THE END.
London:Printed by A. & R. Spottiswoode,New-Street-Square.
Footnotes:
[1]Warton (History of English Poetry, vol. i. p. 118. note, 8vo.) notices a passage in Piers Plowman, which shows how the reigning passion for chivalry infected the ideas and expressions of the writers of this period. The poet is describing the crucifixion, and speaking of the person who pierced our Saviour’s side with a spear. This person our author callsa knight, and says, that he came forthwith his spear in hand and justed with Jesus. Afterwards, for doing so base an act as that of wounding a dead body, he is pronounced a disgrace toknighthood, and ourchampion chevaler chyese knightis ordered to yield himself recreant. fol. 88. b. So, too, in the Morte d’Arthur, Joseph of Arimathea is called the gentle knight that took down Jesus from the cross.
[2]Warton, vol. ii. p. 86.
[3]Barnes’s Edward III., p. 564.
[4]Leland, Collect. vol. ii. p. 476.
[5]Arthur went to his mete with many other kings. And there were all the knights of the Round Table except those that were prisoners, or slain at a recounter, thenne at the high feast evermore they should be fulfilled the hole nombre of an hundred and fifty, for then was the Round Table fully accomplished. Morte d’Arthur. The tale of Sir Gauth of Orkeney, c. 1. And see Vol. I. of this work, page 376.
[6]Walsingham, sub anno 1344. Ashmole on the Order of the Garter, cap. v. s. 2.
[7]Preface to the Black Book of the Order of the Garter.
[8]Walsingham, p. 164. Froissart, c. 100.
[9]Supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. iii. part 1. p. 139. As the story of Lady Salisbury’s garter is fabulous, we must resort to some other conjectures for an explanation of the famous motto of the order, and the one cited in the text is extremely ingenious and plausible. With much less appearance of truth, Ashmole fancies that Edward by this motto retorted shame and defiance upon him that should dare to think ill of so just an enterprise as he had undertaken for the recovery of his lawful right to the French crown (whose arms he had lately assumed); and that the magnanimity of those knights whom he had chosen into this order was such as would enable him to maintain that quarrel against all who durst think ill of it. Ashmole’s Order of the Garter, p. 184. There never was a knight more fond of impresses, mottoes, and devices, than King Edward III. He not only stamped them upon his own armour and that of his horse, but on his apparel, beds, and household furniture. “It is as it is,” was one of these mottoes. Another was:—
“Ha! ha! the white swan,By God’s soul I am thy man.”
[10]Gibbon is the chief supporter of the last hypothesis, In his text (vol. iv. c. 23.) he states positively, that “the infamous George of Cappadocia has been transformed into the renowned St. George of England, the patron of arms, of chivalry, and the Garter.” In a note, however, he observes that this transformation is not given as absolutely certain, but as extremely probable. Few people read this note, and, perhaps, Gibbon did not intend they should. He wished to strike their attention by the sentence in his text, and he satisfied his conscience for literary honesty by writing the modification at the bottom of the page.
[11]Froissart, c. 213.
[12]Barnes, p. 444.
[13]Knyghton. Chron. col. 2615.
[14]Stow’s Chronicle.
[15]
——“these gallant yeomen,England’s peculiar and appropriate sons,Known in no other land. Each boasts his hearthAnd field as free as the best lord his barony,Owing subjection to no human vassalage,Save to their king and law. Hence are they resolute,Leading the van on every day of battle,As men who know the blessings they defend.Hence are they frank and generous in peace,As men who have their portion in its plenty.No other kingdom shows such worth and happinessVeil’d in such low estate.”—Halidon Hill, act ii. sc. 2.
[16]This national characteristic is alluded to in Latimer’s sermons, folio 69:—a work not of very good promise for such matters.
[17]Hair cut short.
[18]Chaucer, Prologue to the Canterbury Tales, line 101, &c. &c.
[19]Froissart, c. 131.
[20]Froissart, c. 163.
[21]Ibid. cc. 168. 174.
[22]Froissart, cc. 150. 152. “Messire Eustace vous estes le chevalier au monde, que veisse oncques plus vaillamment assailer ses ennemis, ne son corps deffendre: ny ne me trouvay oncques en bataille ou je veisse, qui taint me donnast affaire, corps à corps, que vous avez huy fait. Si vous en donne le pris, et aussi sur tous les chevaliers de ma cour, par droit sentence. Adonc print le roy son chappelet, qu’il portoit sur son chef (qui estoit bon et riche) et le meit sur le chef de Monseigneur Eustace; et dit Monseigneur Eustace, je vous donne ce chappelet pour le mieux combattant de la jouence, de ceux de dedans et de dehors: et vous pui que vous le portez ceste année pour l’amour de moi. Je say bien que vous estes gai et amoureux, et que volontiers vous vous trouvez entre dames et damoiselles. Si dites, par tout la ou vous irez, que je le vous ay donné. Si vous quitte vostre prison, et vous en pouvez partir demain, s’il vous plaist.”
[23]Froissart, cc. 133. 146.
[24]Barnes’s History of Edward III. p. 452, &c.
[25]There was a Lord of Manny, as well as Sir Walter, at Edward’s court. The lord was a distinguished person, for he was among the bishops, earls, and barons, who accompanied Edward to France, upon his doing homage for the duchy of Guienne. St. Palaye has confounded the lord and the knight, and made but one of them. He overlooked the hundred and second chapter of Froissart, wherein the baron and the knight are separately and distinctly mentioned. There was also another Manny, called the courageous Manny. He was knighted by Sir Eustace Dambreticourt before a battle, and after fighting most valiantly he was left for dead in the field. Froissart shall tell the remainder of the story. “After this discomfiture, and that all the Frenchmen were departed, the courageous Manny being sore hurt and near dead, lift up his head a little, and saw nothing about him but dead men lying on the ground round about him. Then he rose as well as he might, and sat down, and saw well how he was not far from the fortress of Nogent, which was English; then he did so much, sometimes creeping, sometimes resting, that he came to the foot of the tower of Nogent; then he made tokens to them within, showing how he was one of their companions; then certain came down the tower to him, and bare him into the fortress, and dressed his wounds, and there he governed himself so well that he was healed.” Froissart, c. 199.
[26]Froissart, c. 19.
[27]Froissart, cc. 24. 26.
[28]Appendix, No. xxiv., to Anstis’s History of the Knighthood of the Bath.
[29]“Mais il dit à aucuns de ses plus privés, qu’il avoit promis en Angleterre devant les dames et seigneurs, qu’il seroit le premier qui entreroit en France, et prendroit chastle ou forte ville, et y feroit aucunes appertises d’armes,” c. 36.
[30]Froissart, c. 36.
[31]Quand Messire Gautier veit ce, il dit, j’amais ne soye salué de madame et chere amie, se je réntre en chastel n’en forteresse, jusques à tant que j’aye l’un de ces venans verse. Froissart, c. 82.
[32]Froissart, c. 82.
[33]See Vol. I. p. 151.
[34]Froissart, c. 87.
[35]Vol. i. p. 246. ante.
[36]Froissart, c. 103. Le Comte D’Erby dit, Qui merci prie merci doit avoir. This sentence, I suppose has escaped the notice of writers who have represented the sole amusement of knights to have consisted in cutting the throats of common people.
[37]Froissart, c. 107.
[38]This is Lord Berners’ rendering of the passage. The phrase “par un sien clerc” had crept into some editions of Froissart; and Mr. Johnes’s translation is, “Sir Walter caused the inscription to be read to him by a clerk.” This, perhaps, was necessary, as the inscription was in Latin, for heroes have not been famous for their clerkship. But the inference which some writers have drawn, that he could not read at all, is perfectly unwarrantable.
[39]Froissart, c. 110.
[40]Froissart, c. 135
[41]Froissart, c. 146.
[42]She was the Lady Margaret, daughter and heiress of Thomas Plantagenet, surnamed of Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk, and uncle to Edward III.
[43]Dugdale.
[44]The reader may, reasonably enough, enquire who could have been the vendor? I cannot tell him: I can only copy Stow in these matters.
[45]Stow’s London, book 4. c. 3. Maitland’s History of London, p. 661. This was the state of the Charter House till the suppression of the monasteries, in the reign of Henry VIII. Its annual value was 642l.It was given to Sir Thomas Audley, speaker of the House of Commons, with whose only daughter it went, by marriage, to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, and from him, by descent, to Thomas, Earl of Suffolk. In the time of James I. it was purchased by that “right phœnix of charity,” Thomas Sutton, citizen and girdler, for the large sum of 13,000l.; and he converted the buildings and gardens into an hospital for the relief of aged men, education of youth, and maintaining the service of God.
[46]Froissart, 286.
[47]See vol. i. p. 204.
[48]Ashmole’s History of the Garter, c. 26. s. 3. Froissart, cc. 142. 147.
[49]Dugdale, Baronage, i. 503.
[50]Authorities in Ashmole, p. 702.
[51]Froissart, c. 125. See the first volume of this work, page 228.
[52]Froissart, c. 161. Monseigneur Jehan de Clermont dit, Chandos, ce sont bien les parolles de vos Anglois, qui ne savent adviser riens de nouvel; mais quant, qu’ils voyent, leur est bel. This is a very curious proof of the antiquity of the common remark that Englishmen are a borrowing and improving people, and not famous for originality of invention. It might be contended, but not in this place, that we are both. And here I will transcribe another sentence of Froissart, more characteristic and true. “Les Anglois, selon leur coutume se divertirent moult tristement.”
[53]Froissart, c. 226.
[54]Froissart, c. 237.
[55]Froissart, cc. 265, 266.
[56]Froissart, c. 270.
[57]Froissart, liv. ii. c. 82.
[58]4 Plac. Parl. iii. 5.
[59]Thomas of Elmham, p. 72. His general expression, tapestries representing the ancient victories of England, I presume chiefly meant those of Edward III.
[60]The tales of chivalry had for their prologue some lines expressive of war and love; but in a grander strain the poetical biographer of the Bruce sings:—
“Ah! freedome is a noble thing;Freedome makes men to have liking;Freedome all solace to men gives;He lives at ease, that freely lives.A noble heart may have none ease,Nor ellys[A]nought that may him please,If freedome fail: for free likingIsyearned[B]o’er all other thing.Na he that aye has lived freeMay not know well the property,The anger,nathe wretched doomThat is coupled to foul thraldom.But, if he had essayed it,Then allperquer[C]he should it wit,And should think freedom more to prizeThan all the gold in world that is.Thus contrary things ever moreDiscoverings of the tother are.”The Bruce, line 225, &c.
[A]nor else.[B]eagerly desired.[C]perfectly.
[A]nor else.
[B]eagerly desired.
[C]perfectly.
[61]haste.
[62]laundress.
[63]child-bed.
[64]stop.
[65]pity.
[66]pitched.
[67]moved.
[68]laundress.
[69]Selden’s Titles of Honour, and Pinkerton’s History of Scotland, on the authority of a book which I have not been able to meet with, called “Certain Matters composed together.” Edinb. 1597. 4to.
[70]Henry’s History of England, vol. iii. p. 80. 4to.
[71]Border History of England and Scotland, p. 91.
[72]Border History, p. 143.
[73]Nisbet’s Heraldry, i. 7.
[74]Knyghton, col. 2580.
[75]This amusing opinion of the French knights should be given in the original language. “Adonc eurent plusieurs chevaliers et escuyers de France passage: et retournerent en Flandres, ou là ou ils pouvoyent arriver, tous affamés, sans monture, et sans armeures: et Escoce maudissoyent, et le heure qu’ils y avoyent entré: et disoyent qu’oncques si duc voyage ne fut: et qu’ils voudroyent que le roi de France s’accordast aux Anglois, un an ou deux, et puis allast en Escoce, pour tout destruire, car oncques si mauvaises gens ne verint: n’y ne trouverent si faux et se traistres, ne de si petite congnuissance.” Vol. ii. c. 174.
[76]The Scotch knights procured horse-shoes and harness ready made from Flanders. Froissart, vol. ii. c. 3. Lord Berners’ translation.
[77]Froissart, vol. ii. c. 142.
[78]“Henry Percy,” says Holingshed, “was surnamed, for his often pricking, Henry Hotspur, as one that seldom times rested, if there were any service to be done abroad.” History of Scotland, p. 240.
[79]The gallantry of this fighting priest was afterwards rewarded by the gift of the archdeaconry of Aberdeen.
[80]He was afterwards ransomed; and, according to Camden, Pounouny castle, in Scotland, was built out of the ransom money.
[81]Walsingham, (p. 366.) says, that the Earl of Dunbar came in and turned the scale in favor of the Scots. Nothing of this is mentioned by Froissart, who had his account of the battle from the Douglas family, at whose castle he resided some time. If it be said that their account was probably a prejudiced one, the same objection may be raised against that of Walsingham. The Douglas’ always spoke of their victory with true chivalric modesty; for they declared that it was the consequence of the exhausted state of the English after the march from Newcastle.
[82]Froissart, vol. ii. c. 146. Buchanan, lib. 9. p. 173, &c.
[83]Monstrelet, vol. i. c. 9, &c. Rymer, Fœdera, vol. viii. p. 310, 311.
[84]This Archibald Douglas, Earl of Galloway, called the Grim, was an illegitimate son of a good Sir James Douglas, and the successor in the earldom of Douglas to the Earl James who fell at Otterbourn. Archibald had been taken prisoner by Hotspur at the battle of Holmedon Hill; and Percy agreed, that if he would fight with him as valiantly against Henry IV. as he had fought during that battle, he would give him his liberty free of ransom-money. Douglas, as a soldier and an enemy of the English king, had no objection to these terms, and therefore he fought at the battle of Shrewsbury. Buchanan, book 10.
[85]Well, indeed, might the Scottish knight say,
“Another king! they grow like Hydras’ heads:I am the Douglas, fatal to all thoseThat wear these colours on them.”Shakspeare, Henry IV, Part I. act v. scene 4.
[86]Otterbourne, p. 239. 244. Walsingham, p. 410, &c. Hall, folio 22. I mean not to say, however, that his conduct was without precedent, for at the great battle of Poictiers nineteen French knights were arrayed like King John.
[87]Camden has marked the commencement of this custom in the reign of Henry IV., and he has been followed by all our writers on heraldry and titles of honor, except Anstis, who endeavours to trace it to the reign of Edward I. Anstis mistook the matter entirely. Undoubtedly many instances may be met with in earlier times when knights were created with the full ceremonies of oblation of the sword at the altar, of bathing, &c.; and in strictness all knights should have been created in that manner. Whenever Anstis met with a knight inaugurated in that way, he called him a knight of the Bath. Now the question is, at what time was the first royal marriage, royal christening, or other festivity, when knights were made?—made, not exactly for military objects, not in consequence of feudal tenure, but in honour of the event which they were celebrating. Knights of the Bath were knights of peace, knights of compliment and courtesy. Camden’s opinion was founded on the following passage in Froissart: “The vigil before the coronation (of Henry IV.) was on the evening of Saturday; on that occasion, and at that time, there watched all the esquires who were the next morning to be created knights, to the number of forty-six. Each of them had his esquire attending him, a separate chamber, and a separate bath, where the rites of bathing were that night performed. On the day following, the Duke of Lancaster (Henry IV.), at the time of celebrating mass, created them knights, giving them long green coats, the sleeves whereof were cut straight, and furred with minever, and with great hoods or chaperons furred in the same manner, and after the fashion used by prelates. And every one of these knights, on his left shoulder, had a double cordon or string of white silk, to which white tassels were pendent.” Now there is nothing in this passage which can lead the mind to think that the coronation of Henry IV. was the first occasion when knights of the Bath were created; and, therefore, our writers on heraldry and titles of honor are not justified in the positiveness with which they always head their dissertations on knighthood of the Bath with the year 1399.
[88]That the shoulder-knot of the knights of the Bath was worn only for a time, and on the principle of chivalry which induced men to place chains round their legs until they had performed some deeds of arms, I learn from Upton, a writer of great reputation in heraldic matters, who lived in the days of Henry VI. See his treatise De Re Militari, p. 10., quoted in the Appendix to Anstis’s History of the Knighthood of the Bath.
[89]Thus Chaucer:
“A custom is unto these nobles all,A bride shall not eaten in the hall,Till days four, other three at the leastYpassed be, then let her go to feast.”
[90]MS. Norfolc. in Off. Arm. n. 15. See Anstis’s Appendix to his History of the Knighthood of the Bath, p. 24.
[91]
“For to obeie without variaunceMy lordes byddyng fully and plesaunceWhiche hath desire, sothly for to seynOf verray knyghthood, to remember agaynThe worthyness, gif I shall not lye,And the prowesse of olde chivalries.”Lydgate, War of Troy.
[92]Henry V. Act ii. Chorus.
[93]He was kind and courteous to them immediately after the battle, and indeed as long as their deportment merited his friendship. The Duke of Orleans and four other Princes of the blood royal were taken prisoners at the battle of Agincourt, and for a while lived on their parole. But when they forfeited the titles of knights and gentlemen, by endeavouring to deceive and betray Henry while he was negotiating with the parties that distracted France, he then removed them to close confinement in Pontefract castle; nor did they obtain their liberty for many years. A great outcry has been raised against Henry for his conduct in this instance,—for his not showing a chivalric deportment to men who had forfeited their honour.
[94]Thus the Chorus in Shakspeare’s Henry V. addresses the audience:
“So let him land,And solemnly, see him set on to London.So swift a pace hath thought, that even nowYou may imagine him upon Blackheath.When that his lords desire him, to have borneHis bruised helmet and his bended sword,Before him through the city: he forbids it,Being free from vainness and self-glorious pride;Giving full trophy, signal, and ostent,Quite from himself, to God.”
[95]Caxton, of the Order of Chivalry or Knyghthood.
[96]Ibid.
[97]Comines, vol. i. p. 31.
[98]Sir Tristrem, Scott’s edition, Fytte first. st. 2.
[99]Rymer’s Fœdera.
[100]Warton pleasantly observes, that had Henry never murdered his wives, his politeness to the fair sex would remain unimpeached.
[101]Holingshed, p. 805, 806, &c. Henry’s passion for disguising himself was singular, and carried him beyond the bounds of chivalric decorum. “Once on a time the King in person, accompanied by the Earls of Essex, Wiltshire, and other noblemen, to the number of twelve, came suddenly in the morning into the Queen’s chamber, all apparelled in short coats of Kentish kendall, with hoods on their heads, and hose of the same, every one of them carrying his bow and arrow, and a sword and a buckler, like outlaws, or Robin Hood’s men. Whereat the Queen, the ladies, and all other there were abashed, as well for the strange sight, as also for their sudden coming,—and after certain dances and pastimes made, they departed.” Holingshed p. 805.
[102]Holingshed, p. 815.
[103]Holingshed, p. 807, 808.
[104]Holingshed, p. 85, &c.
[105]Shakspeare, Henry VIII. Act i. scene 1.
[106]Dr. Nott, in his life of Lord Surrey, prefixed to the works of His Lordship and Sir Thomas Wyatt, has by the evidence of facts completely overthrown this pleasing tale.
[107]These curious particulars are to be gathered, as Dr. Nott remarks, from the following passage in Hardynge’s Chronicle.
“And as lords’ sons been set, at four year age,At school to learn the doctrine of letture;And after six to have them in languageAnd sit at meet, seemly in all nurture:At ten and twelve to revel is their cure,To dance and sing, and speak of gentleness:At fourteen year they shall to field I sure,At hunt the deer, and catch at hardiness.“For deer to hunt and slay, and see them bleedAn hardiment giveth to his courage.And also in his wit he giveth heed,Imagining to take them at advantage.At sixteen year to warry and to wage,To joust and ride and castles to assail,To skirmish als, and make sicker scurage,And set his watch for peril nocturnal.“And every day his armour to essay,In feats of arms with some of his meynie;His might to prove, and what that he do mayIf that he were in such a jeopardyOf war befall, that by necessityHe might algates with weapons him defend.Thus should he learn in his priorityHis weapons all, in armes to dispend.”
See to the same effect, the Paston letters, vol. iii. 34, 35, &c.
[108]This curious circumstance is mentioned in a journal of Sir John Wallop’s expedition, which Dr. Nott dug out of the State-Paper Office. The whole passage is amusing.
“July 31. Wallop advances to Bettune. Passing by Terouenne, he attempts to draw out the garrison of that place, but fails. The French defeated in a skirmish. Wallop says, that he sent a letter to the commandant of Terouenne, an old acquaintance, that if he had any gentlemen under his charge, who would break a staff for their ladies’ sake, he would appoint six gentlemen to meet them. The challenge is accepted, and the conditions are fixed. Mr. Howard, Peter Carew, Markham, Shelly of Calais, with his own two men, Cawverly and Hall, are the English appellants. They all acquit themselves gallantly at the jousts. Hall, at his first course, did break his staff galliardly, in the midst of the Frenchman’s cuirass. Markham stroke another on his head-piece, and had like to have overthrown him. Peter Carew stroke his very well, and had one broken on him. Cawverly was reported to have made the fairest course; but by the evil running of the Frenchman’s horse, which fled out of the course, he was struck under the arm, and run through the body into the back, and taken into the town where he was well treated. I wish to God, said Wallop, the next kinsman I had, not being my brother, had excused him.”
[109]Pinkerton’s History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 85, &c.
[110]Drummond, 140, &c. Buchanan, xiii. 25.
“For the fair Queen of FranceSent him a turquois ring and glove,And charged him, as her knight and love,For her to break a lance;And strike three strokes with Scottish brand,And march three miles on Southron land,And bid the banners of his bandIn English breezes dance.And thus, for France’s Queen he drestHis manly limbs in mailed vest.”Marmion, canto v.
[111]He was afterwards Duke of Norfolk, and great grandfather of the Earl of Surrey, who was mentioned by me in p. 114. ante.
[112]It has been generally thought that James, forgetting both his own wife and the Queen of France, lost much time at Ford, in making love to a Lady Heron, while his natural son, the Archbishop of St. Andrew’s, was the paramour of Miss Heron the daughter. Dr. Lingard (History of England, vol. vi. p. 31. n.) seems inclined to doubt this tale, because James had only six days to take three castles and a fair lady’s heart. What time was absolutely necessary for these sieges and assaults, the learned Doctor has not stated. However, to speak seriously, the story has no foundation in truth; and it only arose from the beauty of Lady Heron, and the reputed gallantry of the Scottish King.
[113]Henry’s History of Great Britain, book vi. ch. 1. part ii. s. 1.
[114]Pitscottie, p. 116, &c.
[115]Pinkerton, book xii.
[116]So reported in the conversation of Ben Jonson and Drummond of Hawthornden.
[117]Thomson’s Seasons. Summer, l. 1511.
[118]The Arcadia was popular so late as the days of Charles I., as may be learned from a passage in the work of a snarling satirist, who wanted to make women mere square-elbowed family drudges. “Let them learn plain works of all kind, so they take heed of too open seaming. Instead of songs and musick, let them learn cookerie and laundrie; and instead of reading Sir Philip Sydney’s Arcadia, let them read the Grounds of Good Huswifery. I like not a female poetess at any hand.” Powell’s Tom of all Trades, p. 47.
[119]This was the honourable distinction of the Sidney family in general, as we learn from Ben Jonson’s lines on Penshurst.
“Whose liberal board doth flowWith all that hospitality doth know!Where comes no guest but is allow’d to eat,Without his fear, and of thy Lord’s own meat.Where the same beer and bread, and self-same wine,That is His Lordship’s, shall be also mine.”Gifford’s Ben Jonson, vol. viii. p. 254.
The practice of making a distinction at the table by means of a salt-cellar was very proper in early times, when the servants as well as the master of a family with his wife and children dined at one long table. It became odious, however, when a baron made this mark of servility separate his gentle from his noble friends. This was feudal pride, whereas chivalric courtesy would rather have placed the guests in generous equality about a round table.
[120]Spenser,Colin Clout’s come Home again.
[121]Nicholls’s Progresses of Queen Elizabeth, vol. iii. p. 41, &c.
[122]Puttenham, Arte of English Poesie, book ii. c. 9. & 19.
[123]Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, p. 271. This passage brings to mind a corresponding one in Wilson’s Arte of Rhetoricke, printed in 1553. “If there be any old tale or strange history, well and wittily applied to some man living, all men love to hear it. As if one were called Arthur, some good fellow that were well acquainted with King Arthur’s book, and the knights of his Round Table, would want no matter to make good sport, and for a need would dub him knight of the Round Table, or else prove him to be one of his kin, or else (which were much) prove him to be Arthur himself.”
[124]“The Two angry Women of Abingdon.” The sword and buckler fighting was the degeneracy of the ancient chivalry; and Smithfield, which had shone as the chief tilting ground of London, was in the sixteenth century, according to Stow, “called Ruffians’ Hall,” by reason it was the usual place of frays and common fighting, during the time that sword and bucklers were in use. “When everyserving-man, from the base to the best, carried abucklerat his back, which hung by the hilt or pommel of his sword.” Alas, for the honor of chivalry!
[125]Wilson’s Life of James, p. 52.
[126]Ben Jonson, Masque of Prince Henry’s Barriers.
[127]G. Wither. Prince Henry’s Obsequies. El. 31.
[128]Life of Edward Lord Herbert, written by himself, p. 16.
[129]Life, p. 46.
[130]Life, &c. p. 63. Sir Edward was very much annoyed at Paris by a Monsieur Balagny, who enjoyed more attention of the ladies than he did. They used one after another to invite him to sit near them, and when one lady had his company awhile, another would say, “You have enjoyed him long enough, I must have him now.” The reason of all this favour was, that he had killed eight or nine men in single fight, p. 70. This was the degeneracy of chivalry with a vengeance.
[131]Life, p. 60.
[132]Act i. scene 1. of the play whose title I shall transcribe: “The New Inn: or, the Light Heart; a Comedy. As it was never acted, but most negligently played by some, theKing’s Servants; and more squeamishly beheld and censured by others, theKing’s Subjects, 1629. Now at last set at liberty to the Readers, HisMajesty’sServants and Subjects, to be judg’d of, 1631.”
[133]Dugdale, Origines Juridiciales. c. 39. Serjeants at law were not knighted till the reign of Henry VIII. c. 51.
[134]Ferne’s Blazon of Gentry, p. 100. See too Camden’s Britannia “on the degrees in England,” p. 234.
[135]Thus Lord Bacon says, “There be now for martial encouragement some degrees and orders of chivalry, which nevertheless are conferred promiscuously on soldiers, and no soldiers,” &c. Essays on the true Greatness of Kingdoms.
[136]Fletcher, Fair Maid of the Inn, act i. scene 1.
[137]Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. xv. p. 497.
[138]British Museum, Cottonian MSS. Nero. c. ix. folio 168. The assumption of dignity by the squire-governors, in order to get greater largesses, is amusing enough: but no knights of other lands were present to chastise them for their insolence.
[139]Du Cange, Gloss. ad Script. Med. Œvi. in verb. Milites Regis.
[140]Du Chesne. Hist. Franc. Script. vol. ii. p. 148. The assertion, however, is not strictly correct; for so early as the fourth century Armorica had been colonised from Wales. Argentré, Hist. de la Bretagne, p. 2. A connection ever since subsisted between Armorica and this island; and when the Britons were oppressed, they repaired to the Continent for refuge.
[141]Velly, Hist. de la France, vol. v. p. 132-136.
[142]Velly, Hist. de la France, vol. v. p. 313, &c.
[143]D’Argentré, Histoire de Bretagne, livre vii. c. 15. Paris, 1618.
[144]Froissart, c. 230.
[145]Mémoires de Du Guesclin, vol. iv. c. 16. The mode by which the Queen came by her death was never certainly known. One common story was, that she had been murdered by a party of Jews employed by the King, and hence he was considered a patron of Judaism itself.
[146]This is Froissart’s story, c. 231., and far more natural than the account in the Mémoires de Du Guesclin (which Mr. Turner has placed in the text of his History of England). The memoir-writer gives a long melo-dramatic story of Peter’s application to the Prince—of his tears and sobs, and other expressions of grief. The tale goes on to relate, that when the Prince was won to espouse his cause, his Princess, who was at her toilette, was much displeased, that he should have been imposed upon by a man so criminal as the Spanish King. Edward, fancying his martial prerogative infringed, exclaimed, “I see that she wants me to be always at her side. But a Prince who wishes to immortalize his name mustseekoccasions to signalise himself in war, and must by his victories obtain reward among posterity. By St. George, Iwillrestore Spain to its right inheritor.” Mr. Turner says, “That although this account is given by an enemy, yet as the circumstances correspond with the known character of Edward, they seem entitled to our belief.” History of England, vol. ii. p. 178. Now, for my part, I do not believe one word of the pretty stories of the tears and the toilette. The Mémoires of Du Guesclin are a good authority for the life of their hero; but Froissart is the historian of the other side of the question, and the hero of his tale (if sometimes he loses historic dignity in the partiality of biography) is Edward. Froissart was acquainted with every circumstance that happened in the English army, and his account of the matter is far more rational than that of Du Guesclin’s historian. It is expressive of the character of Edward and his times. Here we see the gentle knight yielding the place of honour to his friend, and the lady of the knight treating the guests sweetly and graciously. The toilette-scene is altogether omitted; and even if it had been inserted in the Chronicle I should, reject it as false, for it was not characteristic of Edward’s noble mindedness to speak to his Princess with petulance and ill humour.
[147]Froissart, liv. i. c. 231, 232.
[148]Froissart, c. 232.
[149]The Memoirs of Du Guesclin and Froissart, and a few passages in Mariana, have furnished this account of the Spanish war. In the general outline I have been anticipated by the popular historians of England; but I have introduced a great many circumstances essential to my subject, and, which did not come within the scope of their design.
[150]Froissart, book i. c. 233.
[151]Memoires de Du Guesclin, p. 255, &c.
[152]D’Argentré, Histoire de Bretagne, liv. vii. c. 15.
[153]Labineau, Hist. de Bretagne, vol. ii. p. 538. The treaty itself is so curious, that a life of Du Guesclin would be imperfect without it. “A tous ceux que ces lettres verront, Bertrand du Guesclin, Duc de Mouline, Connestable de France, et Olivier, Seigneur de Clisson, salut. Sçavoir faisons que pour nourrir bonne paix et amour perpetuellement entre nous et nos hoirs, nous avons promises, jurées et accordées entre nous les choses qui s’ensuivint. C’est à savoir que nous Bertrand du Guesclin voulons estre alliez, et nous allions à toujours à vous Messire Olivier, Seigneur de Clisson contre tous ceulx qui pevent vivre et mourir, exceptez le Roy de France, ses freres, le Vicomte de Rohan, et nos autres seigneurs de qui nous tenons terre: et vous promettons aidier et conforter de tout nostre pouvoir toutesfois que mestier en aurez, et vous nous en requerrez. Item, que ou cas que nul autre seigneur de quelque estat ou condition qu’il soit, à qui vous seriez tenu de foy et hommage, excepte le Roy de France, vous voudroit desheriter par puissance, et vous faire guerre en corps, en honneur, et en biens, nous vous promettons aidier, defendre, et secourir de tout nostre pooir, se vous nous en requerrez. Item, voulons et consentons que de tous et quelconques proufitz et droitz, qui nous pourront venir, et echoir dorenavant, tant de prisonniers pris de guerre par nous ou nos gens, dont le proufitz nous pourroit appartenir, comme de pais raençonné vous aiez la moitié entierement. Item, au cas que nous sçaurions aucune chose qui vous peust porter aucune dommage ou blasme, nous vous le ferons sçavoir et vous en accointerons le plutost que nous pourrons. Item, garderons vostre corps à nostre pooir, comme nostre frere. Et nous Olivier, Seigneur de Clisson, voulons estre alliez, et nous allions à toujours à vous Messire Bertrand du Guesclin dessus nommé, contre tous ceulx qui pevent vivre et mourir exceptez le Roy de France, ses freres, le Vicomte de Rohan, et nos autres seigneurs de qui nous tenons terre, et vous promettons aidier et conforter de tout nostre pooir toutefois que mestier en aurez et vous nous en requerrez. Item, que au cas que nul autre seigneur de quel que estat ou condition qu’il soit, à qui vous seriez tenu de foi, ou hommage, excepté le Roy de France, vous voudroit desheriter par puissance, et vous faire guerre en corps, en honneur ou en biens, nous vous promettons aidier, defendre, et secourir de tout nostre pooir, si vous nous en requerrez. Item, voulons et consentons que de tous ou quelconques proufitz et droitz qui nous pourront venir et echoir dorenavant, tant de prisonniers pris de guerre par nous, ou nos gens, dont le proufit nous pourroit appartenir, comme de pais raençonne, vous aiez la moitié entierement. Item, au cas que nous sçaurions aucune chose qui vous peust porter dommage aucun ou blasme, nous vous la ferons sçavoir, et vous en accointerons le plutost que nous pourrons. Item, garderons vostre corps à nostre pooir comme nostre frere. Toutes lesquelles choses dessusdites, et chacune d’icelles, nous Bertrand et Olivier dessus nommée avons promises, accordées et jurées, promettons accordons et jurons sur les saintz evangiles de Dieu corporellement touchiez par nous, et chascun de nous, et par les foys et sermens de nos corps bailliez l’un à l’autre tenir, garder, enteriner et accomplir l’un à l’autre, sans faire, ne venir en contre par nous, ne les nostres, ou de l’un de nous, et les tenir fermes et agreables à tous jours. En temoing desquelles choses nous avons fait mettre nos seaulz à ces presentes lettres, lesquelles nous avons fait doubler. Donné à Pontoison, le 24 jour d’Octobre l’an de grace mille trois cens soixante et dix.”
[154]Argentré, viii. 3, 4.
[155]Voltaire says, that Bertrand du Guesclin was the first person over whom a funeral oration was delivered, and who was interred in the church destined for the tombs of the kings of France. He adds, “Son corps fut porté avec les mêmes cérémonies que ceux des souverains; quatre princes du sang le suivaient; ses chevaux selon la coutume du temps, furent présentées dans l’église à l’évèque que officiait, et qui les bénit en leur imposant les mains. Les détails sont peu importants; ils font connoitre l’esprit de chevalerie. L’attention que s’attiraient les grands chevaliers célèbres par leurs faits d’armes s’étendait sur les chevaux qui avoient combattre sans eux.” Essai sur les Mœurs, c. 78.
[156]Anselme in his Palais de l’Honneur, gives an amusing account of the chivalric rules for sepulchral monuments. They were better observed in France than in any other country, and even there they were not very scrupulously attended to. “They are,” however, as Gough remarks, (Sepulchral Antiquities, vol. i. p. cxvii.) “a curious specimen of monumental punctilio. Knights and gentlemen might not be represented by their coats of arms, unless they had lost their lives in some battle, single combat, or rencontre with the prince himself, or in his service, unless they died and were buried within their own manors or lordships; and then to show that they died a natural death in their beds, they were represented with their coat of armour ungirded, without a helmet, bareheaded, their eyes closed, their feet resting against the back of a greyhound, and without any sword. Those who died on the day of battle, or in any mortal rencontre, on the victorious side, were to be represented with a drawn sword in their right hand, and a shield in their left, their helmet on, which some think ought to be closed, and the visor let down, in token that they fell fighting against their enemies, having their coat of arms girded over their arms, and at their feet a lion. Those who died in prison, or before they had paid their ransom, were represented on their tombs without spurs or helmet, without coat of arms or swords, only the scabbard girded to, and hanging at their sides. Those who fell in battle or rencontre on the side of the conquered were to be represented without coats of arms, the sword at the side and in the scabbard, the visor raised and open, their hands joined on their breasts, and their feet resting against the back of a dead and overthrown lion. The child of a governor, or commander in chief, if born in a besieged city, or in the army, however young he died, was represented on his tomb, armed at all points, his head on his helmet, and clad in a coat of mail of his size at the time of his death. The military man, who at the close of his life took on him a religious habit and died in it, was represented completely armed, his sword by his side on the lower part; and on the upper the habit of the order he had assumed, and under his feet the shield of his arms. The gentleman who has been conquered and slain in the lists, in a combat of honour, ought to be placed on his tomb, armed at all points, his battle-axe lying by him, his left arm crossed over the right. The gentleman victorious in the lists was exhibited on his tomb, armed at all points, his battle-axe in his arms, his right arm crossed over the left.”
[157]Argentré, Hist. de Bretagne, liv. viii. Velly in an. and Memoires de Du Guesclin, ad fin.
[158]
“Jamais,disoit il, je ne serai aimé ne conveis (bienvenu)Ainçois serai des dames très toujours éconduits,Car biensçais que je suis bien laid et malfettis,Mais puis que je suis laid, être veux bien hardis.”Vie du Connetable du Guesclin.
[159]Chastelet, Hist. de Du Guesclin, p. 33. There were no children of either of these marriages. Du Guesclin, however, left a son,par amours. The last male heir of this family died in the year 1783, an officer in the French army. In the time of Napoleon, a Madame de Gîvres asserted and proved her descent from the Constable, and Bonaparte granted her a pension of 6000 franks a year.
[160]Monstrelet, vol. ii. c. 3. The battle between the Burgundians and Dauphinois, in August, 1421, was fought with similar cruelty. Vol. v. c. 62.
[161]All these curious particulars of ancient manners are contained in the Histoire de Jeanne d’Arc, of M. Le Brun des Charmettes.
[162]Daniel, Histoire de la Milice Francaise, liv. iv. c. 1. Monstrelet, vol. viii. c. 46. Velly, tome v. p. 394.
[163]Boutillier, La Somme rurale, compillée par lui, p. 671. Abbeville, 1486.
[164]Memoires d’Olivier de la Marche, vol. ix. c. 2. of the Collection des Memoires relatifs à l’Histoire de la France.
[165]Perceval’s History of Italy, vol. ii. c. 8.
[166]The old French, in which this dialogue was held, is exceedingly interesting and expressive. “Monseigneur de Bayard, mon amy, voicy la premiere maison ou avez esté nourry, ce vous seroit grand honte si ne vous y faisiez congnoistre, aussi bien qu’avez fait ailleurs.Le bon chevalier respondit, Madame, vous savez, bien que des ma jeunesse vous ay aymée, prisée et honorée, et si vous tiens à si saige et bien enseigné, que ne voulez mal à personne, et encores a moy moings que à un autre. Dites moy, s’il vous plaist que voulez vous que je face pour donner plaiser à Madame ma bonne maistresse, à vous sur toutes, et au reste de la bonne et belle compaignée qui est ceans.La dame de Fleuxas lui dit alors.Il me semble, Monseigneur de Bayard, mais que je ne vous ennuye point, que ferez foit bien de faire quelque tournoy en ceste ville, pour l’honneur de Madame qui vous en scaura très bon gré. Vous avez ici alentour force de vos compaignons gentils-hommes François et autres gentils-hommes de ces pays, lesquels s’y trouveront de bon cœur, et j’en suis asseurée. Vrayment,dit le bon chevalier, puis que le voulez il sera faist. Vous estes la dame en ce monde qui a premierement acquis mon cœur à son service, par le moyen de vostre bonne grace. Je suis asseuré que je n’en auray jamais que la bouche et les mains, car de vous requirir d’autre chose je perdrois ma peine, aussi sur mon ame j’aymerois mieulx mourir que vous presser de deshonneur. Bien vous prie que me veuillez donner un de vos manchons. Car j’en ay à besongner. La dame qui ne savoit qu’il en vouloit faire le lui bailla, et il le meit en la manche de son pourpoint, sans faire autre bruit.” Memoires, vol. xiv. p. 397.
[167]The Memoires of Bayard, by one of his secretaries, have furnished me with the chief facts in this account of Bayard. A very excellent English translation of them has been lately published in two vols. post 8vo. The Memoires Du Bellay (Paris, 1573,) have supplied some deficiencies in the narration of the loyal serviteur.
[168]Memoires de Bayard, in the great collection of French Memoires, vol. xv. p. 458. “Et puis après par maniere de jeu, cria haultement l’espée en la main dextre: tu es bien heureuse d’avoir aujourdhui à un si vertueux et puissant roy donné l’ordre de chevalerie. Certes ma bonne espée, vous serez moult bien reliques gardée et sur toutes autres honorée. Et ne vous porteray jamais, si ce n’est contre Turcs, Sarrasins, ou Maures, et puis feit deux faults, et après remeit au fourreau son espée.” This sword has been lost.
[169]This mode of receiving knighthood had, however, been stealing into a custom for some time. The earliest instance I have ever met with was in the case of an infant son of Charles VI. (A. D. 1371,) who was knighted by Du Guesclin, a cavalier who, one would think, was sufficiently jealous of the honour of chivalry. After the ceremonies of baptism, Du Guesclin drew his sword, and putting it naked into the hand of the naked child, (nudo tradidit ensem nudum,) said to him, “Sire, I give you this sword, and put it into your hand; and pray God that he will give you such a noble heart that you may prove as true a knight as any of your illustrious ancestors.” So, too, Monstrelet, in his account of the events in the year 1433, says, that the Duchess of Burgundy was delivered of a son at Dijon, who was knighted at the font. Vol. vii. p. 147.
[170]Part of Segar’s account of this tournament is too interesting to be omitted. “At the fourth course, by marvellous misadventure, the King became hurt with a splinter of the adversary’s lance, which pierced his eye so deep, as thereby his brain was much bruised. Thus was the nuptial feast disturbed, and joy converted to sorrow. Such is the state of worldly things: gladness is ever followed by sadness, and pleasure accompanied by pain. The rest of the troop who were ready to run were with that accident marvellously amazed, and not knowing what to do, every man let fall his lance, and cursed such triumphs. Some pressed to carry his person home, and others (as touched to the heart) shut their eyes from seeing a spectacle so miserable. The ladies likewise and gentlewomen of the court turned their faces from beholding, and closed their eyes with tears. To conclude, the whole number of courtiers were stricken with sorrow not explicable. The citizens, also, and, generally, all the subjects of that kingdom, were perplexed to see the tragical event of that disastrous triumph, which was intended to congratulate a new peace and an honourable alliance. The form and face of the city were thus converted from exceeding joy to unspeakable sorrow: some held up their hands to heaven, others made haste to the churches, and every one, with abundance of sighs and sobs, cried out, beseeching God to grant the King recovery; as if every man’s well doing had thereon depended. Then the physicians and surgeons, not only of France but of the Low Countries, came thither to show their skill, using all art and endeavour that might be; but the splinters of the lance had pierced the King’s eye so deeply, as the tenderness of the place could not suffer it to be taken out nor seen (the brain also being pierced), no means there were to cure the wound. The King, therefore, tormented with extreme pain, fell into a burning fever, whereof at the end of eleven days he died. In all which time he did never weep, nor speak any word that might be imputed to pusillanimity; but most magnanimously took leave of life. Only this he said, that seeing he was destined to die in arms, he would have been much better contented to have lost his life in the field than in those domestic pastimes.” Segar, of Honour, lib. iii. c. 40.
[171]Warton justly observes that this apotheosis of chivalry, in the person of their own apostle, must have ever afterwards contributed to exaggerate the characteristical romantic heroism of the Spaniards, by which it was occasioned, and to propagate through succeeding ages a stronger veneration for that species of military enthusiasm to which they were naturally devoted. Warton, Diss. on the Gesta Romanorum.
[172]Painters are as good witnesses for manners as romance writers; and in Murphy’s Arabian Antiquities of Spain there is an engraving from a picture in the Alhamrā, representing a martial game, wherein both Moors and Christians contended.
[173]Froissart, vol. ii. c. 44.
[174]Calaynos, however, went out of fashion, not for want of merit in the hero, but by reason of the form of the verse in which he was celebrated. Thus the phrase,Este no vale las coplas de Calainos, passed into a proverb. Sarmiento, Memorias para la Historias de la Poesia, y Poetas Espanoles, p. 228.
[175]
Caballeros GranadinosAunque Moros, hijos d’algo.
[176]For proofs of this circumstance, I must again refer the reader to the engravings in Murphy’s Arabian Antiquities of Spain.
[177]Pur su ley, pur su Sennor natural, pur su terra. Partidas, cited by Selden, Titles of Honour, part ii. cap. 4.
[178]Partidas, l. ii. tit. 21. lib. 36. tit. 2, &c.
[179]Selden, Titles of Honour, part ii. c. 4.
[180]Tomich, Conquestas de los Reyes de Aragon e los Comtes de Barcelona, 1534, folio 23.
[181]Our English translators of ancient Spanish poetry need not think, as they are inclined to do, that they are worshiping a shade in Pelayo. The Arabian History of Spain by Ahmadu-bn Muhammadi-bn Mūsa Abū Bakr Arrāzy, a writer of the fourth century of the Hegira, attests his existence in the manner stated in the text. This author, whose name I will not again attempt to transcribe, is one of the authorities of Mr. Shakspeare, whose able dissertation on the History of the Arabs in Spain accompanies Murphy’s splendid work on the architecture of that country. Great expectations have always been entertained of the illustrations of Arabic-Spanish history which the Escurial manuscripts could furnish. The work of Casiri encouraged the most ardent hopes of a successful result of more patient enquiry; and nothing could promise better than the circumstance that his very learned and intelligent successor in the librarianship, D. José Antonio Conde, was engaged in the work. The results of his labours were published at Madrid in 1820 and 1821. I have not been able to meet with a copy of his work in the original Spanish, but I have found it mixed up with other matter in a French book, entitled “Histoire de la Domination des Arabes et des Maures en Espagne, et en Portugal, depuis l’Invasion de ces Peuples jusqu’a leur Expulsion définitive; redigée sur l’Histoire traduite de l’Arabe en Espagnol de M. J. Conde. Par M. de Marlés.” 3 vols. 8vo. Paris. 1825. From the preface of M. de Marlés it appears that D. Conde’s book is entirely the tale of the Arabic historians, and not the judicious result of a critical comparison between these writers and the Spanish chroniclers. M. de Marlés has endeavoured to supply the deficiency, and to write a history of Spain from Mariana and others on the one hand, and D. Conde’s Arabians on the other. He has entirely failed; for a more feeble work was never written. Much of the fault rests with his authorities; for his history is only another proof, of what we possessed a thousand instances before, that sufficient materials do not exist for the compilation of a good and complete Spanish history. The insufficiency of D. Conde’s book to all real historical purposes appears in every page. Something, indeed, has been gained on the subject of the Moorish civil wars and dissentions, but such details are without interest. Little or nothing has been added to our stores on the subject of Pelayo, Charlemagne’s invasion, the Cid, or the conclusion of the Moorish history; all points whereon information is so much wanted. These remarks apply only to Conde’s researches into the political and civil history of Spain while under the dominion of the Moors, and not to his enquiries into the literary history of the Arabs.