by Penny Lawne
As Richard had his powerful uncle to protect him, and a council to rule for him, Joan could have decided at this stage to retire from court. Now that Richard was king there could be no question of him continuing to live in his mother’s household, or staying resident largely in Kennington as he had done in the months after his father’s death. He was naturally expected to live in the royal palaces with his own household and retinue. Wallingford was Joan’s favourite home and not too far from court, so that it would have been possible for her to visit easily whenever she wanted or was required to do so. Joan may well have considered it, and secured the appointment of Aubrey de Vere to be steward of the castle in October 1377.10 But Richard was still very young and, despite the acclamation with which his accession had been greeted, and the support of his uncle Gaunt, his position was by no means secure. Joan did not yet feel that she wanted to leave him. Her overriding concern seems to have been to protect Richard and provide him with support. As the king’s mother Joan had enormous influence, but she was so discreet in exercising it that it is hard to discern. Joan was clearly still wary of attracting attention in any way which might be detrimental to Richard and had no intention of becoming openly associated with the politics of the new regime. However, she was instrumental in enabling the appointment of many of those who would serve her son in his household. Inevitably there were many courtiers seeking positions close to the new king to further their own interests, and some who would see it as their right to do so by virtue of their rank. It was important for Joan that her son was surrounded by familiar, trusted retainers who would have his interests at heart rather than their own, and to a large extent she was able to ensure this. The emotional attachment between Richard and his tutor, Simon Burley, was strong, but now that Richard was king their time together would inevitably become more limited. On the day of his coronation Richard appointed Simon Burley master of falcons and keeper of the mews at Charing Cross, and in August he was made constable of Windsor Castle and given responsibility for looking after Kennington Palace.11 In addition, Burley was appointed a chamber knight. These appointments were both a reward and ensured that Burley would have responsibilities which would keep him close to the king, even when he no longer needed as a tutor. The personal chamber of the king, where he slept, was guarded by chamber knights acting as bodyguards. They, and the chamber squires, would spend most of their time close to Richard. Although there is no direct evidence showing Joan was responsible for their appointment, there can be no doubt that she was behind it. Apart from Simon Burley, the other chamber knights appointed to serve Richard were mainly knights whom he had known from early childhood, who had served his father and retained a close bond with Joan: Richard’s first tutor Richard Abberbury, Nicholas Bond, Lewis Clifford, Aubrey de Vere, William Beauchamp (married to Thomas Holand’s sister-in-law, Joan, daughter of Richard, Earl of Arundel), William Neville, Baldwin Bereford, John Burley, Peter Courtenay, Nicholas Sarnesfield, as well as his half-brother John Holand, and John Holand’s erstwhile guardian John Hay. In addition, nearly half of Richard’s chamber squires (nine of nineteen) were also former servants of his father.12 Richard Stury, another trusted knight and already a chamber knight under Edward III, continued in office.13 Later William Neville and John Clanvowe, two other knights in the same circle, also became chamber knights.14 All received allowances and fees as members of the household, and the chamber knights were granted annuities; Clanvowe and Neville each received 100 marks a year in May 1381.15 Among the clerks entering Richard’s service were several old servants of his father, such as William Packington (Joan’s receiver), Reginald Hilton, Alan Stokes (the prince’s receiver), John Fordham (the prince’s secretary), and, significantly, Robert Braybrooke, who was appointed Richard’s secretary on 20 August 1377.16
As the senior female member of the court Joan’s own taste and preferences would undoubtedly have influenced the tone of the new court, but it is surprisingly difficult to ascertain these. This is in part due to the fact that there are no personal or financial records to indicate how Joan preferred to spend her time, and partly also to her success in adopting a discreet presence. However, it can hardly be a coincidence that many of the knights Joan chose to keep close to her were men with sophisticated literary taste. Simon Burley, Lewis Clifford, Richard Stury and Philip la Vache (later married to Lewis Clifford’s daughter Elizabeth) were all enthusiastic book owners, of both serious-minded reading and courtly romances like The Romance of the Rose, while John Clanvowe wrote verse in English (his one surviving work is The Book of Cupid, originally thought to have been written by Chaucer17), and Sir John Montague (William Montague’s cousin, who had been one of the prince’s knights and continued in Richard’s service, and became steward of the household in October 1381) wrote verses in French.18 Some of them were close friends of Geoffrey Chaucer, whom Joan would have known well. As a young man Chaucer had held a position in the household of Elizabeth de Burgh (Prince Lionel’s first wife), before joining the court as a squire, and he had gone to France on the ill-fated Rheims campaign in 1369, where he was captured. He was married to Philippa de Roet, whose sister Katherine Swynford had become governess to John of Gaunt’s daughters, and then his mistress. Shortly after Richard’s accession to the throne, in 1378, Chaucer had been appointed to be one of the confidential marriage commissioners negotiating the young king’s marriage.19 Although Chaucer was by this time a professional royal servant with considerable experience, he would hardly have achieved this appointment to a matter of such importance to Joan without her approval. Although there is no record of Joan having promoted or patronised Chaucer, or of his having dedicated any of his writings to her, it seems highly likely that Joan would have encouraged and welcomed his attendance at her young son’s court, and enjoyed his work when he read them out to the assembled court.
Joan’s religious views are not clear. The prince had been conventionally religious, patronising several religious foundations, most notably St Albans Abbey, but he had shown a marked devotion to the Trinity. There is no evidence that Joan shared the prince’s interest in the Trinity. The only foundation that Joan is known to have supported is the Benedictine foundation at St Albans, but this does not give any indication of her individual taste, as the abbey enjoyed widespread support among the royal family, having been patronised by Edward III and Queen Philippa as well as the prince, and John of Gaunt was an equally generous patron, giving the monks numerous gifts and making frequent donations.20 Joan’s aunt Blanche Wake and her cousin Margaret, Countess of Norfolk, were also patrons.21 The abbot, Thomas de la Mare, had been a personal friend of the prince, and was on similarly good terms with John of Gaunt. In supporting St Albans Joan was doing no more than was expected of her, and it is likely that she was also on good terms with de la Mare as she stayed at the abbey on several occasions after the prince’s death. The abbey kept a careful list of its benefactors, the more important beautifully illustrated in the Liber Benefactorum, now in the British Library. This contains an image of Joan, indicating that they considered her one of their more important patrons, although this may have had more to do with her status as Princess of Wales than with the generosity she displayed towards them.
There is some evidence of a link between Joan and the Franciscan order, starting with the reinterment of Thomas Holand in the Franciscan church at Stamford (though she may simply have been carrying out his wishes), and in 1380 an astronomical calendar was composed by John Somer, a Franciscan, at the bidding of Thomas Kingsbury, provincial of the Franciscans, ‘at the request of the most noble lady, Joan Princess of Wales’.22 The calendar contained an algorism table, a table of dominical letters, feast days, a calendar of English saints, ruling planets, signs of the zodiac, a table of solar and lunar eclipses, and tables of conjunctions covering the period 1387 to 1462. The work in astrology was used in medical diagnosis and treatment and such works had become fashionably popular among the wealthy (John of Gaunt, for example, later commissioned a similar work).23
The Franciscans had a greater interest in astrology than most of the other religious orders. Presumably Joan received the work, and perhaps she even commissioned Somer to cast her horoscope, or that of another member of the family, such as Richard, but there is no way of knowing whether she did so, or even if she appreciated the work, and gives little assistance in indicating Joan’s own taste. Joan may simply have been continuing the favour towards the Franciscans exhibited by her grandmother Margaret and her mother-in-law Philippa. It is notable that Joan cannot be associated with the founding of any religious establishment, and that even her public support for St Albans cannot be considered unusual. Unlike her uncle, Thomas Wake, who founded an Augustinian priory at Haltemprice in Yorkshire and a Franciscan house at Ware in Hertfordshire, and her cousin Elizabeth de Burgh, who was famously generous towards several religious houses, as well as founding Clare College, Cambridge, there is no evidence that Joan was a major religious patron of any house.24 Joan did not follow their example, though whether this was because she had no inclination to do so cannot be known.
It is possible that Joan had less conventional views, and there has been speculation that she had considerable sympathy for John Wyclif and the Lollard movement. John Wyclif was an Oxford theologian who was strongly critical of the Church and publicly preached against what he regarded as many corrupt practices, advocating a devout and simple life focussing on faith in Christ. His anti-papal and anti-clerical rhetoric appealed to many of the nobility, including John of Gaunt, and it was Bishop Courtenay’s exposure of Wyclif’s heretical views and attack on them which had sparked the feud between Gaunt and Courtenay in 1377. Joan’s intervention on this occasion was obviously of assistance to Wyclif, but her motive appears to have been a desire to help her brother-in-law rather than an attempt to shield and protect the radical preacher. However, Gaunt was himself a sympathiser, and several of the knights close to Joan were adherents to Wyclif’s ideas – John Clanvowe (who wrote a religious treatise known as The Two Ways which implicitly supports Wyclif’s views), Lewis Clifford (who later became a member of Philippe de Mézières’ Order of Passion and remained sympathetic to Wycliffite teaching throughout his life, repeating key sentiments in his will), Richard Stury, William Neville and Thomas Latimer. Although the evidence is inconclusive, it does seem likely that Joan was at least sympathetic. In a papal bull dated May 1377 the Pope issued instructions to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London to warn the king and his sons and specifically ‘his beloved daughter in Christ, the noblewoman Joan, Princess of Aquitaine and Wales’ about Wyclif’s heresies, and in a separate bull he ordered Wyclif’s arrest. Shortly afterwards Joan was writing privately to the Pope.25 Although the subject matter of their correspondence is not known the timing is suggestive and quite possibly Joan was sending reassurance of her conformity. Certainly, if Joan shared any of Wyclif’s views she was at pains to conceal this from being generally known. However, when Wyclif was brought for trial before the bishops, Lewis Clifford was sent as a messenger to request that they did not pronounce sentence against him, effectively asking the bishops stay their proceedings. Although Lewis Clifford was also one of Richard’s household knights he was identified with Joan, and sending him with a message which contravened the Pope’s direct instructions was risky. Her intervention, giving Wyclif royal protection, was decisive and secured his release. Once again Joan showed a willingness to take risks where she felt it was important to do so, in order to preserve harmony. It also showed her shrewd sense of judgment, as Walsingham noted that the Londoners were sympathetic to Wyclif on this occasion, and Gaunt at this time was still a supporter. It is possible that she did it out of personal conviction, but in this, as in so much else, Joan was extremely private. In terms of her own personal beliefs, all that can be stated for certain is that she generally behaved in the way expected of her in terms of piety and religious observance, without being identified as a major patroness of any individual foundation, other than the abbey of St Albans.
Family, and personal relationships, were what Joan cared about most and her interest in political affairs was limited to her strong maternal instinct to protect her son. In surrounding Richard with loyal and trusted men who had served his father Joan ensured there was a strong link between his household and the council who governed in his name, as again many of these had also served the prince. In the first three years of Richard’s reign there were three councils, the first being replaced after three months with a second formed at the first parliament held in October 1377, this in turn was superseded by a third council appointed a year later in October 1378 during the parliament held at Gloucester that year. On each change some members were replaced, but the council consistently contained a significant number of former servants of the prince. The first council, appointed on 19 July 1377, included the earls of March and Arundel (Thomas Holand’s father-in-law), Bishop Courtenay, the Bishop of Salisbury (a friend of Gaunt’s), Sir Ralph Ferrers, Sir Roger Beauchamp, Sir John Knyvet and several knights associated with the prince: Hugh Segrave (who had been his steward and then became steward to Joan), William Latimer, John Lord Cobham, Richard Stafford and John Devereux.26 Cobham, Stafford, Segrave and Knyvet were joined by William Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester; John Harewell, Bishop of Bath and Wells (both executors of the prince) and William Ufford and Aubrey de Vere (former members of the prince’s council) in the council formed in October 1378.27 All these men were loyal to the prince and it was natural that they would transfer their loyalty and dedication to his son. Many had also served and had connections with Gaunt.28 This was unlikely to be a coincidence. The presence of so many of the prince’s former servants on the council and their added connection to Gaunt could only be beneficial to Richard. It is even more difficult here to prove that Joan had any involvement, but it seems probable that she was consulted and made her views known, so influencing their selection as council members.
Joan’s influence was not confined to the selection of trusted individuals to serve her son. She knew personally most of those influential in politics, and she had already shown that she could use her charm and tact to smooth working relationships. In this way, she was able to provide a steadying political influence without being directly involved.29 This was particularly important with John of Gaunt. None of Richard’s uncles were included on the councils. This was almost certainly a deliberate omission, and one endorsed, if not suggested, by Gaunt. He and his two brothers were given a quasi-supervisory role by being given authority to oversee cases involving maintenance of quarrels by any of the councillors.30 Gaunt was well aware of his unpopularity and knew his presence could cause divisiveness. Despite the duke’s obvious goodwill towards his nephew there remained those who found it difficult to believe in his sincerity, and unpleasant rumours continued to circulate about him, questioning the motives that lay behind his apparently quiescent and supportive role. Although Gaunt was ambitious and able, powerful and not averse to seizing power when he felt it was his due, he was first and foremost devoted and loyal to his father and older brother, and loved his nephew for their sake; he was also genuinely fond of his sister-in-law and his actions demonstrate that he had the interests of his nephew and his sister-in-law in mind. In 1327 the council had included the young king’s uncles, Joan’s father, Edmund of Woodstock and Thomas of Brotherton, but it had exercised little real authority, fatally weakened by the hold on power retained by Queen Isabella and her lover, neither of whom were on the council. This was not a situation Gaunt chose to emulate, although there were many who believed that Gaunt continued to control the government through his friends. Shortly after the coronation he withdrew from court and retired to his estate at Kenilworth; according to Walsingham, out of pique and because he feared he would be blamed if anything went wrong, after first approving the councillors chosen for the first council.31 It is possible he felt that his presence was needed to deal with pressing government business on the Scottish border, where the Scots had used the opportunity of th
e change of regime to raid Roxburgh. This certainly provided an excuse for his absence, and at an Anglo-Scottish conference held in September he was asked to attend to help settle unresolved border grievances, but this is unlikely to have been the real reason. His self-imposed and immediate withdrawal from the court and the political arena so soon after the coronation was probably manufactured to enable the council to start its work unimpeded by his presence, and he would have discussed this with Joan. It was a further instance of his unequivocal loyalty to his nephew. Nevertheless, Gaunt’s position at court had changed with his nephew’s accession and, although his support was needed it was likely that he would have less influence in the new regime than he had had with his father. He could not necessarily guarantee his friends would continue to occupy influential positions. Henry Percy, for example, resigned his position as marshal just after the coronation, according to Walsingham because he did not want to be humiliated by being forcibly replaced. Joan’s cousin, Margaret Brotherton, now Lady Segrave, was insisting that as her father, Thomas Brotherton, had been hereditary marshal she had the right to appoint a deputy to act for her. In fact, Margaret’s claim was not upheld, and the Earl of Arundel’s brother, Sir John Arundel, was appointed in Percy’s stead. Gaunt also remained deeply unpopular, and his relationship with the City of London was fragile, while the public reconciliation with the Bishop of Winchester had yet to be tested.