1415: Henry V's Year of Glory

by Mortimer, Ian

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

  83. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 496.

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

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

  86. Curry, Agincourt, p. 66.

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

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

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

  90. Fears, pp. 206–7.

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

  92. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 472.

  93. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 496.

  94. Foedera, ix, p. 271.

  95. CCR, p. 218.

  96. CCR, p. 232.

  97. CCR, p. 218.

  98. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 38.

  99. CCR, p. 218.

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

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

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

  103. CCR, p. 218.

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

  105. CPR, pp. 337–8.

  106. CPR, p. 339.

  107. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 162.

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

  109. CCR, p. 210; CPR, p. 353.

  110. CPR, p. 355 (both grants).

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

  112. CPR, p. 342.

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

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

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

  July

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

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

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

  4. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 517.

  5. Nicolas (ed.), Testamenta Vetusta, i, pp. 189–90.

  6. Spinka (ed.), Letters, p. 206.

  7. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, pp. 517–19. Also today Henry renewed his licence for the chapter of Chichester Cathedral to elect a new bishop. He probably suggested they elect his humble nominee, Stephen Patrington, at the same time. See CPR, p. 338.

  8. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 489.

  9. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 519.

  10. CCR, p. 215 (dated Winchester). The ports were Sandwich, Lynn, Melcombe, Southampton, Great Yarmouth, Chichester, Plymouth, Fowey, Bristol, Bridgewater, St Botolph’s town (Boston), Kingston upon Hull, Newcastle upon Tyne, Dover and Dartmouth.

  11. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 253–5.

  12. The other lords named were the bishops of Norwich and Chester, the duke of York and the earls of Huntingdon and March. Note that there was no bishop of Chester in 1415; however, Langley was almost certainly there, as he had led previous embassies to France, and had greeted the ambassadors on their arrival.

  13. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, pp. 519–21. The French text, which I have otherwise used here, states that the archbishop referred to ‘your two kingdoms’ which seems most unlikely; the Latin ‘both kingdoms’ is original and to be preferred.

  14. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 502–3.

  15. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 416.

  16. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 503–4.

  17. CPR, pp. 301–2 (York), 341 (murder), 407 (shipbuilding). The ship was probably not the famous Grace Dieu, the largest ship of the middle ages, as this was commissioned the following year from William Soper.

  18. CPR, p. 342. This commisison was actually dated Portchester; but given the distance from Winchester to Portchester (18 miles), it is unlikely that Henry himself rode to and from the castle before the morning.

  19. Spinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance, pp. 224–5.

  20. Hus’s last letters appear in Spinka (ed.), Letters of John Hus, pp. 207–11.

  21. The account of Hus’s death is taken from Spinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance, pp. 225–34, and Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 133–4.

  22. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 504–5. Note the claim made by two others of the embassy that this was not Fusoris’s first meeting with the king, he having spent two hours with him the previous afternoon. Fusoris denied this. See p. 505, n. 6.

  23. Most of this passage comes from Wylie but this specific point is in Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 525.

  24. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 505–6.

  25. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, pp. 522–5.

  26. Johnes (ed.), Monstrelet, i, pp. 329–30.

  27. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 60.

  28. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 256–7.

  29. Kirby (ed.), Signet Letters, p. 197 (Bordeaux); CPR, p. 348 (Fife).

  30. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 511.

  31. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 507.

  32. Gesta, p. 17; Wylie, Henry V, i p. 512.

  33. CCR, pp. 206 (Calais), 216 (Trinity Royal), 219 (Venetians).

  34. CCR, pp. 216 (sergeants), 223 (Wakeryng), 225 (Bordiu), 232 (Rochford).

  35. CPR, p. 351 (both Loddyngton and crown).

  36. Kirby, Signet Letters, p. 161.


  37. Nicolas, Agincourt, appendix, p. 66.

  38. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 498.

  39. Curry, Agincourt, p. 126.

  40. CCR, pp. 277–8.

  41. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 55, 258.

  42. See Gray’s letter of confession in Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 161–3, and Scrope’s letter, ibid. p. 169. For the relationship between Lucy and Gray, see ibid. p. 187. Gray later claimed that Scrope and Arundel had both agreed to support the earl of March three years earlier; but this was probably an attempt to spite Arundel when Gray was facing trial, as Arundel was one of the king’s closest friends and his loyalty was never in doubt.

  43. Foedera, ix, p. 287.

  44. Perfect King, p. 283. The petition is SC 8/332/15711.

  45. CPR, p. 359.

  46. This is Hamulton as transcribed by Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 163. The confession states that Gray came there that day. But he woke up at Southampton, so had reached Southampton on the night of the 20th and it was at Southampton that Cambridge and Gray plotted together (ibid., p. 182).

  47. Testamenta Vetusta, i, p. 192.

  48. Their commissions were drawn up on the 25th, and their instructions on the 28th. See Foedera, ix, pp. 293–7.

  49. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 94.

  50. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 164.

  51. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 169.

  52. John Wakeryng, keeper of the privy seal, was probably at Waltham with the chancellor (CPR, p. 350).

  53. CCR, p. 224. Thomas was Henry Beaufort’s stepfather and guardian as well as his cousin.

  54. CPR, p. 350. As with many of the other similar grants being made at this time, Henry stated that if the money was not repaid within the year, the recipients might dispose of the tabernacle as they saw fit, provided they give the king a month’s notice.

  55. CPR, p. 356.

  56. Barker, Agincourt, p. 77; Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 520–1.

  57. Monstrelet, i, p. 331.

  58. Curry, Agincourt, p. 77.

  59. CCR, p. 278 dates this to 24 June. Foedera, ix, p. 289 dates it to 24 July, not 24 June; Curry in Agincourt, p. 74, follows the July dating. I presume the July date is more likely to be correct, as men were not mustering in June and so were not likely to have need to complain of molestation.

  60. Foedera, ix, p. 288.

  61. CPR, p. 358. Also today Henry dictated a signet letter to the keeper of the privy seal telling him to draw up a licence for the convent of St John the Baptist, Godstow, to elect a new abbess. See Kirby, Signet Letters, p. 161.

  62. CPR, p. 328.

  63. Otway-Ruthven, Medieval Ireland, pp. 348–9.

  64. Henry’s first will, in Latin, appears in Foedera, ix, pp. 289–93. His second, in English, is in Nichols (ed.), Royal Wills, pp. 236–43. The apparent antipathy to Thomas is strengthened in this second will, of 1417, in which he bequeathed the duchy of Lancaster to be divided between his two younger brothers, missing out Thomas entirely. For Henry’s third will, see P. and F. Strong, ‘The Last Will and Codicils of Henry V’, EHR, xcvi, pp. 79–102.

  65. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 164–5.

  66. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 169–70.

  67. Fears, pp. 206–7.

  68. See Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 172–3. Cambridge admitted Scrope knew nothing of the cry of usurper, nor of the plan to give battle with men of the north.

  69. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 493.

  70. Curry, Agincourt, p. 80. Other royal business conducted today includes Henry’s grant of permission for Janico Dartasso to reside in England for life and to continue to receive the annuities granted him there by the king and his father and Richard II, regardless of any laws requiring him to live in Ireland if he enjoyed an income from those parts. A similar grant was made on Henry’s orders to the Irishman, Philip Natervyle. See CPR, p. 356. Today also Henry waived any royal rights in the advowson of a Norfolk church so that Thomas Beaufort could grant it in its entirety to the priory of St Cross and St Mary, Wormingay, to endow a vicar to pray for his soul (CPR, p. 349).

  71. Vaughan, John the Fearless, p. 212.

  72. CPR, p. 344; Curry, Agincourt, p. 76.

  73. S&I, p. 443.

  74. Curry, Agincourt, p. 80.

  75. The original is printed in Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, pp. 526–30. See also Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 493; Curry, Agincourt, p. 51; Nicolas, Agincourt, appendix pp. 5. The last is a very erratic translation. The same letter appears dated 5 August in Waurin, pp. 179–80 and Monstrelet, i, pp. 331–2.

  76. CPR, p. 353.

  77. Foedera, ix, p. 297.

  78. Foedera, ix, p. 298.

  79. Kirby, Signet Letters, p. 161; CPR, pp. 356–7.

  80. CPR, p. 358. The trustees were Thomas Beaufort, Lord Fitzhugh, Sir John Rothenhale, and Robert Morton.

  81. CCR, p. 223. The names were John Yate corviser, John Snowhite corviser, and Christopher Horylade of Derby, all of whom had been arrested in the Southampton area.

  82. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 165.

  83. Wylie, Henry V, ii, pp. 97–8.

  84. Vaughan, John the Fearless, p. 204; Barker, Agincourt, p. 59; Curry, Agincourt, p. 109; Wylie, Henry V, ii, pp. 99–100.

  85. Johnes (ed.), Monstrelet, i, p. 332.

  86. EHD, p. 210; Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 157; Chronica Maiora, pp. 404–5.

  87. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 170

  88. Issues, p. 342.

  89. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 530.

  90. PROME, 1415 November, item 9; CPR, p. 409. The lords were the Earl Marshal and the earls of Salisbury, Suffolk and Oxford, Lord Zouche, Lord Camoys, Lord Fitzhugh and Sir Thomas Erpingham. The justices were William Lasingby and Robert Hull.

  August

  1. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 44.

  2. Mortimer, ‘Richard II and the Succession to the Throne’, pp. 333–4.

  3. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 167–71.

  4. The first version appears in Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 166–7; the second on pp. 172–3.

  5. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 166–7, 172–3.

  6. CPR, p. 331 (Grawe); CPR, p. 365 (More); C 53/185, nos 10 & 11 (Joan). Those mentioned as witnesses were ‘Henry, archbishop of Canterbury; our very dear uncle, the bishop of Winchester, our chancellor; Thomas bishop of Durham; Richard bishop of Norwich; Thomas duke of Clarence, John duke of Bedford, and Humphrey duke of Gloucester our very dear brothers; Edward our very dear kinsman, duke of York; Edmund earl of March; Thomas earl of Arundel our treasurer; and Richard earl of Warwick our very dear kinsman, Sir Henry Fitzhugh our chamberlain; Sir Thomas Erpingham, our steward of the household; and John Wakeryng keeper of the privy seal’. Note, Erpingham had been replaced as steward on 24 July, so this grant must have originally been made and witnessed before then, and was simply engrossed or sealed today.

  7. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 182.

  8. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 129.

  9. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 182–3.

  10. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 183.

  11. CCR, pp. 278–9.

  12. Johnes (ed.), Monstrelet, i, p. 331; Waurin, p. 178; Curry, Agincourt, p. 80.

  13. Taylor, Roskell (eds), Gesta, p. 21.

  14. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 530.

  15. Walsingham, Chronica Maiora, p. 405.

  16. Walsingham, Chronica Maiora, p. 406; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 528.

  17. Pugh, Southampton Plot, p. 173.

  18. CPR, p. 409.

  19. Pugh, Southampton Plot, pp. 184–5.

  20. Pugh, ‘The Southampton Plot of 1415’, pp. 67–8, 129.

  21. CCR, p. 225.

  22. Pugh, ‘The Southampton Plot of 1415’, p. 64.

  23. CPR, pp. 349–50.

  24. Foedera, ix, pp. 302–3.

  25. CPR, p. 360.

  26. CPR, pp. 328, 361.

  27. CPR, p. 378.

  28. CPR, pp. 360; 361–2.

  29. Testamenta Vetusta, i, pp. 190–1 (West, dated 1 August), 192–3 (Oxford);
Nicolas, Agincourt, pp. 339–40; 352 (for the retinues).

  30. CPR, p. 349.

  31. See Archer, Walker (eds), Rulers and Ruled, p. 91 for Sir John Mortimer’s comments on March.

  32. CCR, p. 278.

  33. Foedera, ix, p. 254. The earlier order had been issued on 28 May.

  34. Curry, Agincourt, p. 76.

  35. Wylie, Henry V, ii, pp. 2–3; Willett, ‘Memoir on British Naval Architecture’, Archaeologia, 11, pp. 154–9 at p. 155 for the colour of the sails.

  36. CCR, p. 208.

  37. CCR, pp. 210–11, 225; Foedera, ix, pp. 304–5; Curry, Agincourt, p. 49.

  38. CPR, p. 352.

  39. CCR, p. 227; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 535.

  40. CPR, p. 349.

  41. Henry acknowledged later that it much troubled him that he had given away the Scrope lands. However, despite this confession, he never took steps to reverse the distribution. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 537; PROME, 1423 October, item 29; CPR, p. 361.

  42. CPR, p. 353.

  43. Gesta, p. 21; Wylie, Henry V, ii, p. 5.

  44. Curry, Agincourt, pp. 73, 284. Thirty-five pages accompanied thirty-nine men-at-arms on the return journey.

  45. For Curry’s estimates of the numbers, see Curry, Agincourt, pp. 75–7. Curry discounts the pages, and so assumes the total number of men was in the region of 12,000. There is no reason to suppose the earl of Oxford’s retinue was not representative of the whole army; therefore any assessment of the total number of men must include a number of pages more or less equivalent to the number of men-at-arms.

  46. Perfect King, p. 247.

  47. Gesta, p. 23; Curry, Agincourt, p. 81.

  48. Gesta, p. 23. Note: ‘Steward’ is spelled ‘Stewart’ herein.

  49. Gesta, p. 25.

  50. Gesta, p. 23. There were several ways of reckoning time. The oldest was to divide the daylight into twelve hours, so this could mean around midday. However the same chronicler uses the timing of ‘the fifth hour after noon’ (horam quintam post nonam), so if he had meant between 12 and 1 p.m. he would not have used the older system. Hence the sixth hour here is likely to relate to the sixth hour after midnight, which chimes with Henry’s proclamation of the previous day that he would land in the morning.

  51. Wylie, Henry V, ii, p. 19; Curry, Agincourt, p. 82. For Edward III’s knighting his son, see Perfect King, p. 226.