by Teresa Cole
The Treaty of Canterbury, signed on 15 August, not only recognised Henry’s claim to France, but also acknowledged his right to use all means necessary to recover what was rightfully his. As an offensive and defensive treaty it also gave Henry the right to call on Sigismund for active support when next he pursued this claim, though in fact the Emperor never did commit any troops to this task.
Nor did Sigismund get the full measure of support at the council that he might have hoped for. By the time he returned to Constance in January 1417 there had been some changes. The Spanish had sent a delegation which now made up a fifth voting ‘nation’, and they, together with the French and Italians, were pressing for a speedy resolution in dismissing Benedict and electing a new pope. Sigismund insisted that reform of the Church must come first, since it was the abuse of power by the Pope and his governing council, the curia, which had to a large extent created all the problems in the first place. His influence as a supposedly neutral, benign leader was in decline, though, not helped by his clear adoption of the English cause. In fact there was a considerable fuss at the time about whether or not England was entitled to be treated as a nation at all.
A French accusation that England was too small and unimportant and not deserving of one out of five votes to settle the affairs of Christendom was answered in a way that was to have great significance for the development of English identity. The themes of history, Christianity and language were all employed to answer the accusation, and these were all areas where a growing feeling of Englishness was already taking root and would spread and bear fruit in the future. English history, it was claimed (wrongly of course), went back to that great Roman, Brutus, after whom the land of Britain was named. Likewise Christianity had been originally brought to the land by no less than Joseph of Arimathea, the very man who had received Christ’s body from the cross, and the flowering thorn tree at Glastonbury marked the exact spot where he had planted his staff.
In fact the status of English saints had been advancing greatly already in Henry’s reign. He had fought under the banner of St Edward the Confessor at Agincourt, as well as that of St George (whom England shared with other countries). Similarly, although it is well known that the battle was fought on the feast day of St Crispin and St Crispinian, two French saints, equal prominence was given in England to St John of Beverley, an Anglo-Saxon of the eighth century who had been Bishop of Hexham and later of York, and one of whose feasts also fell on that day. Others such as St Dunstan, St Chad and St Winifred were also increasingly honoured, while the better-known Thomas a Becket was celebrated with great ostentation by the English delegates at Constance on his feast day of 29 December.
Perhaps the greatest impact of the challenge at Constance, however, was felt in the use of the English language. Henry had been actively promoting this for some time by commissioning translations of celebrated works into English. Geoffrey Chaucer, too, had shown in the previous century that English was a suitable medium for literature. However it was still possible for the French to sneer that the vast majority of official documents in England were written in French or Latin.
From 1417 that began to change and the change was led by the king himself. Henry had always written some of his letters in English, his characteristic blunt, down-to-earth style contrasting favourably with some of the more flowery language employed by others. Now he seems to have made a conscious decision that all should be in English. And when he wrote in English he was increasingly answered in English. Gradually the king’s chancery started to develop a standard form of the language, while over a period of time Parliament, the city of London, monasteries and guilds all began to express themselves in their mother tongue.
At Constance, in the meantime, matters seemed to have reached an impasse. The English, led by Robert Hallum, Bishop of Salisbury, solidly backed Sigismund in calling for Church reform, a matter which was, in fact, close to his own heart. The Spanish, French and Italians were equally determined the election of a new pope should come first. In particular they wanted no reduction in the role of the cardinals, of which they had many, in carrying out that election.
By the summer of 1417, however, Henry had his mind again on France. A deadlock at Constance did not suit him. He wanted the council’s business concluded so that Sigismund might be free to back him in his new French campaign. In mid-July he sent new instructions to his delegates with an abrupt change of policy and a firm direction that they must carry out only his orders and not express their own views. At almost exactly the same time, by coincidence or otherwise, Bishop Henry Beaufort announced his intention to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, resigned as chancellor and set out across Europe.
At Constance a brief and unexplained absence of Sigismund caused a small shift in the situation later that month. The other nations took the opportunity of finally deposing Benedict and declaring the papal throne vacant. A matter of weeks later the sudden death of Hallum was a further blow to the reform cause.
It was at his funeral that the proposal was first put forward by the English that the time might have come for the council to move at last towards the election of a new pope. This was, apparently, the first Sigismund had heard of this, though his allies were quick to assure him that this was no desertion but an attempt to negotiate a compromise between the deadlocked parties. The negotiations were clearly going well when it was discovered that Bishop Henry was passing close by, and he was invited to come and lend his silken tongue to the discussions.
Matters now proceeded fairly rapidly. First there was an acceptance in principle that a papal election would take place imminently, with promises of reforms to follow. Then, on 30 October, it was settled that the election would be by the twenty-three cardinals together with six deputies from each of the ‘nations’. On 8 November the final details were arranged, and this was followed immediately by the election of an Italian cardinal who would become Pope Martin V. The fact that the English delegates voted unanimously for him and seemed unlikely to change their minds, was seen as highly influential in persuading the other voters to follow suit, and it is generally acknowledged that Martin in large part owed his election to the English influence.
The new pope was enthroned on 21 November, but despite the fact that a new reform commission (the third) was set up immediately afterwards, very little in the way of actual reform was achieved before the council was finally brought to a close on 22 April 1418. It is ironic to think that if Sigismund had had his way perhaps the revolution and bloodbath that made up the Protestant Reformation a century later might have been avoided.
Henry’s diplomatic efforts in 1416 were not solely confined to the Emperor Sigismund. Reminding the Castilians of their treaty may have persuaded them to stay away from the Battle of the Seine, and Duke John of Burgundy also needed attention.
Immediately following the Treaty of Canterbury both Sigismund and Henry travelled to Calais to set up a meeting with the duke with a view to persuading him to join the alliance. Having set the precedent of assassinating his political opponents, John the Fearless was so fearful for his own safety that he insisted Humphrey of Gloucester be exchanged as a hostage for the duration of the talks. As usual, pinning the duke down to a form of words was like trying to tie knots in water. He acknowledged that Henry’s victories showed that God favoured his cause, so he would, therefore, support his claim to be King of France. However he would only swear fealty and do homage to him as such when Henry had conquered a substantial amount of the land he claimed. He would support him in secret ways rather than openly, and further, if later he was found to be supporting the (other) King of France or his son, this should not be seen as acting against the interests of Henry.
What he meant by this is not at all clear. At the least it seemed he would not actively oppose Henry, which was something. Beyond that he might be agreeing to fight against the other factions in France, or hoping that Henry would fight his enemies for him. Or he might simply be playing on both sides as usual. One commentator h
as referred to Henry, Sigismund and John of Burgundy as ‘the three champion double-crossers of the age’. In fact almost as soon as the meeting broke up, John was in touch with his brother-in-law William of Holland and the Dauphin John, proposing an alliance against both Armagnac and England.
Henry, however, had achieved as much as he was likely to and returned to England determined that the next year would see a resumption of his campaign in France. The theme introduced in the parliament held in March 1416 had been, ‘A good beginning is half the deed.’ Now a new parliament was summoned for 19 October with the theme, ‘The best way to peace is through war.’ Further money was voted for the coming year, one and a half subsidies to be paid in February 1417 and a further half in the following November.
At this time, too, Henry rewarded two of his most faithful followers. His half-uncle the Earl of Dorset, still holding Harfleur for the king, became Duke of Exeter, while Sir John Holland, who had served so valiantly in France, was finally restored to the title Earl of Huntingdon, which had been lost by his father (along with his head) in the rebellion of 1400.
Early in the New Year indentures for service in France were once again being issued, this time in general for one year’s service. From February ships were being arrested and converted to transports as before.
The sudden death of the Dauphin John in April made little difference to Henry’s plans. (Poison has been suggested, though other accounts say it was an abscess to the head.) It did, however, bring about a further power shift in France. The new Dauphin, Charles, was the last surviving son and eleventh child of Charles VI. He was fourteen years old and for the last three years had been betrothed to the daughter of the Duke of Anjou, placing him firmly in the Armagnac camp. Although they would not marry for some time he was already living in the household of the duke, treated in all respects as a son-in-law, and when at about the same time the duke died, the new Dauphin was left in the care of the formidable thirty-three-year-old duchess Yolande of Aragon, who was to play the role of supporter and protector through all the dangerous years ahead.
Immediately John the Fearless began exerting his influence in northern France, raising support for an advance against the king and the Armagnacs in Paris. With the country in a state of chaos, Count Bernard had little attention to spare for Henry across the Channel. At the end of June an English fleet, this time under the new Earl of Huntingdon, defeated another French and Genoese flotilla off Honfleur, clearing the seas for another invasion. As a bonus they captured four Genoese carracks, a French admiral and a considerable treasure which had been intended to pay the wages of the sailors.
Finally Henry set sail in his new ship, the Jesus, leading his forces once more across the channel to claim his kingdom. They landed on 1 August near Touques, to the west of Honfleur on the coast of Normandy. The nearby castle surrendered immediately, but as Henry sent his formal defiance to the King of France he would have been well aware that the next stage of his campaign would not be achieved so easily.
10
THE SECOND CAMPAIGN: NORMANDY
1417–1420
Long before, in Wales, Henry V had learned how to take or retake a hostile land. At the time the successful tactics had been his, and they were his again now. There would be no pitched battles this time, no strike for Paris, no swift raid and retreat. Instead siege, blockage and consolidation would be the way forward. The Duke of Burgundy had declared he would only pay homage to Henry when he had taken a substantial chunk of France. Very well, then. He would take it.
It is hard to assess exactly how far those two believed and trusted each other. For a time it suited them to work in tandem, though how much liaison there might have been between them we don’t know. It is certain that Henry would have had a considerably harder job – would maybe not have attempted it at all, for he was always a realist – if France had not already been split open by civil war. Given the ambitions of each it seemed inevitable that they would sooner or later end up confronting each other, but for now, with John of Burgundy operating on the eastern side of the Seine, Henry turned away from Honfleur and Rouen and made instead for Caen.
Caen was the second town in Normandy, some ten miles inland but on the River Orne, which gave certain advantages to an attacker. Not only could supplies, and particularly guns, be brought up to it by water, but a branch of the river divided the town in two. On the north side the castle on its steep hill dominated the Old Town, while across the river on the Ile Saint-Jean was spread the New Town. The only link between them was a single bridge guarded by the fort of St Pierre.
The town had been sacked by Edward III in 1346 and its fortifications were new and impressive. Both parts were completely surrounded by walls, and on hearing of Henry’s landing it had been well stocked with food and re-garrisoned. There were, however, two weak spots. On each side stood an abbey (his and hers abbeys founded by William the Conqueror and his queen Matilda) which, although also fortified, rose higher than the town walls. Artillery mounted there could fire straight into the town itself. There was a plan to burn down the suburbs outside the walls and mine the abbeys themselves, but the Duke of Clarence arriving too quickly with an advance guard put a stop to that. One chronicle tells a story that a monk from one abbey, aghast at the prospect of it being destroyed, showed Clarence a secret way in to enable him to save it. It adds the rather improbable detail that he found the duke sleeping in full armour in a little garden, presumably on his own, with his head on a stone.
Be that as it may, both abbeys were seized by Clarence and became the headquarters of the king and his brother at opposite sides of the town. By 8 August the town was ringed with English camps – the king, Warwick and Mowbray the Earl Marshal on the west; Huntingdon, Salisbury, Sir John Cornwaille and the Duke of Gloucester to the south; Talbot, Umphraville and Neville to the north; and Clarence, Willoughby and Pembroke on the east. The siege of Caen began.
Once more Henry deployed his guns, including some lighter pieces on the abbeys, and the walls and town took a pounding though the French fought back with artillery of their own. On 4 September simultaneous attacks were launched by the king in the west and Clarence in the east. The king was held up by some fierce fighting, but Clarence, making a bridge of boats across the river, managed to carry a breach and get inside the New Town. Then, joining with men of the Earl of Warwick, they seized the fort of St Pierre and fell upon the rear of those defending the western side. Even now the defence went on as the English had to fight street by street into the Old Town, while the defenders gradually fell back to the castle in the rear, to which some of the townspeople had also managed to retreat. The town was now given up to pillage, though Henry’s strict orders that no violence was to be done to priests, women or children seems to have been obeyed.
The castle held out until 20 September when, with no prospect of relief from the Armagnac forces of the king or Dauphin, terms were negotiated to allow the governor and garrison to leave with their arms and horses. On taking possession of the castle, Henry found there were quantities of money, jewels and other valuables left behind which had been placed there for safety by people from the town and countryside around. It is reported that Clarence was rewarded with a good part of this for his role in the taking of the town.
The people of Caen found themselves in very much the same position as those of Harfleur before. Since Henry regarded himself as their rightful king, those who opposed him were treated as rebels rather than patriots. However, once the fighting was over he was prepared to pardon any who agreed to acknowledge his sovereignty, in general allowing them to keep their property. A new garrison and governor would be put in place and English settlers invited to take the place of those who had died or refused to submit, but Henry would then offer them the same ‘good governance’ as he had offered his English subjects on his accession. Oppressive taxes would be cancelled, trade encouraged and an administration put in place that was often more efficient than the one they had had before. In contrast to other area
s of France, where chaos was reigning, those parts of Normandy conquered by Henry were relatively well off, particularly if their submission was quick and easy.
At about the same time as Caen was surrendering the nearby towns of Bayeux and Lisieux also submitted, and with a firm foothold along the Normandy coast Henry now marched south into the heart of the duchy. Within a matter of weeks the towns of Argentan, Sées, Verneuil and Alençon were all in his hands. The latter put up some show of resistance but surrendered in a matter of days when it was clear no help would be expected from Paris.
Paris had trouble enough of its own, with John of Burgundy steadily advancing on it and spreading his influence through all of north-east France. At about this time, too, he got another boost to his ambitions. Earlier in the year the French queen, Isabeau of Bavaria, had been reported to her temporarily sane husband for having an affair with a young courtier. The denouncer was Bernard, Count of Armagnac, whose dislike of the queen was only surpassed by her hatred of him. The unfortunate young man was tortured and then murdered by being sewn in a sack and thrown into the River Seine. Some say this was by order of the king and some say by the Dauphin, but since Bernard of Armagnac likely spoke for them both this may amount to the same thing. The queen was then exiled from the court and held in rather austere surroundings until, in November of that year, she so far overcame her earlier aversion to John the Fearless as to appeal to him for help.
The gallant duke sent eight hundred horsemen to rescue her and from this time on she was a firm supporter of the Burgundian cause. She declared herself the true Regent of France, a role she had earlier legitimately fulfilled, and it is possibly at this time, too, that she called for her son to join her, a request that was firmly turned down on his behalf by his mother-in-law Yolande of Aragon. ‘We have not,’ declared Yolande, ‘nurtured and cherished this one for you to make him die like his brothers, or to go mad like his father, or to become English like you. I keep him for my own. Come and take him away if you dare.’