arrival, with his English soldiers, perhaps charged with adrenaline, provocatively shouting ‘St George! St George!’ as they passed through the gates. Page reported the inhabitants were but ‘bonys and skyn’ and beheld their conquerors with great fear, prompting some of the residents to nervously ransom their lives ‘for fifty thousand pounds in gold’. Money was not enough to save a commander named Alain Blanchard; he was promptly executed for having hanged English prisoners from the walls in preceding months.
One can only wonder at the horror which greeted the duke as he rode through the disease-plagued, death-infested streets. Rotting corpses littered the roads, with Page confirming ‘in everyche strete lay dede’ whilst those who had only just survived the ordeal, ‘dyde faster than cartys myght cary away’. The stench alone must have overwhelmed Exeter and his men, forced to navigate their way through grim pandemonium. Even so, Thomas had a duty to perform, and so the duke ‘to the castelle fyrste he roode’ and ‘ryche baners up he set’, including those of St George and the arms of France and England. As the flags fluttered in the wind, their presence above the city represented not only a hard-fought English victory over Rouen, but also the duchy of Normandy.
With Exeter having secured the city, the king followed his uncle into Rouen the following afternoon, and whilst ‘the bells of all the churches were rung’, the surviving ecclesiastical figures emerged to greet the intimidating figure that had reduced their places of worship to rubble. Alongside his commanders, Henry offered thanksgiving in the cathedral before settling into his new lodgings within the castle. His nobles dispersed into the city to find accommodation in any buildings English cannons had failed to destroy.
Exeter finally had the opportunity to rest his weary body, and to reflect on events of previous months, particularly the waste of life that had occurred on both sides of Rouen’s walls. Tragic losses had not been limited to the Normans, for death had also struck at the heart of the Beaufort family. Accompanying his stepfather Clarence on the campaign had been the seventeen-year-old Henry Beaufort, 2nd Earl of Somerset, heir of John Beaufort, and Exeter’s nephew. Information about the youngster’s life is scarce, although his upbringing was overseen by Clarence and partly funded by his namesake uncle, the bishop of Winchester.
Likewise, young Henry’s death is also poorly documented, although later inquisitions in the summer of 1425 place the date of his demise to 25 November 1418, just as the siege of Rouen reached its climax. It’s unclear whether the cause was warfare or disease, or if his uncle Exeter was present at the time having been posted near to the Clarence forces in which the teenage earl served. There is no record of what happened to Henry’s body, whilst his earldom passed to his brother John who became the third Beaufort to hold the Somerset title within a decade. At what point Bishop Beaufort, or the boy’s mother Margaret Holland, became aware of his demise is also uncertain, as is his final resting place. This Henry Beaufort remains an enigma, something of a lost Beaufort, and his death was a sad consequence of the fall of Rouen.
Nathen Amin grew up in the heart of Carmarthenshire and has long had an interest in history. He has a degree in Business and Journalism and runs the Henry Tudor Society. He has an active social media presence promoting historical sites in Wales. He now lives in York.
My book, Heroines of the Medieval World, is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.
You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.
There are many women in history of whom we only have snippets of information. However, those snippets prove to be fascinating and demonstrate how closely the lives of noble houses were tied together – and how they were torn apart. Maud Clifford is one such lady.
Born about 1389 at Brough Castle in Westmoreland, Maud (or Matilda) was the daughter of Thomas Clifford, 6th Baron Clifford, and his wife Elizabeth de Ros. Maud’s brother, John, has also been given 1389 as his possible year of birth. It may be that John or Maud were twins, or that they were born within a year of each other.
Their early childhood cannot have been very pleasant. Their paternal grandfather, Roger Clifford, died in July of 1389, probably of a stroke. In October 1391, their father, Thomas, died. Whilst in Königsberg Thomas had had a disagreement with Sir William Douglas, illegitimate son of the earl of Douglas; Douglas was killed in the ensuing brawl and Clifford, overcome with guilt, went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem in penance. He died on an unidentified Mediterranean island whilst on the way to the Holy City.
Nothing else seems to be known of Maud’s childhood. Sometime before 1406 she was married to John Neville, Lord Latimer. For some unknown reason the marriage was never consummated and Maud successfully sued for an annulment. The marriage was dissolved with very favourable terms for Maud; some of the Neville lands had been put in trust for Maud and, even though the marriage had been declared invalid, she was allowed to keep them.
Maud was, therefore, a very attractive bride for a landless earl. Richard of Conisbrough, earl of Cambridge, was the poorest – and the only landless – earl in England. He lived at Conisbrough Castle in Yorkshire as the tenant of his older brother, Edward, Duke of York. Richard was a widower with 2 small children; his wife, Anne Mortimer, had died sometime after 1411, when she had given birth to their 2nd child, Richard (future Duke of York), probably at Conisbrough Castle. It is not known when Anne died, but it was before 1414, which is the probable date of Maud’s marriage to the earl of Cambridge.
Unfortunately the marriage proved to be short-lived, with Richard of Conisbrough becoming involved in the Southampton Plot, a plan to overthrow King Henry V and replace him with Richard’s brother-in-law, Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March. However, March revealed the plot to the King and Richard and his accomplices were arrested, with Richard beheaded for treason on 5th August 1415.
Richard of Conisbrough was not attainted, so his lands, such as they were, were not forfeit to the crown. Maud was allowed to remain at Conisbrough Castle, and her step-son, Richard, would be allowed to inherit the Dukedom of York from his uncle, Edward, following his death at Agincourt in October 1415.
It is not clear how much contact Maud had with her step-children. The eldest child, Isabel, had been born around 1409; she had been betrothed in 1412 to Sir Thomas Grey and it is possible that she was raised in the household of the Grey family. As Duke of York, Richard’s wardship and marriage was a great prize, and would eventually go to Ralph Neville, earl of Westmoreland; with York marrying Neville’s daughter, Cecily. The Yorks’ eldest and youngest sons would become the Yorkist kings of England; Edward IV and Richard III, respectively.
Maud would continue to use Conisbrough Castle as her principal residence throughout her life; she received an annuity of £100 from the Earl of March, perhaps to assuage his guilt in the part he played in her husband’s downfall. She seems to have led a full and active life, and remained very close to her Clifford family; they stayed with her often and she was a regular visitor to the Clifford home of Skipton Castle. Her nephew, Thomas and his family, lived with her at Conisbrough for a year in 1437, while his castle at Skipton was undergoing extensive works.
On 8th April 1435 Maud’s great-nephew, John Clifford – the future 9th Baron Clifford – was born at Conisbrough Castle. He was the grandson of Maud’s brother, John, and son of her nephew, Thomas, and his wife, Joan Dacre. Baby John would have been born either in the solar of the keep itself, or in the family apartments above the great hall of the inner bailey.
Either way its most likely he was baptised in the small private chapel within the keep; with Maud as his godmother. The chapel is built into one of the keep’s 6 buttresses and, despite the years and water damage, it is a wonder to behold, with exquisite designs carved into the stone columns, and the vaulted ceiling.
Maud’s brother, John, was killed at the siege of Meaux in 1422 and her nephew, Thomas, would be killed at the First Battle of St Albans in 1455, supposedly by Richard, Duke of York, himself. And so it was, that on the 30th december 1460, at the Battle of Wakefield, John Clifford is said to have taken his revenge by killing York’s son Edmund, the 17-year-old earl of Rutland. Whether or not Clifford uttered the words ‘as your father slew mine, so I shall slay thee’ as he killed young Edmund, is entirely debatable, but the event serves to highlight how closely the noble families of the Wars of the Roses were related.
There is some suggestion that Maud remarried in 1429. The supposed groom was John Wentworth of North Elmsall, Yorkshire. However, this seems to be more of a family legend among the Wentworth family and only arose over 100 years after Maud’s death.
Maud’s will demonstrates her closeness to her family, and serves as an insight into her comfortable life and the sumptuous furnishings of the castle.
To Thomas, Lord Clifford, my relation: a ‘hall’ of arras [a fine woven wall-hanging from Arras] bought from Sir Robert Babthorpe; my bed of Arras with three curtains; four cushions of red silk; two long cushions of cloth.
To John Clifford, my godson: 12 silver dishes, 6 salt-cellars signed with the ‘trayfulles’ [trefoils] and a shell.
To Beatrice Waterton, my relation: a gold cross, which belonged to my mother; my green Primary [a book of readings from the Bible]; a diamond; my best furred robe with ‘martes’ [marten fur].
To Katherine Fitzwilliam: the brooch that I wear everyday; a small black Primary; a jewel called Agnus Dei covered with silver and written around with pearls; my best robe furred with miniver [white stoat fur].
To Maud Clifford, my god-daughter: my best gold belt.¹
Maud died, of an unknown illness, at Conisbrough Castle on 26th August 1446 and was buried at Roche Abbey, of which she was a benefactor. Her tomb is now lost to history, but may have been in the nave of the church, where many secular patrons are known to have been buried.2 Though some tombs still remaining, their markings are faded after centuries of exposure to the elements, and none can be definitively identified.
Footnote: ¹English Heritage Guidebook for Conisbrough Castle by Steven Brindle and Agnieszka Sadrei; English Heritage Guidebook for Roche Abbey by Peter Ferguson and Stuart Harrison.
Sources: Sources: TheHistory Today Companion to British History, edited by Juliet Gardiner & Neil Wenborn; Brewer’s British Royalty by David Williamson; Britain’s Royal Families, the Complete Genealogy by Alison Weir; The Wars of the Roses by John Gillingham; The Wordsworth Dictionary of British History by J.P. Kenyon; The Oxford Companion to British History, edited by John Cannon; The Reign of Edward III by WM Ormrod; The Wars of the Roses by Martin J Dougherty; englishmonarchs.co.uk; womenshistory.about.com; findagrave.com; conisbroughcastle.org.uk; hrionline.ac.uk; English Heritage Guidebook for Conisbrough Castle by Steven Brindle and Agnieszka Sadrei; English Heritage Guidebook for Roche Abbey by Peter Ferguson and Stuart Harrison; oxforddnb.com.
Agincourt was an astonishing clash of arms, a pivotal moment in the Hundred Years War and the history of warfare in general.
In August 1415, King Henry V claimed the throne of France and landed an army in Normandy. Two months later, outside the small village of Agincourt in Picardy, he was preparing for certain defeat. On 25 October his exhausted, starving and ailing troops faced a far larger French army, whose soldiers were fresh for combat and determined to destroy their opponents. But what was to take place in the following 24 hours, it seemed only the miraculous intervention of God could explain.
Interlacing eyewitness accounts, background chronicle and documentary sources with a new interpretation of the battle’s onset, acclaimed military historian Michael Jones takes the reader into the heart of this extraordinary feat of arms. He brings the longbowmen and knights to life, portrays the dilemmas of the commanders and shows the brutal reality on the ground, as archers seized swords, daggers and even mallets to beat their opponents, and heavily armoured men-at-arms sank into knee-deep mud in a bloody fight that astounded the courts of Europe.
Last October, at the Harrogate History Festival, I watched a panel entitled ‘600 Years of Beating the French’. Although it concentrated on the Battle of Waterloo – which was commemorating its 200th anniversary – there was one lone voice talking about Agincourt.
I have to admit, I’ve never really read much about Agincourt until last year. I wrote a blog post to commemorate the battle’s 600th anniversary and it piqued my interest. I managed to corner the ‘lone voice’ in the book shop afterwards and told him I had little love for the Lancastrian king and didn’t understand the reverence held for him and his victory at Agincourt.
I asked Dr Jones what was so special about Agincourt and Henry V in particular. Michael Jones was passionate and intensely knowledgeable on the subject and, luckily, was more than happy to try to persuade me of the merits of Henry V.
As a result of the conversation I bought his book (which he very kindly signed), which turned out to be a fascinating read.
24 Hours at Agincourt: 25th October 1415provides a detailed analysis of the battle, focussing on the immediate pre-battle preparations and on the action itself. The book covers all aspects of the campaign – and of campaigning in the early 15th century in general.
24 Hours at Agincourt is a full and frank account of Henry V’s 1415 campaign. Dr Jones analyses not only the leadership but also the propaganda, business transactions, the men themselves and even the religious undertones of the day. He discusses the requirements for a successful military campaign, such as good supply lines, leadership and reconnaissance and analyses the effects of what happens when one or more of these goes wrong.
Michael Jones leads us through the story of Agincourt, from the launch of the campaign in England, through the Siege of Harfleur and the march to Agincourt to the battle itself and the aftermath. He discusses at length the value and quality of both the English and French commanders, and of their decisions of the day, analysing their weapons and tactics – and their overall effectiveness.
Henry’s own battle experience at Shrewsbury in 1405 demonstrated to him the terrible effectiveness of the English longbow, and it is likely that on the Agincourt campaign he wished to forge these bowmen into a formidable fighting force…
The book draws heavily on the primary sources from both sides of the battle. Dr Jones carefully evaluates these sources, analysing them for bias and discussing their proximity to the action. He also uses the examples of earlier battles of the Hundred Years’ War and the wars against Scotland to demonstrate and discuss the development of battle strategies.
The book offers a new interpretation of the battle which attempts to explain some of the confusion and ambiguity in the contemporary sources, providing new insights into the planning and prosecution of the battle. Dr Jones gives credit to Henry V’s impressive group of captains, his ‘Band of Brothers’, discussing the abilities of each and their contributions to the campaign and the battle itself.
A major strength of the book is that Michael Jones looks at the battle from both sides, analysing the French contribution to its outcome as thoroughly as he does the English. The French tactics are explained and discussed, as are the strength and qualities of France’s allies, and the divisions among the commanders.
24 Hours at Agincourt is a lively, descriptive book which demonstrates Dr Jones’ passion and enthusiasm for his subject. The narrative is engaging and entertaining. Michael Jones is passionate about Henry V and the significance of his victory at Agincourt, and this shines through when talking to him and in his writing. He convincingly argues of Henry V’s qualities as a general and also rehabilitates Edward Duke of York as a key figure at the centre of the battle’s history. He explains how it was these two men, working together, who were pivotal to the success of the campaign.
I have to admit, for anyone interested in knowing more about Agincourt, I cannot recommend this book highly enough. Dr Jones’ writing style is so easy and engaging – it was an absolute pleasure to read. I have a new-found admiration for Henry V – even if I still don’t like his father.
I did my history PhD at the University of Bristol and subsequently taught at the University of South West England, Glasgow University and Winchester College. I am a fellow of the Royal Historical Society and a member of the British Commission for Military History and now work freelance as a writer, tour guide and presenter.
Among my history titles I have written on the battles of Agincourt, Bosworth, Stalingrad and Leningrad, and in After Hitler, provided an account of the last days of the Second World War in Europe. I am also the author, with Malcolm Underwood, of The King’s Mother (a biography of Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII), with Philippa Langley, The King’s Grave: the Search for Richard III and with Philippa Gregory and David Baldwin, The Women of the Cousins’ War.
I have been a consultant to a number of TV programmes, including Channel 4’s Richard III: Fact or Fiction, the History Channel’s Warriors series, the National Geographic’s Mystery Files and Russia Today’s The Children of Stalingrad. I have also been interviewed on the BBC’s Today programme and appeared on Melvyn Bragg’s In Our Time.
I am fascinated by timeless themes of military history: leadership, morale and motivation at moments of crisis – and how people respond to challenges against the odds. I have worked closely with veterans of the battle of Stalingrad and siege of Leningrad – and their stories of fortitude and resolve in desperate circumstances remain deeply moving. In my medieval titles, most recently my biography of the Black Prince, I am drawn to the age of chivalry, and the remarkable esprit de corps and camaraderie that bound together its foremost fighters.
In July 1282 King Edward I was in the middle of subduing Wales when his wife, Eleanor of Castile, was reaching her final month of pregnancy. Unlike most royal wives, who would have stayed at home in one of their sumptuous, cosy palaces, Eleanor was in Wales with her husband. After all, Eleanor had been on Crusade with her husband and had even given birth to her daughter, Joan of Acre, in the Holy Land. Wales was no more of a difficulty.
Rhuddlan Castle had been ‘civilised’ for the queen’s use; with the addition of gardens, decorative seating and a fish pond to aid Eleanor’s comfort. However, it was still Edward’s headquarters, where troops were mustering and messengers were coming and going at all hours – hardly the most comfortable and peaceful place for a queen to give birth.
Elizabeth of Rhuddlan was born around the 7th August 1282. She was the youngest surviving daughter of the king and queen’s 15 children – a 16th and final child, Edward (the future Edward II) would be born in 1284. Although the castle must have been hectic during Elizabeth’s birth, one can imagine the rooms surrounding the birthing chamber were kept as serene as possible. Indeed, it seems that Eleanor was allowed the ‘laying-in’ of a whole month following Elizabeth’s birth with her churching at the end of it – a luxury that did not arise all that often for Edward’s queen.
Eleanor’s wardrobe accounts show that the queen purchased several small items for her baby daughter’s use; a basin, some tankards, a storage chest and a bucket. And, unlike her siblings, Eleanor kept Elizabeth with her during the 1st few years of her life. It’s possible she was with her full-time until the age of 2, or was at least visited regularly by Eleanor. Elizabeth was still with her mother when her baby brother and the king’s heir, Edward, was born at Caernarfon in 1284.
When Edward was established in his own household, Elizabeth went with him. She spent most of her childhood in her brother’s company; her education supervised by her mother, often from a distance.
In 1285 Elizabeth and Edward spent the summer with their parents and older sisters. They visited Thomas a Becket’s shrine at Canterbury and spent a week at Leeds Castle in Kent before traveling to Amesbury in Wiltshire. Amesbury Priory was the retirement home of the dowager queen, Eleanor of Provence; and it was during the visit that Elizabeth’s 6-year-old sister, Mary, was veiled as a nun.
Edward I and Eleanor of Castile are famous for having had a close, loving relationship. They appear to have travelled everywhere together. Their children, however, were often left behind, usually in the care of their grandmother, Eleanor of Provence, Henry III’s queen and Edward I’s mother. In 1286, when Elizabeth was still only 3, they left England for the continent to broker peace between France and Aragon, in the hope of another Crusade. Although the Crusade never materialised, Edward and Eleanor were absorbed in their continental possessions until 1289.
However, the children were not forgotten. While in Paris Eleanor bought little items of jewellery for her daughters and sent them other pieces that had been given to her as gifts. She was also known to make offerings for her children’s health at any major shrines she visited.
Arriving at Dover after a 3 year absence, Edward and Eleanor were met by their children; 6-year-old Elizabeth and 4-year-old Edward probably had little or no memory of their parents. Following celebrations for their return in Canterbury, the royal family would spent the next 2 weeks at Leeds Castle, getting to know each other again.
Elizabeth and Eleanor were not especially close. Eleanor had spent half of her daughter’s life away on the Continent and Eleanor’s health began to fail shortly after her return. Elizabeth spent the summer of 1290 touring the countryside with her brother, only attending the court for the weddings of their sisters; Joan in April and Margaret in July.
In October 1290 Elizabeth was summoned to her ailing mother’s bedside at the royal hunting lodge of Clipstone in Nottinghamshire. Eleanor died at Harby in Lincolnshire on the 28th November 1290, the king accompanied her body back for burial at Westminster Abbey, ordering stone crosses to be erected at the places they stopped along the route.
We have no record of how Elizabeth reacted to her mother’s death, she was just 8 years old and had seen her mother rarely over the last 4 years. We can assume that she was saddened, but that life carried on pretty much as normal otherwise, with her day-to-day life remaining constant. In 1297 she and her sister Mary paid to have a special Mass held in honour of their mother, demonstrating their affection, and that she hadn’t been forgotten.
In 1297 Elizabeth’s marriage was celebrated; to John, Count of Holland. John had been educated at Edward’s court following his betrothal to Elizabeth in 1285. He had been one of the competitors for the Scots throne, though with only an outside chance. Elizabeth is said to have thrown a tantrum before the wedding, when not all her jewels were ready in time.
However, the royal wedding went ahead, at Ipswich Priory on 8th January 1297, when Elizabeth was just 14 years old and John was about 13. It seems Elizabeth was very fond of her father – there is some suggestion, too, that she was his favourite – and she was loath to leave him, and England. The king himself threw Elizabeth’s coronet into the fire during an argument over Elizabeth’s refusal to leave England with her husband. It took several letters from Count John, and cajoling from the king, to persuade Elizabeth to accompany her husband to her new country.
In the event, however, the arguing proved unnecessary as Count John died at Haarlem on 10th November 1299. Elizabeth, a childless widow at 17, returned home to her father’s court.
Almost exactly 3 years after the death of her 1st husband, on 14th November 1302, Elizabeth married again. This time there would be no arguments about leaving England as her husband was Humphrey de Bohun, 4th Earl of Hereford and Essex. Before the wedding Humphrey had relinquished all his lands and titles to the crown; after the wedding they were re-granted, jointly, to Humphrey and his new wife.
Elizabeth’s 2nd marriage appears to have been highly successful. Humphrey and Elizabeth weathered the storms of change together. Humphrey had been a stalwart of Edward I’s Scottish campaigns and in 1306 had been rewarded with the forfeited estates of Robert the Bruce. When Elizabeth’s father died in 1307, Humphrey was initially a supporter of the new king, Elizabeth’s brother and childhood companion, Edward II. He is witness to the document that created Piers Gaveston, Edward’s controversial favourite, Earl of Cornwall.
However, in 1310 he was named one of the lords ordainers, set up to reform the king’s household and government. He was stripped of his position as Constable of England for refusing to accompany the king on his Scottish campaign of 1310/11, but was reinstated the following year.
In 1314 Humphrey was one of the commanders of the English forces facing Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn. It is believed his arguments with Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, over who should have precedence, was a major factor contributing to England’s defeat. Gloucester was killed in the fighting, but Humphrey was captured by the Scots; he was exchanged for Robert the Bruce’s queen, Elizabeth de Burgh, who had been held captive by the English since 1306.
Between 1303 and 1316, the couple were to have 11 children, including twin boys, 8 of whom survived childhood; 6 boys and 2 girls. Their eldest daughter, Eleanor, married James Butler, 1st Earl of Ormonde and, following his death, Sir Thomas Dagworth, who was murdered in 1350. While their youngest surviving daughter, Margaret, married Hugh de Courtenay, Earl of Devon and lived until 1391.
Two of their sons would succeed, consecutively to the earldoms of Hereford and Essex; John and Humphrey. While William de Bohun, twin brother of Edward (who drowned in 1334), would be granted the title of Earl of Northampton by his cousin and close friend Edward III. The twin brothers had both been involved in Edward III’s escape from Nottingham Castle and the control of his mother’s lover, Roger Mortimer. Of the 2 remaining sons; Eneas died before 1343 and Edmund married Matilda, the daughter of Nicholas de Segrave, Baron Stowe.
Elizabeth died in childbirth on 5th May 1316; their last daughter, Isabella, died with her. They were buried together at Walden Priory (Waltham Abbey) on 23rd May.
Humphrey survived his wife by 6 years, being killed at the Battle of Boroughbridge in March 1322, fighting with the forces of Thomas of Lancaster against the king. Despite his will requesting he be buried beside his wife at Walden Priory, he was laid to rest at the Church of the Friars Preachers in York.
Elizabeth and Humphrey’s great-granddaughter, Mary de Bohun, married Henry Bolingbroke (the future Henry IV) and was the mother of 5 children, including Henry V.
Pictures courtesy of Wikipedia
Sources: The Oxford Companion to British History Edited by John Cannon; The Plantagenets, the Kings who Made England by Dan Jones; History Today Companion to British History Edited by Juliet Gardiner and Neil Wenborn; Brewer’s British Royalty by David Williamson; Britain’s Royal Families, the Complete Genealogy by Alison Weir; The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens by Mike Ashley; The Plantagenets, the Kings that made Britain by Derek Wilson; oxforddnb.com; Edward I; A Great and Terrible King by Marc Morris; Chronicles of the Age of Chivalry Edited by Elizabeth Hallam; Eleanor of Castile; the Shadow Queen by Sara Cockerill.
Edward of Norwich, 2nd Duke of York, was born into wealth and privilege. Grandson of 2 kings and 1st cousin to 2 kings, his life story is full of ambition, glory and war, duty and service – and a hint of treason. All the ingredients needed for a rollicking good novel; with also the possibility of a strange love story.
Edward was born, probably at King’s Langley, in about 1373. A birthday of 1375 has also been suggested, but 1373 seems most likely. The fact he has Norwich after his name has suggested he could have been born there, but there is a theory that it is a derivation of “d’Everwick”, meaning “of York”.
Edward’s father was Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York and 5th son of Edward III and Philippa of Hainault. His mother was Isabella of Castile, daughter of Pedro the Cruel, king of Castile, and his mistress – and later, wife – Maria de Padilla. Although the couple had 3 children, their marriage doesn’t appear to have been a happy one and there were rumours of scandal surrounding Isabella, with a question mark raised over the paternity of her youngest son, Richard of Conisbrough. Edward also had a sister, Constance, who was close in age to him and born around 1374.
Edward was born into a time of great change in the English monarchy. His grandmother, Philippa, had died in 1369 and his grandfather, Edward III, king since 1327, was slipping into senility, allowing his mistress, Alice Perrers, and her cohorts too much control of his affairs. In 1376 Edward’s eldest son and heir – and England’s hero of the time – Edward, the Black Prince, died after years of debilitating illness. The prince’s death broke the old king, who died the following year, leaving his 10-year-old grandson Richard of Bordeaux, son of the Black Prince, as king.
The government – and the country – was largely in the hands of Edward and Richard’s uncle, John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster. John was the 4th son of Edward III and married to Edward of Norwich’s aunt, Constance of Castile. It was a time of uncertainty; many feared John would usurp the crown for himself, but he stayed loyal to his nephew and Richard was crowned as King Richard II.
At only 4 years old Edward of Norwich attended the coronation, receiving his knighthood as part of the celebrations. Edward would be a loyal supporter of Richard II and received numerous royal grants, including the title of Earl of Rutland in February 1390. He was also given the title Earl of Cork when he accompanied Richard on his Irish campaign in 1394/5, leading several successful missions.
In the 1390s Edward emerged as a leading member of Richard’s circle of intimates. A man of considerable ability, Richard named him “the most able,wise and powerful man that he could think of”¹ and is even said to have considered leaving his crown to Edward. After the death of Richard’s queen, Anne of Bohemia, in 1394, Edward was one of the 3 feoffees of her estate, allowing him control of considerable patronage.
Richard practically showered Edward with lucrative positions, including: admiral of the North & West (1391), Constable of Dover and Warden of the Cinque Ports (1396), Constable of the Tower of London (1397) and Constable of England (1398). He was also involved in the king’s diplomacy in France and the Holy Roman Empire, undertaking diplomatic missions to both.
Richard even took personal interest in Edward’s marriage prospects. In 1381 Edward had been betrothed to Beatriz of Portugal as part of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance against Castile. However, when the Portuguese made peace with Castile, Beatriz was married to Juan I of Castile instead.
Richard II suggested the sister-in-law of Giangaleazzo Visconti of Milan and also considered 3 relatives of Charles VI of France before suggesting Jeanne de Valois, younger sister of Richard’s proposed bride, Isabelle de Valois. Edward was addressed as ‘the king’s brother’ in recognition of their proposed marriages to sisters, even long after Edward’s planned marriage had fallen through.
By October 1398 Edward was married. His bride was a very curious choice for England’s most eligible bachelor. At 25 and likely to inherit his father’s dukedom in the not-too-distant future, Edward must surely have had the choice of every heiress in the kingdom of marriageable age. And yet his bride was twice widowed, 20 years his senior and with no dowry or inheritance to speak of.
Philippa was the 3rd daughter of John Mohun, 2nd Baron Mohun and a founding member of the Order of the Garter, and his wife Joan Burghersh. She had first been married to Walter Fitzwalter, 3rd Baron Fitzwalter, who died in 1386 and secondly to Sir john Golafre who died in 1396. Having no male heirs, Philippa’s mother had sold the reversion of the Mohun estates to Lady Elizabeth Luttrell, leaving her daughters with no landed inheritance.
The fact this was hardly a glittering match for such an illustrious magnate greatly suggests that it was a love match. And, as with Philippa’s previous 2 marriages, the union was to remain childless; Edward would eventually name his young nephew as his heir.
While Edward was finalising the domestic arrangements for his new bride, England was falling into turmoil. Richard II had imprisoned one uncle Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, in Calais and was distrustful of another uncle, John of Gaunt.
In the 2nd half of the 1380s Gloucester and the Lords Appellants had been the focus of opposition against Richard’s personal rule and had attempted to curb the king’s excesses, forcing restrictions to his rule. John of Gaunt had restored order following his return from campaigning in Spain, but in 1397 Gloucester was murdered whilst imprisoned in Calais, most likely on Richard’s orders. It was said Edward had played a leading role in the arrest of Gloucester and the earls of Arundel and Warwick and he certainly benefited from the aftermath, receiving a significant share of the forfeitures that followed.
In September 1397 he was made Duke of Aumale and given the post of Constable of England – formerly held by Gloucester. As Constable, Edward would preside over Richard’s legal reforms, extending the court of chivalry to include treason and other offences which touched the king’s dignity.
Of the other 2 ringleaders of the Lords Appellant, Richard Fitzalan, earl of Arundel was beheaded and Thomas de Beauchamp, earl of Warwick was stripped of his titles and imprisoned on the Isle of Man. Two of the younger members of the Lords Appellants, Thomas of Mowbray, earl of Nottingham and Henry Bolingbroke earl of Derby, had initially escaped any severe retribution. However, in 1398 Richard found a pretext to exile them both from the country.
Bolingbroke was the son of the most powerful man in the kingdom – John of Gaunt – he was also cousin to both Richard II and Edward of Norwich. On Gaunt’s death in 1399, instead of passing his inheritance onto Bolingbroke, Richard appropriated it for the crown, putting some of the lands into Edward’s care – and extending his cousin’s exile to life.
Later that year Richard set off on campaign to Ireland, taking with him his cousin Edward and Bolingbroke’s 13-year-old son, Henry of Monmouth. We don’t know how Edward had reacted to his cousin Henry’s disinheritance, but it can’t have been an easy time for him, caught in the middle of his warring cousins, and he may have felt uneasy with the sudden change in Henry’s circumstances at the hands of the king. He later claimed that he had not drawn any of the revenues from the Lancastrian lands which had been put in his custody.
Whilst Richard was in Ireland Henry of Bolingbroke landed at Ravenspur in Yorkshire, announcing that he had returned only to claim his inheritance. While Richard headed back to England to face him, Henry was progressing through the country, gaining support. Edward advised Richard to send John Montague, Earl of Salisbury, into north Wales while Richard gathered his forces. Montague raised 4,000 men, but his force had disintegrated by the time the king arrived. On arriving in south Wales, Richard had immediately pressed northwards, leaving Edward and his main force behind him.
There seems to be some confusion as to Edward’s actions. He was reputedly attacked as he made his way through Wales, but by which side is unclear. He was said to be part of the delegation sent – by Bolingbroke – to Richard at Flint, wearing Bolingbroke’s livery.
Jean Creton, in his Histoire du Roy d’Angleterre Richard II, says Edward ‘said nothing to the king, but kept at as great a distance as he could from him’². Creton stated there was no man alive that Richard had loved better and depicted Edward as a Judas deliberately betraying his king in 1399.
However, the transition of power from Richard II to Henry IV was far from plain sailing for Edward. Henry and Edward were 1st cousins, but Edward was one of the key personalities of Richard’s tyrannical reign, and a focus for revenge. According to the chronicler, Thomas Walsingham, Edward came close to being lynched as tempers ran hot during Henry’s 1st parliament. Edward was accused of urging Gloucester’s murder, a claim he was forced to vehemently deny. Henry resisted calls for the death penalty for Richard’s adherents, and settled instead for punishment by the confiscation of all titles and rewards granted since 1397.
Edward was one of the greatest losers; he lost the constableships of England and the Tower of London and his manor of Burstwick was granted to the earl of Northumberland. He was no longer Duke of Aumale and back to being, simply, earl of Rutland. However, when parliament finished, Henry confirmed Edward’s custody of the Channel Islands and his lordship of the Isle of Wight, suggesting the new king had confidence in his cousin’s loyalty, even if parliament didn’t.
By the end of 1399 Edward had become embroiled in the Epiphany Rising, the plot to murder Henry IV and his sons during a tournament at Windsor on Twelfth Night. Edward is said to have been a conspirator, but it was he who betrayed the plot to the king, and he was rewarded with the restoration of the lordship of Oakham in Rutland. The plot’s failure meant death for Richard II; Richard had been held at Pontefract Castle since his deposition, but the uncovering of the plot meant he was too dangerous to keep alive. He died around 14th February 1400, probably from starvation.
Edward served the Lancastrian dynasty in much the same way he had Richard II. In October 1400 he was appointed Keeper of North Wales and July 1401 he was dispatched to France as Henry’s lieutenant in Aquitaine, in response to an appeal from the archbishop of Bordeaux who described Edward as ‘the man closest to the king after the king’s sons’.
Whilst in Bordeaux Edward succeeded as the Duke of York, following his father’s death on 1st August 1402. In May of the following year Edward gave up his office to return to England and by the autumn he was campaigning in Wales. In October he was appointed the king’s lieutenant in south Wales for 1 year, but by November the appointment had been extended to 3 years.
Still owed money from his time in Aquitaine, and with Henry unable to meet the costs of the war in Wales, Edward was left in serious financial straits. His men were on the verge of mutiny. However, Edward was one of those rare commanders, who knew how to inspire men and command loyalty. Forced to mortgage his properties to release funds, he made a promise to his troops that, on his honour, he would receive none of his own revenues until they were paid.
The Duke of York’s duty in Wales stood him in good stead in February 1405 after his sister, Constance, implicated him in a plot against the crown. York was imprisoned in Pevensey Castle for 17 weeks. But it was the Prince of Wales who came to his defence in parliament. Henry of Monmouth described Edward as “a loyal and valiant knight”. Speaking of clashes against Owen Glendower, in 1407 Prince Henry said “If it had not been for the duke’s good advice and counsel he and others would have been in great peril and desolation.”
As far as the Prince of Wales was concerned, York “had laboured and served in such a way as to support and embolden all the other members of the company, as if he had been the poorest gentleman in the realm wishing to serve him in order to win honour and renown”.³
The Duke of York was an authority on hunting, translating the work Gaston Phebus, Count of Foix, Livre du Chasse” into English and adding several chapters himself. He dedicated the work, Master of Game to the Prince of Wales, the future Henry V. The book gives us a glimpse of the Duke of York’s personality and shows us why his men and peers thought so much of him:
“I ask of every person who reads this little treatise, or comes to hear of it, whatever their estate or condition, that in plain and simple language they will add to it anything they find useful and remove all that seems superfluous … so that this work may always grow through the advice and counsel of all hunters, and with this in mind, I tried to set out, as simply and clearly as I knew, what I understood of this craft, for the use and remembrance of all.”³
Edward and Prince Henry were particularly close. Edward was something of a mentor to the young Prince of Wales, as well as being his hunting master.
However, when Henry IV and the Prince of Wales quarreled over foreign policy, Edward sided with the king. In 1412 he accompanied the king’s 2nd son, Thomas, on campaign in France, to aid the Armagnacs against the Burgundians. Following the king’s death in 1413 he was preparing to defend Aquitaine in the June, and by August he was in Paris, negotiating a possible marriage between the new king, Henry V and Catherine of Valois.
Edward was back in England by October 1413, but was constantly involved in the diplomacy between England and France that led to Henry’s invasion of the country in 1415. In August 1415 Edward’s brother, Richard of Conisbrough, earl of Cambridge was executed for his involvement in the Southampton Plot to replace Henry V with his Mortimer cousin. For once, the Duke of York was above suspicion.
Shortly after the executions the fleet set sail for France and landed there on 13th August 1415. Almost immediately the army besieged Harfleur, finally taking the small town on 22nd September, but at great cost. During the siege dysentery had spread through the army, decimating Henry’s forces and leaving him with barely 6,000 men to continue the campaign.
As a result, Henry decided to make a run for Calais and safety, hoping to find a crossing of the River Somme whilst avoiding the French army amassing near Rouen. Edward, Duke of York, led the vanguard, taking part in several skirmishes from the harassing French troops and marching his men at an incredible pace. His men were starving and desperately ill – with more succumbing to dysentery every day.
According to historian Michael Jones, the Duke of York used his extensive hunting expertise to formulate the battle plan that would give Henry V the great victory that is still remembered today.
His battle plan depended on a contingent of English archers being able to provoke the French into attacking down an enclosed valley, channelling them into the path of massed volley fire from a 2nd contingent of archers. The knights and men-at-arms would then enclose the survivors and destroy the remainder of the French army.
York was in the thick of the fighting, 90 men were killed defending his banner – the majority of the English casualties on the day. York fought valiantly but was killed as his helmet was smashed into his skull. His men protected their fallen leader’s body, preventing the French from breaking through the thin English line.
The London Chronicler wrote:
The Duke of York was slain,For his king he would not retreat, even by a foot, til his bascinet into his brain was brent [impaled].³
Edward Duke of York had led an illustrious and often controversial career. He had served 3 kings. He had written the first book on hunting in the English language. He could quote Chaucer, was a generous lord and a great military leader. The Chronicler of Godstow regarded him as a “second Solomon”. However, his reputation suffered damage during the Tudor era, when he was accused of being fat and dissolute – it was said he’d died at Agincourt after being suffocated in his armour because he was too heavy to rise after a fall.
The reverence with which Henry treated Edward after his death proves the lie of the later propaganda. Edward’s will was honoured; his nephew Richard inherited his lands and title, gifts to his men were fulfilled, such as Sir John Popham who received armour, a horse and a life rent from one of the Duke’s manors.
Edward asked to be buried in the church at Fotheringhay, where he had recently founded a college of priests. He was laid to rest beneath the choir steps, the grave marked by a marble slab with his figure upon it, engraved in brass. A larger memorial was added in Elizabethan times.
Edward’s wife Philippa survived him by 16 years, spending her widowhood at Carisbrooke Castle as the Lady of the Isle of Wight. She died 17th July 1431 and was buried in Westminster Abbey.
Edward’s nephew Richard, 3rd Duke of York, would go on to challenge Henry VI for the throne, dying at the Battle of Wakefield in December 1460. His son Edward would take up the mantle and succeed as Edward IV in March 1461, just 3 months after his father’s death.
Footnotes: ¹ Given-Wilson quoted in Oxford Database of National Biography; ² Jean Creton Histoire du Roy d’Angleterre Richard II quoted in Oxford Database of National Biography; ³ 24 Hours at Agincourt by Michael Jones.
Pictures courtesy of Wikipedia
Sources: The Oxford Companion to British History Edited by John Cannon; The Plantagenets, the Kings who Made England by Dan Jones; History Today Companion to British History Edited by Juliet Gardiner and Neil Wenborn; Brewer’s British Royalty by David Williamson; 24 Hours at Agincourt by Michael Jones; Agincourt: My Family, the Battle and the Fight for France by Ranulph Fiennes Britain’s Royal Families, the Complete Genealogy by Alison Weir; The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens by Mike Ashley; The Plantagenets, the Kings that made Britain by Derek Wilson; englishmonarchs.co.uk; oxforddnb.com; britannica.com; upenn.edu.
Born sometime around 1382 Anne of Gloucester was the daughter of Thomas of Woodstock, 1st Duke of Gloucester, and Eleanor de Bohun.
Anne’s parentage was impeccable. Her father was the youngest son of the late king Edward III and his queen Philippa of Hainault, making Anne first cousins with the 2 subsequent kings, Richard II and Henry IV. Along with Henry IV’s wife, Mary de Bohun, Anne’s mother was co-heiress of the earls of Hereford.
Anne’s childhood would have been marred by the political conflicts of Richard II’s reign. By the late 1380s her father had set himself up in opposition to the king’s tyrannical rule and his reliance on personal favourites. As a leader of the Lords Appellant he was responsible for the arrest of Richard’s favourites and the curbing of the king’s powers.
Anne was probably born at Pleshey Castle and it was also the scene of her first wedding. In June 1391, aged only 8 or 9, Anne was married to Thomas Stafford, 3rd Earl of Stafford, who was about 15 years her senior. Thomas died in 1392, before the marriage could be consummated. Even before Thomas Stafford’s death, it seems, provision had already been made for Anne to marry one of his younger brothers. The brothers, William and Edmund, were wards of Anne’s father. The year after the elder boy William, died in 1395 (aged about 19), Anne was married to Edmund, now 5th Earl of Stafford.
In the year following her marriage, Anne was to suffer further tragedy when her father was personally arrested by the king, whilst recovering from illness at the family’s home of Pleshey Castle, Essex. Thomas was transported to imprisonment in Calais to await trial, under the care of the earl of Nottingham, from where his death was reported in September of the same year. A later inquiry established that Thomas Duke of Gloucester had been murdered, most likely on the night of 8th September, smothered under a mattress.
The Duke was declared a traitor and his lands and property were forfeited to the crown. Anne’s only brother, Humphrey, was made a ward of King Richard II and was with the king in Ireland 2 years later, when Henry Bolingbroke invaded England and claimed the crown as Henry IV. The new king ordered Humphrey’s return to England, but he died on the voyage home in August 1399, aged just 18.
Anne’s life was hit by 2 further losses in close succession. Her mother, Eleanor de Bohun died on 3rd October 1399. The Chronicler, Walsingham, said she died of a broken heart following the deaths of her husband and only son. Anne’s unmarried sister, Joan, died in August 1400. With her only remaining sibling, Isabel, taking the veil at the Minoresses in London on her 16th birthday in April 1402, Anne became one of the greatest heiresses in the kingdom. From 1399 she was recognised as Countess of Buckingham, Hereford and Northampton and was made a Lady of the Garter in 1405.
In these same years Anne gave birth to 2 daughters and a son. Of her daughters Philippa died young and Anne would marry consecutively her cousins Edmund Mortimer, earl of March and John Holland, 3rd Duke of Exeter. Anne’s only son by Edmund Stafford, Humphrey, was born in 1402 and would go on to become the Duke of Buckingham. Loyal to King Henry VI at the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses, he would be killed at the Battle of Northampton in 1460. Humphrey’s son, Henry, would be husband to Henry VII’s mother, Margaret Beaufort.
On 21st July 1403 Anne was made a widow for the second time, when Edmund was killed fighting for the king at the Battle of Shrewsbury. Still only in her early 20s Anne was left with 2 young children and a dower income of £1500 a year. However, with her dower properties stretched across the strategically important Welsh Marches Anne’s remarriage was of great interest to Henry IV.
Of immediate concern was the security of those dower properties, giving Henry IV’s ongoing conflict with Owain Glyn Dwr and the Welsh. Sir William Bourchier, Count of Eu, was dispatched to help protect Anne and her properties from any Welsh incursions. And it was with this same knight that Anne, taking her future into her own hands, contracted a secret marriage some time before 20th November 1405.
The king was displeased with the clandestine marriage and the couple were fined ‘great sums’. However, Bourchier it seems was highly charismatic, a capable soldier and valued administrator, all factors which, when added to his proven loyalty to the Lancastrian king, helped to ensure that the couple was soon forgiven.
Sir William Bourchier would continue his impressive career under Henry V; fighting at Agincourt in 1415, after which he was appointed Constable of the Tower of London and took responsibility of the high-profile French prisoners captured in the battle. In letters Anne described with pride ‘the valiant prowess, wisdom and good governance’ her husband .
The couple seems to have been genuinely in love and soon had a nursery full of children, with 4 sons and a daughter all born before 1415. Anne promoted the careers of all her children and arranged marriages for them.
William and Anne’s eldest son, Henry 1st Earl of Essex was married to Isabel of Cambridge, daughter of Richard of Consibrough. A Yorkist supporter, he fought at the Second battle of St Albans and at Towton, dying in April 1483.
Thomas Bourchier, most likely Anne and William’s second son, went to Oxford and then joined the Church. He rose to become Archbishop of Canterbury in 1454 and was made a cardinal in 1467. Although he was Chancellor for a short time, in the reign of Henry VI, Thomas was a loyal supporter of and it was Edward IV himself who wrote to the pope urging for Thomas’s promotion to cardinal. In his position as Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas crowned both Richard III and Henry VII. He died in 1486 and was buried next to the high altar in Canterbury Cathedral.
Of their other sons; William Bourchier became Baron Fitzwarin in right of his wife and Sir John Bourchier who was created Baron Berners following his marriage to Margery Berners and was Constable of Windsor Castle in the 1460s. Anne and William’s only daughter, Eleanor Bourchier, married John de Mowbray, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, and was the mother of another John, the 4th Duke.
Although they seem to have been on opposing sides of the political spectrum, Humphrey Stafford remained close to his mother and his Bourchier half-siblings.
Anne was widowed for a third and final time when William died at Troyes in 1420. His body was sent back to England for burial at Llanthony Priory in Gloucestershire. Anne had an enduring friendship with the Prior, John Wyche, and corresponded with him in both French and English.
Although not yet 40 Anne never remarried. Throughout her marriages – and after – she was personally involved in estate management and her letters demonstrate a sound business acumen. Anne had loyal and talented administrators who helped her fight for her interests. As earl of Buckingham, Anne’s father had revenues of £1,000 a year from the lordships of Oakham (Rutland) and Holderness (Yorkshire). While Oakham was returned to Anne in 1414 she only recovered Holderness in 1437, the year before she died.
While Anne was cousin to the king, Henry V, both he and his father had resented the unequal division of the Bohun inheritance in her favour. Henry V was to eventually force a new settlement on the recently widowed countess in 1421, this time heavily weighted for the king’s benefit, leaving Anne just £1200 a year from her mother’s inheritance; and even this often fell into arrears.
Anne had shared a love of the church with her mother and was known for her piety and love of learning. She died in October 1438, aged around 55. Her will, written “in the Englyshe tonge for my most profit redyng and vnderstandyng”, remembered her “most trewe and diligent” reatiners (Register of Henry Chichele.
Anne of Gloucester, mother to combatants on both sides of the Wars of the Roses and granddaughter of Edward III, was buried beside William at Llanthony Priory where, in 1453, her children set up a perpetual chantry for the welfare of their souls.
Sources: The Oxford Companion to British History Edited by John Cannon.; Brewer’s British Royalty by David Williamson; Britain’s Royal Families, the Complete Genealogy by Alison Weir; Chronicles of the Age of Chivalry Edited by Elizabeth Hallam; The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens by Mike Ashley; oxforddnb.com; geni.com; thepeerage.com.
This Sunday, 25th of October 2015, marks the 600th anniversary of the Battle of Agincourt. One of the greatest battles in English history, it epitomises the pinnacle of English successes against their traditional enemy, France, during the epic struggle of the Hundred Years War. But what started it all?
The origins of the Hundred Years War go back 200 years before its outbreak, to Henry II. His marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine meant he was not only Duke of Normandy in the north of France, but Duke of Aquitaine in the south. And his accession to the English throne in 1154 brought all these French possessions to the crown of England. This made for the awkward position that the sovereign of England was technically a vassal of the King of France, causing no end of squabbles and friction for years to come.
Wars broke out frequently and the French gradually ate away at England’s French possessions.
It all came to a head with a crisis in the French monarchy. When Philip IV, the Fair, of France, died in 1314, he was successively succeeded by each of his 3 sons; Louis X, Philip V and Charles IV. Only one of these kings produced a son, King John the Posthumous was born 5 months after the death of Louis X, his father, and lived – and ruled – for only 5 days. Following the death of the baby king Philip V seized the crown, effectively disinheriting Louis X’s daughter, Jeanne.
Although Salic Law was known in France, it generally related to property and had never actually been used to decide the succession to the crown. However, Philip V made certain that it would be from now on, by having the Estates General declare that women were not eligible to succeed to the throne of France.
Unfortunately for the French royal family, both Philip V and his successor, his brother, Charles IV, only had daughters. Charles IV died in 1328, leaving his wife, Jeanne d’Evreux, pregnant; a regency council was set up to rule the country, until the child’s birth. However, Jeanne gave birth to a daughter, Blanche, and France had to find a new king.
One candidate was Edward III of England. Edward was the oldest grandson of Philip IV through his daughter Isabella of France, Queen of Edward II of England. However, Edward III was only 15 years old and England – and Edward – were controlled by Edward’s mother, Isabella of France, and her lover, Roger Mortimer, who had deposed and possibly murdered Edward’s father, Edward II. Edward’s claim came through his mother – and he was English.
The assembly of French notables, convened to decide who should be king, declared: “It had never been seen or known that the kingdom of France should be subject to the government of the King of England.“
As a result, they chose another as their king; the nephew of Philip IV, Philip of Valois, Count of Anjou and Maine. Philip was in his thirties, with a 9-year-old son, and had been Regent during Jeanne’s pregnancy.
Edward III initially agreed to pay homage to Philip VI, who was crowned in 1329, for his French possessions. However, he was still a minor and under the tutelage of his mother and Mortimer. When Edward took control of his kingdom, in 1330, he had a change of heart. Irked by Philip’s support for the Scots, and encouraged by local conflicts in Guyenne, Edward questioned the validity of his oath to Philip, made while he was still a minor. And in 1337 Edward III declared war.
Initial English successes devastated France: the French fleet was destroyed at Sluys in 1340, and Edward III ravaged the French countryside, in a great chevauchee. In an attempt to bring the French to battle Edward’s ‘scorched-earth’ policy saw towns besieged, convents and monasteries ransacked and the people displaced. The French were eventually brought to battle at Crecy in 1346, where their cavalry was destroyed. The fall of Calais followed in 1347.
In 1356, at the Battle of Poitiers, the English, under the Black Prince (Edward, Prince of Wales) captured France’s king, John II the Good. John was sent to England – where he died in 1364, still awaiting the payment of his vast ransom.
The 1360 Treaty of Bretigny was the crowning success of England’s war, with Edward III taking possession of almost a third of France.
Although technically at peace, the two countries kept picking at each other – each supporting opposing factions in places of mutual interest, such as Brittany. In then end, with the failing health of the Black Prince, and and aging Edward III, a resurgent France emerged under Charles V; which saw English possessions reduced to a few ports and their environs by 1380.
After 1389 truces between France and England were almost continuous. Richard II married Isabella of Valois, daughter of Charles VI, in 1396, as part of a 28 year truce.
Charles VI had suffered from madness since 1392 and France had started to implode. The king was surrounded by bad councillors and factions, such as the Armagnacs and Burgundians, had riven the country apart with their in-fighting. Many parts of France were ruled almost totally independent of central government.
However, with the turn of the century, the English had problems of their own and were unable to take advantage of France’s woes. Richard II was imprisoned and, later, murdered by the usurping Henry IV, who spent his reign preoccupied by troubles and rebellions in England.
Henry IV and his son, the future Henry V were divided as to which French factions they should support; Henry IV preferred the Armagnacs, while the Prince of Wales supported the Burgundians.
With the death of Henry IV, and the accession of Henry V, English ambitions turned to France yet again. Almost immediately, Henry laid claim to his inheritance in France. he made a pretense of negotiating for peace, while preparing for war. He would accept nothing less than the total reinstatement of the Plantagenet possessions in France.
There is an, almost certainly, apocryphal story of Henry V taking up arms against the French after they jokingly sent him a set of tennis balls, suggesting that he stick to such ‘childish’ occupations, for which he had established a reputation during his father’s reign.
Henry saw war with France as a way of diverting the interests of the great nobles away from internal conflicts, thus restoring and maintaining order at home. With peace negotiations faltering, and having dealt with several plots to displace him from his throne – the last of which, the Southampton Plot was foiled in the first week of August 1415 – Henry V and his army arrived in Normandy on 13th August 1415 and laid siege to Harfleur.
Harfleur held until 23rd September, by which time Henry’s army of about 10,000 was greatly depleted by dysentery. He was making for Calais – and England – when, on 25th October, he came face-to-face with the French.
Jacqueline of Hainault, also known as Jacoba of Bavaria, is one of those Medieval ladies who seems to have slipped under the radar of history. Until last week I knew very little about her; and yet her life is one of the most colourful I have ever come across.
Born on or shortly before the 16th July 1401 at Le Quesnoy, Flanders, Jacqueline was the daughter of William VI, Count of Holland, and Marguerite of Burgundy; her grandfather was Philippe the Bold, Duke of Burgundy.
Although she had at least 9 illegitimate siblings, Jacqueline was her father’s sole heir. And in order to strengthen her position, William arranged a marriage for Jacqueline while she was still an infant. In 1406 she was betrothed to John of Valois, Duke of Touraine, the fourth son of King Charles VI of France, and only 3 years older than Jacqueline. With little chance of inheriting the French throne, and with a view to him eventually ruling Hainault, the responsibility for John’s education was handed over to Count William; he would be raised alongside his future wife.
The young couple married in 1415 at The Hague. Only 4 months after the wedding John’s older brother Louis, Dauphin of France, died and John became Dauphin and heir to the French throne.
Within 2 years John himself was dead, on 4th April 1417, with rumours circulating that he was poisoned, although this is far from certain. His younger brother, Charles, became Dauphin and Jacqueline was a widow at only 16.
In the meantime, although Holland was not subject to Salic Law (where a woman could not inherit), Jacqueline’s father had been having a hard time getting his people and Sigismund, the Holy Roman Emperor, to accept Jacqueline as his heir. They finally refused outright in 1416.
When Count William died only 2 months after her husband, on 31st May 1417, Jacqueline was accepted as Countess of Hainault; however Holland and Zeeland recognised her uncle John of Bavaria, backed by Sigismund, as their count.
At this point Jacqueline’s mother and uncle stepped in. Margaret of Burgundy and her brother, John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, started looking around for a suitable husband for Jacqueline. Unfortunately they decided on her cousin John IV, Duke of Brabant. The Duke of Burgundy saw the marriage as an opportunity to expand his influence over Jacqueline’s lands, and applied for a Papal Dispensation. The Dispensation was given, but withdrawn just over 2 weeks later, following pressure from Sigismund.
The couple married anyway, in March 1418. The marriage was a disaster, politically and personally. John managed to antagonise both his wife and her subjects. Initially Jacqueline’s husband helped in the fight against her avaricious uncle, John of Bavaria and in 1419 John the Fearless settled the dispute in his niece’s favour; only for John of Brabant to then mortgage Holland and Zeeland to John of Bavaria for a period of 12 years.
Jacqueline ran away; first to her mother in Hainault and then on to England, where she was welcomed by Henry V. The king granted her a pension, and made her godmother to his only son, the future Henry VI.
In 1421 Jacqueline repudiated her marriage to John of Brabant, with the support of Antipope Benedict XIII in Avignon. And in 1422, with a view to strengthening England’s position against France, she married the king’s younger brother Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. The public were behind the marriage and even supported Humphrey’s attempts to recover Jacqueline’s lands.
As Duchess of Gloucester, Jacqueline was made a Lady of the Garter in 1423, and, at some point, accepted Eleanor Cobham into her household as a lady-in-waiting; Eleanor would later go on to become Humphrey’s 2nd wife. In 1424 Jacqueline gave birth to her only recorded child, who was stillborn.
In 1424 Humphrey and Jacqueline led an army to the Low Countries, to recover Jacqueline;s inheritance. Though Humphrey managed to recover much of Hainault, he came up against opposition from the new Duke of Burgundy, Philip III The Good, destroying the Anglo-Burgundian alliance.
Many of Jacqueline’s subjects, however, considered Humphrey an invader and, refusing to recognising him as count, gave their support to Burgundy. So, in 1425, Humphrey returned to England; Jacqueline’s mother had objected to her returning with him, so she moved on to Mons.
The officials of Mons had promised to protect Jacqueline, but once Gloucester was gone, she was handed over to the Duke of Burgundy and imprisoned in Ghent. In the same year her uncle, John of Bavaria, died and her lands were handed over to Burgundy, as regent, by John of Brabant.
Jacqueline escaped her imprisonment, dressed as a man, and escaped escorted by 2 knights, to Gouda. From Gouda, she led the Dutch resistance to the Burgundian takeover. However, when Burgundy besieged Gouda, she was forced to surrender.
In the meantime, Pope Martin V had authorised an investigation into the state of Jacqueline’s marriages. In 1428 he declared her marriage to Humphrey of Gloucester null and void, as her marriage to John of Brabant was legally valid. John of Brabant had died in 1426, so a remarriage between Humphrey and Jacqueline would have been acceptable – had Humphrey’s attentions not already turned to Eleanor Cobham.
Jacqueline still had sympathisers in England, however and the ladies of London petitioned Humphrey, according to the chronicler Stow their letters “containing matter of rebuke and sharpe reprehension of the Duke of Gloucester, because he would not deliver his wife Jacqueline out of her grievous imprisonment, being then held prisoner by the Duke of Burgundy, suffering her to remaine so unkindly, contrary to the law of God and the honourable estate of matrimony”.
Humphrey had managed to get a 9,000 marks grant from the king’s council, in 1427, to help Jacqueline recover her lands; however John, Duke of Bedford, put a stop to the expedition by opening up negotiations with the Duke of Burgundy.
So, in 1428, Jacqueline of Hainault is a prisoner of the Duke of Burgundy, with no prospect of help from England. With few options left to her, she came to an agreement with Philip the Good. In the Treaty of Delft, of 3rd July 1428, Jacqueline retained her title of countess, but administration for her 3 counties passed to Philip. Philip the Good was confirmed as her heir, should she die childless; and she was not to marry without the consent of Philip, her mother and the 3 counties.
Philip, however, broke the treaty by mortgaging the revenues of Holland and Zeeland to members of the Borselen family from Zeeland.
In 1432 Jacqueline secretly married one of the Borselen family, Francis, Lord of Zuilen and St Maartensdijk.
Whether or not this was a plot to overthrow Burgundian rule in Holland, Philip the good certainly saw it that way. Francis was imprisoned in October 1432 and Jacqueline was forced to abdicate as countess in 1433, relinquishing her titles in return for an income from several estates. After years of civil war, Jacqueline’s financial position prior to the settlement had been desperate.
Jacqueline and Francis’ relationship appears to have been a love match and, in July 1434 they had a 2nd, public, marriage ceremony at Maartensdijk Castle. After such an adventurous life, and having fought so hard for her inheritance, Jacqueline settled down to married life. Her happiness was short-lived, however, as Jacqueline died at Teilingen on 8th October 1436, probably of tuberculosis. She was buried at the Hague.
Pictures courtesy of Wikipedia
Sources: Brewer’s British Royalty by David Williamson; History Today Companion to British History Edited by Juliet Gardiner and Neil Wenborn; Britain’s Royal Families, the Complete Genealogy by Alison Weir; medievalists.net; r3.org; susanhigginbotham.com; britannica.com; historyofroyalwomen.com.
From Emma of Normandy, wife of both King Cnut and Æthelred II to Saint Margaret, a descendant of Alfred the Great himself, Silk and the Sword: the Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066. Available now from Amazon UK, Amberley Publishing,Book Depository and Amazon US.
Telling the stories of some of the most remarkable women from Medieval history, Heroines of the Medieval World, is now available in hardback in the UK from Amazon UK, and in the US from Amazon US. It is available now in paperback in the UK from from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon and worldwide from Book Depository.
You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.