Warkworth's Chronicle Introduction
Warkworth's Chronicle Introduction is in Warkworth's Chronicle.
Mr. Hunter, in the Appendix to the last Report of the Record Commissioners1, was the first who noticed the existence of a singularly valuable and curious historical document preserved in the library of St. Peter's College, Cambridge, which had been extensively quoted by Leland in his Collectanea at the commencement of the sixteenth century. Leland extracts from a MS. volume of Chronicles given to the College by John Warkworth, who was then Master, the greater portion of which is a mere copy of Caxton's edition of the Brute Chronicle; and although, without the slightest notion of a judicious selection, that industrious transcriber has extracted as largely from the Brute as from the other part of the manuscript, yet his Collectanea has for three centuries been the only known receptacle2 of a portion of the exceedingly curious facts recorded in Warkworth's own Chronicle, and would, perhaps, have been for three centuries longer, had not the antiquarian diligence of Mr. Hunter discovered its latent resting place, and added one more to the many instances of valuable documents rescued from oblivion by that zealous and able historian.
Note 1. Fol. Lond. 1837, p. 336, col. 2.
Note 2. Previously, however, to Mr. Hunter's notice, the manuscript itself had been mentioned, but not for an historical purpose, in Mr. Hartshorne's Book Rarities of the University of Cambridge, p. 390.
The following Chronicle comprises a history of the first thirteen years of the reign of Edward the Fourth. "This eventful period, well observes Sir Henry Ellis, "though removed from us scarcely more than three centuries, is still among the darkest on our annals. Its records are confused, mutilated, and disjointed. They who wrote history in it, had no talents for the task; and there was a ferocity abroad among the partizans of both the rival houses, which prevented many from even assembling the materials of history."1 The paucity of documents illustrating this period has, indeed, long2 been a matter of regret. To meet with one, then, so minute in particulars, abounding in new facts, and of indisputable authenticity, cannot but be a matter of congratulation to the historian.
Note 1. Original Letters. Second Series, vol. i. p. 94
Note 2. Gentleman's Magazine, 1791, vol. 61, Pt. i. p. 222.
It is quite unnecessary here to enlarge on the history of the period to which the following narrative relates. There is, however, one part of this diary, for in many instances it is sufficiently minute to be called an occasional one, which must necessarily arrest the attention of every reader, —the account of the mysterious death of King Henry, expressed in such decided terms, and with such apparently perfect knowledge of every part of the transaction, as cannot fail to raise strong doubts of its authenticity. On a question of so dark a nature, no excuse will be needed for another writer entering into the controversy, with the aid of an additional auxiliary of powerful evidence.
Before I proceed further, I will place before the reader a few of the unpublished evidences I have collected relative to this transaction:
1. "Obitus Regis Henrici Sexti, qui obiit inter vicesimum primum diem Maii et xxijm. diem Maii."["The death of King Henry the Sixth, who died between the twenty-first day of May and the twenty-second."] MS. Bib. Reg. 2 B. xv. fol. 1, rº.
2 "Rex Henricus Sextus in arce London ferro transfigitur et occiditur [King Henry the Sixth is stabbed and killed in the Tower of London.".] MS. Cotton. Otho, B. xiv. fol. 221, v.
3. "Et Henricus, nuper Rex, reponitur in Turrim London, et, in vigilia Ascenscionis dormiente, ibidem feliciter moriens, per Tamisiam navicula usque ad Abbathiam de Cheltosye deductus, ibi sepultus est." ["And Henry, recently King, is laid to rest in the Tower of London, and, sleeping on the eve of the Ascension, there happily dying, he is then transported by boat across the Thames to the Abbey of Chertsey, where he is buried."] MS. Arundel, (College of Arms) No. 5, fol. 171, vº.
4. "Et in vigilia ascensionis moriebatur Rex Henricus Sextus in turri Londoniarum, qui quidem sepultus erat apud Chersey, et postea translatus per Regem Ricardum usque Wynsowerem." ["And on the eve of the Ascension, King Henry the Sixth died in the Tower of London, who indeed was buried at Chertsey, and later transferred by King Richard to Windsor."] MS. Laud, 674. (B. 23) fol. 11, rº.
5. There is a Latin prophecy (written perhaps after the fulfilment of the predicted event) in MS. Digb. 196, that King Henry the Sixth shall die a violent death.
6. "Also upon ascencion evyn, Kyng Henry was brought from the tower thrugh Chepe unto Powlys upon a bere, and abowte the beere more glevys and stavys than torches; who was slayne, as it was said, by the Duke of Glowcetir; but howe he was deed [nobody knewe, but] thedir he was brought deed; and in the chirch the corps stode all nyght, and on the morue he was conveyed to Chertsey, where he was buryed." MS. London Chronicle. Bibl. Cotton. Vitell. A. xvI. fol. 133, rº.
7. The following is taken from a metrical history of the reign of Edward the Fourth, by John Herd, M.D., of which is in MS. Cotton. Jul. C. II.
"Interea Henricus Sextus, spoliatus avito [Meanwhile Henry VI, stripped of his ancestral]
Qui fuit imperio, vita spoliatur, in arce [power, is stripped of life, in the fortress]
In Thamesis ripa vitreas que prospicit undas. [on the banks of the Thames, overlooking the glassy waves.]
Illum fama refert rigidum jugulasse Richardum, [fame reports that his throat was cut by Richard, ]
Gloucestrensis erat qui dux, vir sevus et audax, [Duke of Gloucester, a stern and bold man,]
Post cujus codem sic insultasse refertur; — [after which, it is reported he insulted him thus:]
'Masculus, en! hæres Edverdo a rege creatus, ['Behold, a male heir, created by King Edward,]
Tertius illius qui vixit nominis olim, [The third of that name who once lived,]
Preter nos hodie respirat nemo superstes— [Except for us, today no one survives—]
Nos, Eboracensis quos gloria stirpis honorat!' [We, of York, whom the glory of our lineage honors!']
Henrici corpus Pauli transfertur in ædem, [Henry's body is transferred to St. Paul's cathedral,]
Et jacet in feretro, vulgi ut videatur ocellis. [And lies in a coffin, visible to the eyes of the common people.]
Parvulus est vicus, Chersei nomine notus, [There is a small village known as Chertsey,]
In quo coenobium, sacer Erchenwalde, locabas, [In which you, holy Erkenwald, once placed a monastery,]
Londini fueras qui clarus episcopus olim; [You who were once a famous bishop in London;]
Huc delatus erat tumuloque Henricus opertus; [Thither was Henry brought and covered by the tomb;]
Post Vindessoram translatus, conditur æde [After he was transferred and laid to rest at Windsor]
Que sacrata tibi celebratur, dive Georgi! [In the sacred building dedicated to you, blessed George!]
Octo et ter denos Henricus præfuit annos; [Henry ruled for eight and thirty years;]
Sex etiam menses post sceptra recepta regebat; [Even after reclaiming the scepter, he ruled for six months;]
Vitæ annos binos et quinquaginta peregit: [He lived for two and fifty years:]
Edverdus princeps gnatus fuit unicus illi." [Edward, the prince, was his only begotten son.]
Fol. 170 vo - 171 ro
8. "Eodem die [mensis Maij xxjo.] decessit Henricus Sextus, olim dictus Rex Anglie, apud Turrim London, et sepultus est in monasterio de Chertesey juxta Tamisiam Winton dioces'. Et sic nemo relinquitur in humanis qui ex illo stirpite coronam petat." ["On the same day [21st of May], Henry the Sixth, formerly known as the King of England, passed away at the Tower of London, and was buried in the monastery of Chertsey near the Thames in the diocese of Winchester. And thus, no one is left among humans who seeks the crown from that lineage."] MS. Arundel, Mus. Brit. 28, fol. 25, vº.
John Blakman1, after relating an anecdote of the patience of Henry, adds- "Consimilem etiam misericordiam cum pluribus aliis ostendit, specialiter autem duobus, mortem ei intendentibus, quorum unus collo suo grave vulnus inflixit, volens excerebrasse vel decolasse eum, quod tamen Rex patientissime tulit, dicens, forsothe and forsothe, ye do fouly to smyte a kynge enoynted so;"2 and he afterwards proceeds to state- "Et tandem mortis ibi corporis violentiam sustinuit propter regnum, et tunc sperabatur, ab aliis pacifice possidendum."3 Little did the author of the following curious song imagine that his reigning sovereign would arrive at so tragical an end—
" Now grawnt him hit so be may—
Pray we that Lord is Lord of alle,
To save our Kyng, his reme ryalle,
And let never myschip uppon him falle,
Ne false traytoure him to betray.
I praye ʒoue, seris, of ʒour gentre,
Syng this carol reverently;
Fore hit is mad of Kyng Herre,
Gret ned fore him we han to pray!
ʒif he fare wele, wele schul we be,
Or ellis we may be ful sore;
Fore him schul wepe mone an e,
Thus prophecis the Blynd Awdlay."4
And "mone an e " doubtless did weep for the sainted Prince. The Croyland Continuator forcibly concludes his account with the following prayer: "may God grant time for repentance to the person, whoever he was, who laid his sacrilegious hands on the Lord's anointed.”
Note 1. De virtutibus et miraculis Regis Henrici, pp. 301 et 303.
Note 2. He also showed similar mercy to several others, but especially to two individuals who sought his death, one of whom inflicted a serious wound on his neck, intending to either behead or decapitate him, yet the King bore it most patiently, saying, "Forsothe and forsothe, ye do fouly to smyte a kynge enoynted so."
Note 3. And finally, he endured the violence of death there for the sake of the kingdom, and then it was hoped by others to be peacefully possessed.
Note 4. MS. Douce, Bib. Bodl. Oxon. No. 302, fol. 29, vo, a. A folio volume on vellum containing poems by John Awdlay, the blind poet, and (fol. 22, vo, b.) written in the Monastery of Haghmond in the year 1426. Mr. Hartshorne will use this MS. in his forthcoming Shropshire Glossary. I may refer here to four Latin verses on Henry the Sixth in MS. Bodl. 926. Laud, 670. E. 3. (Bern. 61.)
But to return from this digression. Mr. Bayley says we have satisfactory testimony that Henry lived at least up to the twenty-fifth of May," and he quotes the Fœdera for his authority, thereby falling into an error which Sharon Turner made, in mistaking the day of the payment of certain monies for that on which they were incurred, —an error which Dr. Lingard was the first to point out, and which takes away entirely the only seeming substantial evidence that has been brought forward to show that Henry did not die between the 21st and the 22nd of May, as stated in the following Chronicle. Fleetwood's narrative affirms that Henry expired on the 23rd "of pure displeasure and melancholy," and this very palpable attempt at deception proves at any rate that the popular feeling and opinion was strong enough to induce the Yorkists to attempt to throw a veil over the important circumstantial fact that would render a murder probable, viz. that Henry died the very night Edward made his triumphal entry into the metropolis.1 Indeed, the whole of the circumstantial evidence is in favour of the murder; Edward made his triumphal entry into London on the 21st, and went into Kent with the Duke of Gloucester on the following day; on the afternoon of the 22nd, Henry's body was brought to St. Paul's, and there, as we are informed by four good authorities, bled afresh—
"O, gentlemen, see, see! dead Henry's wounds
Open their congealed mouths, and bleed afresh!
Blush, blush, thou lump of foul deformity;
For 'tis thy presence that exhales this blood
From cold and empty veins, where no blood dwells;
Thy deed, inhuman and unnatural,
Provokes this deluge most unnatural."
Note 1. The catalogue of authorities for the murder of Henry VI. might be extended ad libitum, and do not show more than the popular opinion after all; it may be as well, however, to give a few references. L'Art de verifier les Dates, i. 816, col. i.; Harl. Miscell. i. 313; Life of Henry the Sixth (8vo. Lond. 1712), p. 58; Grafton's continuation of Harding's Chronicle, Sir Henry Ellis's edition, p. 460; "Rex Henricus occiditur clam in Turri," MS. Tanner, Bodl. II. fol. 104, vo. and fol. 56, ro; Hist. Anglic. a M. H. 1640, p. 180; Cooper's Chronicle, p. 267; MS. Harl. 2408; Palmesii Continuatio Chron. Eusebiani, edit. 1483, fol. 160, rº; Mémoires Olivier de la Marche, sub anno 1469; Lilii Chronicon Angliæ, edit. 1565, fol. 63, ro; the Breviat Chronicle of the Kings of England, edit. Cant. 1553, aº. 1470; MS. Vinc. in Coll. Arm. 418.
William Habington1 remarks that "the death of King Henry was acted in the darke, so that it cannot be affirmed who was the executioner, only it is probable it was a resolution of the state. The care of the king's safety and the publicke quiet, in some sort making it, however cruell, yet necessary;" and he adds, "at what time his body lay in Saint Paul's, and after in Blacke-fryers, a large quantity of blood issued from his nose— a most miraculous way of speaking the barbarisme of his murther, and giving tyrants to understand that the dead dare in their language tell the truth, and call even their actions to account." I make this extract for the purpose of remarking on Habington's political reason for the murder of Henry — an argument which Hume and all subsequent historians, with the exception of Dr. Lingard, have strangely underrated. If the life of Henry was of no importance, how was it that at Ludford the leader of the Yorkists considered it expedient to report his death, and actually cause mass to be celebrated for the repose of his soul, although he knew that the King was then alive and well1. Neither do I consider the argument alleged by Sir James Mackintosh2 of much weight - it is improbable that those who through so many scenes of blood had spared the Prince should at last incur the odium of destroying him. Had not the most recent of Edward's misfortunes been owing to him? and, moreover, while the child was living3, so long as the heir apparent of the throne was in existence - if so, indeed, he could be called after the treaty made by his father - the life of Henry was not worth caring for in comparison with the danger of destroying him. But now the love of the people, stronger and more enthusiastic as the unfortunate Henry was overwhelmed with greater and increasing difficulties, tended towards, and, perhaps, would ultimately have accomplished, the ejection of his rival, a sovereign who was inclined to deal heavily with them, and who never could have been a general favourite.
Note 1. Rot. Parl. V. 348; Owen and Blakeway's History of Shrewsbury, vol. i. p. 229.
Note 2. History of England, vol. ii. p. 44.
Note 3. "And shortly after [his final defeat], to make that parte sure, was deprived of his lief, havinge loste also Edward his sonne the Prynce before spoken of, the hope of all his posteritie, in the Battayle of Tewksbury." MS. Sloan. 3479. fol. 6, vº. See also MS. Arundel, Mus. Brit. 28. fol. 25, vº. which contains the only early authority for this view of the transaction.
Warkworth informs us that the Duke of Gloucester was at the Tower of London on the night of the murder of Henry. No certain evidence has transpired relative to the share that this prince had in the deed, nor is it to be expected that we could obtain any; the voice of the people attributed the direct performance of the murder to him; and his insatiable ambition, for his road was doubtless more open after Henry's decease, afforded a fair ground for the presumption. Philip de Comines says, "if what was told me be true, after the battle was over, the Duke of Gloucester slew this poor King Herry with his own hand, or caused him to be carried to some private place, and stood by himself, while he was killed." There must have been some reason for these rumours, and De Comines was contemporary; perhaps Gloucester might have had a double purpose in the death of the king — the accomplishment of his grand aim of ambition and the service of his brother. He appears to have been de tected in his aim at sovereignty, for Lewis Glyn Cothi (Works, p. 47, l. 13.) in a poem written immediately after the death of Edward, seems to have had some presentiment that Richard would succeed to the throne, for he emphatically styles him y brenin Risiart [Welsh: "The king Richard"].
In the perusal of the following narrative every one must be struck with the difference between the characters of the two rival princes; and although, perhaps, with the enthusiasm of a staunch Lancastrian, its author has coloured the vices of the one, yet in no place has he magnified the virtues of the other. Nothing can be fairer or more sensible than the view he gives of the state of popular feeling, after the resumption of the throne by Henry. "These were the causes, among others, which caused the people to grumble against him; and the common people said if they could have another king, he would regain all his lost possessions, and amend every corruption in the state, and bring the realm of England into prosperity and peace; nevertheless, when King Edward reigned, the people expected all the aforesaid perity and peace, but it came not; but one battle after another, and much trouble and loss among the common people." Almost every change, expected by the people to produce great and immediate advantage to them, has failed at least in its incipient operation, and the above clearly accounts for the strong reaction in favour of Henry. Afterwards it acted as a much more powerful motive, and so deeply did the fortunes of the royal prisoner excite the general compassion of his subjects, that, after he was really deceased, no adulation was con sidered sufficient to sustain the well-merited reputation of his moral virtues. Of this we have a remarkable in stance in the legendary life of him, written by a monk of Windsor about the year 1500, which opens with the following hymn,1 —
"Salve! miles preciose, [Hail! Precious knight,]
Rex Henrice generose, [Noble King Henry,]
Palmes vitis celice; [Palm of celestial vines;]
In radice caritatis [In the root of charity]
Vernans flore sanctitatis, [Blossoming with the flower of holiness,]
Viteque angelice. [And the life of angels.]
Salve! flos nobilitatis, [Hail! Flower of nobility,]
Laus et honor dignitatis, [Praise and honor of dignity,]
Seu corone regie; [Whether of royal crown;]
Pie pater orphanorum, [Pious father of orphans,]
Vera salus populorum, [True salvation of the people,]
Robur et ecclesie.[Strength of the church.]
Salve! forma pietatis, [Hail! Image of piety,]
Exemplar humilitatis, [Example of humility,]
Decus innocencie! [Glory of innocence!]
Vi oppressis vel turbatis, [To the oppressed or troubled,]
Mestis atque desolatis, [Sad and desolate,]
Scola paciencie. [School of patience.]
Salve! fax superne lucis, [Hail! Beacon of heavenly light,]
Per quam servi summi ducis [Through whom the servants of the highest leader]
Illustrantur undique: [Are illuminated from all sides:]
Dum virtute lucis vere, [While by the virtue of true light,]
Meruisti prefulgere [You have merited to shine forth]
Tantis signis gratie. [With so many signs of grace.]
Salve! quem Rex seculorum [Hail! Whom the King of ages]
Choris jungens angelorum [Uniting with the choirs of angels]
Civem fecit patrie; [Made a citizen of his homeland;]
Te laudare cupientes [Grant those desiring to praise you]
Fac ut semper sint fruentes [To always enjoy]
Tecum vita glorie! Amen." [Life with you in glory! Amen."]
Note 1. De miraculis Henrici Sexti, libri duo. MS. Harl. 423, fol.72, rº.
Henry the Seventh made an application to Pope Alexander the Sixth for the canonization of Henry, but his extreme penuriousness was the reason of its not being carried into effect, as he was unwilling to incur the necessary expenses.
John Lidgate's well-known poem on the Kings of England concludes with the reign of Henry VI.; but one manuscript1 contains an addition relating to Edward IV. which renders the entire stanzas on those two reigns worthy of insertion, because the contrast is most singular;
"Sixt Henry brought forthe in al vertu,
By just title borne by enheritaunce,
Aforne providede by grace of Criste Jhesu,
To were ij. crownys in Ynglonde and in Fraunce;
To whom Gode hathe yove soverayne suffisaunce
Of vertuous lyfe, and chose hym for his knyghte,
Longe to rejoyse and reigne in his righte.
Comforthe al thristy and drynke with gladnes!
Rejoyse withe myrthe thoughe ye have nate to spende!
The tyme is come to avoyden yowre distres―
Edwarde the fourthe the olde wronges to amende
Is wele disposede in wille, and to defende
His londe and peple in dede, withe kynne and myghte;
Goode lyf and longe I pray to God hym sende,
And that seynte George be withe hym in his righte.”
Note 1. MS. Harl. 2251, fol. 4, rº.
It is evident that this latter part was written at the commencement of the reign of Edward IV.
The MS. which contains the Chronicle now printed consists of a folio volume of 225 leaves of vellum, the last being pasted to the cover, and written not long after the last mentioned event, A.D. 1473. Leland errs in saying that the MS. is in Warkworth's handwriting, for it is evidently the work of a common scribe; we fortunately possess a note of presentation in Warkworth's autography, and the facsimile of this, with a specimen of the scribe's calligraphy, will be found at the commencement of the volume. The sentence with which Warkworth opens his memoranda is curious; it is probable that he had two copies of Caxton's Chronicle, in one of which he had written his own continuation, beginning with the words "at the coronacyone of the forseyde Edward," and in the other, instead of making a second copy of the continuation, he simply made the reference "as for alle thynges that folowe, referre them to my copey, in whyche is wretyn a remanente [or continuation] lyke to this forseyd werke" [i.e. written in the same manner as Caxton's Chronicle. ] The scribe, who made the transcript of Caxton now preserved at Peterhouse, had been directed to refer from one manuscript to the other for the continuation, and in so doing he added Warkworth's note of reference by way of introduction to the new part, joining them together by means of the words "that is to wytt, that."
The scribe of the Brute Chronicle has exchanged Caxton's orthography for his own, as the reader may readily see by comparing the printed edition with the following conclusion:
"And here I make ane ende of this lytelle werke as myche as I can fynde aftere the forme of the werke by fore made by Ranulpd Monke of Chestere. And where ther is ony faughte I beseche them that schal rede it to correcte it. For yf I cowede have founde moo storyes I wolde have sett in itt moo; but the substaunce that I can fynde and knowe I have schortely seett them in this boke, to the entent that suche thynges as have be done sithe deythe or ende of the same booke of Polycronycone be hade in rememberaunce and not putt in oblyvione, ne forgetynge prayenge alle them that schalle see this simple werke to pardone my symple and rude wrytynge. Endede the secunde day of Julij the xxij. yere of the regne of Kynge Edwarde the fourt, and of the incarnacyone of oure Lorde M¹. cccc. iiij. score and tweyne.
"Finysched and ended after the copey of Caxtone then in Westmynster." Fol. 214, vº.
For the sake of the general reader it may be as well to give the note of presentation, lithographed at the commencement of this volume, in full:—
"Liber Collegii Sancti Petri in Cantebrigia, ex dono Magistri Johannis Warkeworthe, Magistri dicti Collegii, sub interminacione anathematis nullatenus a libraria ibidem alienandus."
The Book of the College of St. Peter in Cambridge, given by Master John Warkeworthe, Master of the said College, under penalty of anathema to be in no way removed from the library there.
From the style in which this is written, there can be no doubt that it is in Warkworth's own handwriting; and it is also evident from a comparison with several of his autographs still preserved in the library of the College.
I have been able to collect nothing relative to the personal history of Warkworth, except that he was Master of St. Peter's College from A.D. 1473 to A.D. 1498.1 He appears to have been a man of moderate learning and ability, although his story about the Wemere partakes strongly of superstition, and a reliance upon mere hearsay; but, in some instances, his minuteness in particulars would lead us to believe that he was intimately acquainted with the political affairs of the period.
Note 1. In St. Peter's College there is an original picture of Warkeworthe, executed in 1498, in a clerical habit, holding an open book with both his hands. This was formerly in the curious room called the Stone Parlour, but is now, I believe, transferred to the library. There is the following distich underneath-
"Vives adoptata gaudeto prole; [May you rejoice in your adopted offspring;]
probato Non cuicunque libet, progenuisse licet." [it is not for everyone, but it is permissible for the proven to beget."]
In the ancient register of donations to the College is a list of books given to the library by Warkeworthe, and from this it appears that he presented his MS. Chronicle in the year 1483.
The account which he gives of Henry's death is certainly most singular. It would seem as if he had intended for every reader a certain assurance far from being voluntarily taken-
"Rede this treyte it may hym move-
And may hym teche lightly with awe."1
Be that as it may, Warkworth's narrative is supported by the strongest collateral proof, and is therefore deserving of the greatest consideration.
Note 1. MS. Bodl. 3692. Hyp. Bodl. 160. (226.) Tract. sep. ult. fol. 1, ro. A miracle play of the Burial of Christ, of the fifteenth century. I quote this MS. for the purpose of pointing out a curious miracle-play which does not appear to have been hitherto known.
I may observe that much new matter to illustrate this period may be found in the contemporary poems of Lewis Glyn Cothi, a Welsh bard, part of whose works have lately been published by the Royal Cymmrodorion Institution, under the able editorship of my friend the Rev. John Jones, M.A. (Tegid), of Christ Church, Oxford, and the Rev. W. Davies. I have made more particular reference to these spirited poems in the notes; but I take the opportunity here of pointing out to the general reader Mr. Jones's Introductory Essay on the Wars of the Rival Roses, which would have done ample credit to a work professing far higher pretensions: I speak of it not as the result of much research, or of any difficult research whatever, but as being an admirable view of the facts of the case, discussed with great judgment and ability, and well adapted to fulfil the purpose for which it was intended.
I gladly take the opportunity of expressing my respect ful and grateful thanks to the Rev. William Hodgson, D.D., Master of St. Peter's College, and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, for the readiness with which I have been favoured with every possible facility for rendering the text of the following document as cor rect as the MS. will allow.
also beg leave to return my best thanks to Charles George Young, Esq., York Herald, for the extreme kind ness and liberality with which he assisted some researches I found it expedient to make in the library of the Col lege of Arms; and to John Gough Nichols, Esq. for the communication of some valuable observations, which will be found introduced among the notes under his initials, and for the comprehensive index to the text and notes. The correctness of the printed text has been ensured by a careful collation made by Mr. Black, whose experience in these matters has rendered his assistance most valuable.
James O. Halliwell.
35, Alfred Place, Sept. 18th, 1839.