by David Green
The scarcity of administrative and other ‘formal’ sources means that we must rely more heavily on the evidence of Froissart and other chroniclers. Their reliability is, of course, in doubt and their manipulation of detail and character may leave one with a somewhat skewed impression. The following statement shows the opportunities for distortion and is also indicative of a broadly held opinion of the prince. ‘Under his [Froissart’s] improving touch, Edward the Black Prince, no longer appears the vicious tyrannical despot he actually was, instead he emerges the chivalrous knight …’24 Edward’s character is open to question. It has been shrouded in chivalric propaganda and was subject to only the mildest criticism in his lifetime. However, he must be judged by the standards of his own age in which it was entirely possible to be a ‘vicious, tyrannical despot’ and a chivalrous knight at one and the same time. In much the same way, the leaders of the mercenary Free Companies, men such as Robert Knolles and Gregory Sais, who often found themselves in the prince’s service, were considered praiseworthy by Froissart and Cuvelier despite their lowly birth, questionable tactics and loyalty which was strong for as long as they were paid.25
Despite the war, French and English knights considered themselves part of the same international brotherhood. Beyond a shared adherence to a code of conduct and culture, knightly solidarity could also be expressed in a more binding way. Brotherhood-in-arms had developed from Germanic roots into a legal association with many connotations; it certainly provided the legal basis for a profitable commercial relationship. Hugh Calveley and Bertrand du Guesclin formed such an alliance. They fought together and on opposing sides during the Castilian civil war, which brought the Iberian Peninsula fully into the arena of the Hundred Years War. Calveley served with du Guesclin to depose Pedro the Cruel in favour of his half-brother, Enrique of Trastamara. Calveley was recalled to the English side in 1367 when the Black Prince became involved. At the battle of Nájera, du Guesclin was captured but in accordance with their agreement Calveley paid part of his ransom.26
Despite such links, the chivalric ethos which the prince brought to Aquitaine was not necessarily the same as that which already existed there. In England and Northern France, the ideal of knighthood tended to merge with one of loyalty and duty to one’s lord. This may not have applied in Occitania.27 Southern French literature laid stress on largesse (ostentatious generosity), friendship and voluntary aid, while the weakness of ‘feudal’ bonds is indicated by the advocation of a sense of loyalty between companions or equals rather than between lord and vassal. There was also an emphasis on individual rights to inherit and on fighting to uphold one’s rights and those of one’s allies. This is not to say that concepts of loyalty and duty did not exist, but they were not fixed or clearly delineated responsibilities. Thus, the knightly ethic of the south was a very pragmatic one: there was no sense of disdaining conflict with one’s inferiors or showing mercy. As a result, there is little evidence of a chivalric ideology or attempt to cultivate a particularly ‘knightly’ way of life although there was a strong courtly culture. This had been disseminated and encouraged by the troubadours for whom the ideal court had a harmonious social atmosphere, characterised by music and female company, in which gifts were freely dispensed. Princes should not be aloof but discriminating, tactful and willing to take advice. The cardinal sin was avarice, the opposite of largesse, and this was often indicated by the lack of feasts hosted by a prince. This was not a charge of which Edward could have been accused. According to Froissart, the early years of the principality seem to have been taken up almost entirely with feasting. From the arrival at La Rochelle where the prince and Joan were met by Chandos with a ‘belle compagnie de chevaliers’ there was feasting and festivities and the giving of gifts and beautiful jewels. After the prince had received the oaths of homage from his great vassals during his tour of the principality Froissart tells us that he could not record all the feasts, the honours done to the prince nor all those that came to see him.28
The troubadours also levelled criticism at princes and courts in which the sway of flatterers, administrators and bureaucrats was seen as too extensive. If such beliefs were representative of wider opinion then attitudes and behaviour evident in the Black Prince’s court could be seen as both delighting the indigenous nobility and yet also contributing to the eventual collapse of the principality. Blame for the souring relationship of the prince and his greater vassals and their eventual rebellion has been attributed to the prince’s haughtiness and his unwillingness to allow the Gascons any part in government. The prince was said to force his greatest vassals to wait days to see him and then leaving them on their knees perhaps for hours.29
With regard to other courtly pursuits, it is usual to see the Black Prince as a man with little or no interest in literary or academic activities. However, there was a literary circle around him, book owners and authors in their own right, men such as Simon Burley, Richard Stury, Philip de la Vache, Lewis Clifford and John Clanvowe.30 In Languedoc there was a long-standing literary tradition and among the prince’s neighbours was Charles of Navarre who became the patron of Guillaume de Machaut some time after John of Bohemia had died at Crécy, according to some at the hand of the Black Prince. It may have been from John that the prince acquired the device of the three ostrich feathers, one of the earliest stable non-ordinal badges. It first appeared on a seal shortly after his appointment as prince of Aquitaine.31
As elsewhere, there was a long tradition and powerful culture of hunting in southern France. In Gaston Fébus, the prince had a neighbour who was an acknowledged master of the art as is shown in his Livre de Chasse.32 In organising a meeting in which the prince hoped to secure Gaston’s homage for Béarn, the count of Foix asked that Chandos’ hounds be brought so that he might see them. The sport was considered an essential part of chivalric and military education. Hawking was also extremely popular and the great ceremony that accompanied such events is evident in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight that may have been written for an English audience abroad. The prince had, prior to 1362, maintained a considerable number of hounds and falcons for hunting. It does not appear that these or at least all of them were brought to Aquitaine, as there are references in the Register regarding falcons being transferred to the prince’s manor of Wallingford for the season after he was resident in Gascony.33
The prince also spent lavishly on clothes and jewels and moved more quickly to ensure the presence in Bordeaux of his goldsmith and two embroiderers than he did to ensure his administrators had enough money for their own expenses.34 There was a great deal of concern with garments as many chronicles and the sumptuary laws demonstrate. Richard II was subjected to heavy criticism for his expenditure on clothing; it may have been a trait he inherited from his father and mother. Records exist of the payment of £715 to an embroiderer for work for the prince, Joan and her daughter, while in 1362, £200 was paid for jewelled buttons for Joan, the equivalent of the wages of a master-craftsman for ten years. The princess seems to have become a sartorial icon in Aquitaine and many followed her style of dressing in tight-fitting garments of silk and ermine with low-cut necklines and wearing pearls and precious stones in her hair.35
The importance of music in the prince’s household, throughout his life, is evident in records of the purchase of instruments and payments to minstrels.36 In 1352, the prince was sent four silver-gilt and enamelled pipes along with a bagpipe, cornemuse and drum by the count of Eu, who had been captured at Crécy.37 In 1355, these instruments were given to Ralph of Exeter and John Martyn, minstrels in the prince’s employ.38 For the journey to Gascony in 1363, the prince was accompanied from England by six minstrels dressed in ray, a broadly striped cloth. The rates of pay were probably similar to those of the king’s minstrels, 20s. a year in peace, 7½d. or a shilling a day on campaign and this military facet of the minstrels’ life should not be overlooked. In addition to standard wages, minstrels probably also received generous tips.39 Music played an important part in both c
ourt ceremonial and general entertainment. Before the battle of Winchelsea, Edward III enjoyed hearing his minstrels play a German dance that Chandos had learned.40 Southern France was an excellent area for musicians to find employment and also to gain inspiration and exposure to one of the most important composers of the age. Both Charles of Navarre and Gaston Fébus were patrons of musicians, the most significant of whom was Guillaume de Machaut, a key figure of the French Ars Nova, and the most distinguished composer of the Middle Ages, particularly renowned for his four-voice Messe de Notre Dame.
Chivalry throughout Western Europe was undergoing change in accordance with varying military tactics and a number of socio-political developments as noted previously. In the principality, such changes were reinforced by differing courtly traditions and England and Aquitaine were sometimes at odds with one another. This is not to say that chivalry was dead. On the contrary, in the prince’s court, chivalric traditions were reinforced by the influence of secular orders of chivalry, such as the Garter, of which the Black Prince and members of his retinue were important members. Chivalry also remained intrinsically linked to the crusade. The crusading movement had lost impetus after the fall of Acre in 1292 and the destruction of the Order of the Temple in 1314. However, one of the great courtly occasions in Aquitaine was the visit of Peter of Lusignan, king of Cyprus, in 1364. Peter had toured Europe passing through Avignon, London and Paris in search of support for a crusade. He was met at Angoulême where there was held ‘une très grosse et noble feste’. He encouraged many to join his crusade including Chandos, Thomas Felton, Nigel Loryng, Richard Punchardoun, Simon Burley and Baldwin Frevill, although the earl of Warwick was the only one to take up the offer. Peter’s visit lasted for a month. The festivities that accompanied the visit were combined in some accounts with the birth of a son to the prince and Joan in early March 1365 at Angoulême.41 On 27 April, a splendid tournament was held to celebrate the birth of Edward of Angoulême and the ‘churching’ of his mother. Accounts of the event vary; Froissart for once appears to be quite restrained, merely stating that 40 knights and 40 esquires comprised the princess’s entourage. The Chronicle of the Grey Friars of Lynn states that Joan’s retinue consisted of 24 knights and 24 lords and noted the presence of 154 further lords and 706 knights at the festivities. The prince stabled 18,000 horses at his own expense and the celebrations lasted for ten days. The cost of the candles alone was said to be over £400.42
There were certainly political benefits in maintaining a lavish court beyond the munificence usually expected of a sovereign. The Languedocian culture that delighted in conspicuous consumption demanded a magnificent court. It helped to placate the nobility and gain their support, at least for a time. Accusations that luxurious living led to the prince’s downfall have been made, and the expenses of the court and household were very large but were almost insignificant beside the military expenditure occasioned by the Nájera campaign and the administrative costs of running a hugely enlarged and financially disparate state with machinery and organisations designed for a much smaller province.43
1367: Nájera, the Beginning of the End
Endemic, if not constant hostilities changed the complexion of England, France and those other states that were dragged within the orbit of the Hundred Years War, and the demands of that conflict and the pressures which it engendered did not end during the all too brief periods of truce. The development of the contract army created a surplus of military manpower in peacetime that banded together in the form of the mercenary Free Companies, ensuring that in France (official) peace with England did not mean an end to military activity. Rather ‘war became a full-time occupation, one in which mercenaries served as the undisciplined instruments of royal policy’.44 The practical problems of bands of unemployed mercenaries roaming the French countryside were real enough and further enhanced by contemporary attitudes to combat, conflict and the bearing of arms. War had acquired a social mystique providing a means for the ennoblement of the common man. In Froissart’s habitual phrase, any man could ‘better himself in the profession of arms’. The mercenary forces seized upon such attitudes, and the religious and idealistic justification of chivalry made it difficult to recognize the actions of soldiers for what they were. In this context, chivalry did not limit war but quite the reverse. Chivalry also underpinned the potential financial benefits that could be accrued in war and it was in the interests of the military classes to maintain that state of affairs. Froissart was not unaware of the brutalities of war or that strategic considerations could overcome the code of chivalry, nor that ransom money was the prize for which men fought. Nonetheless, he seems to have been completely taken in by the spectacle of battle. He made little distinction between mercenaries serving the highest bidder and knights serving their king or prince as indentured retainers. The distinction was, in any case, becoming very uncertain. Professional captains such as Calveley, Knolles, Nicholas Dagworth and Walter Hewitt (who was very active in the Breton civil war) thrived in the Hundred Years War. They proved to be a very considerable military force at Auray (1364) and in 1362 when the Great Company defeated French royal forces under Jean II’s chamberlain, the count of Tancarville, at the battle of Brignais on 6 April 1362. The mercenary forces were led by Seguin de Badefol and the defeat has been compared to both Crécy and Poitiers. There were some tactical similarities between the encounters and it is possible that de Badefol and a number of the routier commanders had fought on the plain of Maupertuis in 1356.45
The defeat at Brignais may have contributed to a change of attitude in France, later compounded by the accession of Charles V. If the Free Companies were not to be defeated then perhaps they could be encouraged to go elsewhere and if in so doing they might further French interests then so much the better. The destination chosen was Moorish Spain: the purported intention, a crusade to drive the enemies of Christ from the Iberian Peninsula; the real purpose, to expel the Companies from France and to replace the English allied King Pedro ‘the Cruel’ of Castile with his half-brother, Enrique ‘the Bastard’ of Trastamara.
The prince was not unaware that steps were being taken for military action and in November 1365 he sent a number of his household officials to Avignon to observe the crusaders receiving a papal blessing and funding for the crusade. But he may well have been taken in by the ruse and seems to have given his blessing for many of his associates to participate in the crusade. It was when his father took belated steps to prevent English involvement in the campaign and indeed ordered that du Guesclin should not be allowed passage over the Pyrennees that retaliatory preparations in Aquitaine began to take shape.
The Black Prince had the most to lose from a French allegiance with Castile, so close to the borders of Aquitaine. The means by which he undertook the Nájera campaign highlights the apparent inconsistencies of the chivalric ethic and of military service, which were nonetheless permitted and indeed lauded in the chronicles of Froissart and others. Many of those members of the Companies that Bertrand du Guesclin led to Castile and who were actively involved in the deposition of Pedro were English and Gascon and were recalled by the prince to serve in his own expedition, designed to reverse the political situation for which they were responsible.
The motivation for, and conditions that surrounded, the Spanish campaign of 1367 were very different and less certain than those of the prince’s previous military operations. The expedition has been described as ‘something of a crusade for an abstract principle’.46 The enemy as well as the theatre of operations changed, although Enrique had French support. Perhaps, like the expeditions of 1346, 1355–6 and certainly 1359, it was a campaign for a throne, although not the throne of France, and in strategic terms, while the army tried to live off the land, it was not a chevauchée after the model of 1355.
The prince’s advisors questioned the wisdom of committing troops to Pedro’s cause. He was counselled that,
… it is reasonable that you should be content with what you have, and not seek
to make enemies. It is well known that Don Pedro of Castile … is now and has always been, a man of great pride, cruelty and wickedness. Through him the kingdom of Castile has suffered many wrongs and many valiant men have been beheaded and murdered without any just cause … He is also an enemy of the Church, and has been excommunicated by the Holy Father. He has had the reputation … of being a tyrant, and has always, without any justification, made war on his neighbours, the Kings of Aragon and Navarre whom he has tried to dethrone by force. It is also generally rumoured and believed that he murdered his young wife, your cousin, the Duke of Bourbon’s daughter … For everything that he has suffered since is merely God’s punishment.47
A Trastamaran propagandist might as well have written this speech, attributed by Froissart to one of the prince’s council. Rebellion against Pedro was justified since he was a tyrant and enemy of Christ, although Knighton blamed the pope for the usurpation of Pedro’s throne. These same arguments were presented to the prince before the battle of Nájera.48 The proximity of Aquitaine had considerable implications with regard to the participation of any of the Iberian kingdoms in the Anglo-French war, as did the Castilian fleets in the maritime struggle. In addition to this, the prince’s own desire to be again involved in a military campaign cannot be overlooked. Support for Pedro in a successful coup would replace the Francophile Enrique providing military and, more particularly, naval assistance, with a galley fleet capable of summer operations in northern waters. Enrique had, by 1365, been offered financial assistance from Aragon, France and the papacy. By deposing him, the prince would have an ally on his border. Furthermore, England, although not the prince personally, was obliged to lend Pedro assistance in accordance with the Anglo-Castilian treaty of 1362.49 Consequently, Martín López de Cordoba was sent to remind Edward III of this and urge his support. On 6 December 1365, the king issued an order, forwarded to the prince at Bordeaux, forbidding Englishmen to fight his Castilian allies. López also probably managed to dispel the worst prejudices about Pedro and ’transmit a sense of Enrique’s pro-French villainies’.50 He may well have stopped in Aquitaine on his way home to deliver the same message.