Archbishop William Courtenay 1342-1396

Chronicle of Adam of Usk [~1352-1430]. 1382. According to the saying of Solomon: "Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child,"¹ in the time of the youth of the same Richard many misfortunes, both caused thereby and happening therefrom, ceased not to harass the kingdom of England, as has been before said and as will hereinafter more fully appear, even to the great disorder of the state and to the last undoing of king Richard [aged 14] himself and of those who too fondly clung to him. Amongst all other misfortunes, nay, amongst the most wicked of all wicked things, even errors and heresies in the catholic faith, England, and above all London and Bristol², stood corrupted, being infected by the seeds which one master John Wycliffe [aged 54] sowed, polluting as it were the faith with the tares of his baleful teaching. And the followers of this master John, like Mahomet, by preaching things pleasing to the powerful and the rich, namely, that the withholding of tithes and even of offerings and the reaving of temporal goods from the clergy were praiseworthy, and, to the young, that self-indulgence was a virtue, most wickedly did sow the seed of murder, snares, strife, variance, and discords, which last unto this day, and which, I fear, will last even to the undoing of the kingdom. Whence, in many parts of the land, and above all in London and in Bristol, they, like the Jews at Mount Horeb on account of the molten calf (Exodus xxxij.), turning against each other, righteously had to grieve for three-and-twenty thousand of their fellows who suffered a miserable³. The people of England, wrangling about the old faith and the new, are every day, as it were, on the very point of bringing down upon their own heads rebellion and ruin. And I fear that in the end it will happen as once it did, when many citizens of London true to the faith rose against the duke of Lancaster to slay him, because he favoured the said master John, so that, hurrying from his table into a boat hastily provided, he fled across Thames and hardly escaped with his life⁴. Such errors and heresies grew in the city of London to so great a height (seeing that from such cause spring strife and variance), that, when such as were accused thereof came to answer before their ordinaries, the people were wont to run together in thousands, some accusing, others defending, them, with clamour and strife, as if they were just rushing at each other's throats⁵. So great, too, grew their malice, that, at the time of the second parliament of king Henry the fifth, hereinafter written, these Lollards, flocking to London from all parts of the land, thought to have utterly destroyed the clergy there at that time assembled6. But my lord of Canterbury [aged 40], forewarned of their evil design, found fitting remedies, as will hereinafter be told.

Note 1. Eccles. x. 16.

Note 2. Adam of Usk, as a native of Monmouthshire, would naturally take an interest in what went on in the neighbouring city of Bristol. John Purvey, Wycliffe's follower and part-translator of the Bible, preached there; and it is not improbable that Wycliffe himself also did so, as, in 1875, he was presented by Edward III to the prebend of Aust, in the collegiate church of Westbury-on-Trym.—Seyer, Memoirs of Bristol, ij. 164.

Note 3. The round number of 23,000 may be intended to represent the total of sufferers down to the time when the chronicle was finished, that is, towards the close of the reign of Henry V.

Note 4. In February, 1377, when Wycliffe appeared in St. Paul's to answer the charges brought against him. A quarrel arising between the duke of Lancaster [aged 41], who was present as a supporter of Wycliffe, and William Courtenay, bishop of London, the duke made use of violent language, which roused the anger of the Londoners, who attacked the Savoy and would have done the duke mischief, had he not escaped by boat on the Thames.— Walsingham, Hist. i. 8325; Archeolog. xxij. 256; Chronicon Anglie, 13828-1388 (Rolls series), 119, 397. A.D. 1882. p. 4.

Note 5. Compare the passage in Walsingham: "Insuper nec illud esse silendum estimo, cum episcopi predicti cum isto schismatico in capella archiepiscopi apud Lambhith convenissent, non dico cives tantum Londonienses, sed viles ipsius civitatis, se impudenter ingerere presumpserunt in eandem capellam, et verba facere pro eodem, et istud negotium impedire."—Hist, Angl. i. 356, ij. 65.

Note 6. The MS. reads "Henrici quarti," but this is a clerical blunder, The gathering in St. Giles's-fields, under sir John Oldcastle, is referred to. But Adam is not accurate: the actual date of the rising was in January, while Henry the fifth's second parliament, which was held at Leicester, did not meet till April, 1414. See below, p. 300.

Westminster Chronicle. On the fourth day before the Nones of October [4th October 1382], Isabella [aged 50], countess of Bedford and daughter of King Edward III, died in London. She was buried at the Friars Minor in London. Around the feast of Saint Edmund the King [20th November 1382], the bishops and a multitude of the clergy were gathered at Oxford by the archbishop of Canterbury [aged 40] for the examination of the heresy of which mention is made above. It was granted to the king that he should have half a tenth, provided that it should be used for the more necessary needs of the kingdom. For they asserted that the tenths granted up to that time had tended rather to the advantage of the enemies than of the kingdom. They concluded this from the expedition made into Spain by the earl of Cambridge¹, which took place around the feast of Saint John the Baptist [24th June], in the year of the Lord 1381. And this gathering was, as it were, a synod.

Quarto nonas Octobres obiit Londoniæ Isabella comitissa de Bedeforde et filia regis Edwardi tertii, quæ apud fratres minores Londoniæ sepulta est. Circa festum sancti Edmundi regis congregatis episcopis et cleri multitudine apud Oxoniam per archiepiscopum Cantuariensem pro hæresis examinatione de qua superius fit mentio concessum fuit regi dimidia decima dum cederet in usus regni magis necessarios, Asserebant enim quod decimæ hactenus concessæ potius cedebant in commodum inimicorum quam regni; quod concludebant ex expeditione facta in Hispaniam per comitem de Cantabrigia quæ fuit circa festum sancti Johannis Baptistæ, Anno Domini MCCCLXXXI. Et ista congregatio fuit quasi synodus.

Note 1. The Earl of Cambridge, Edmund of Langley [aged 41], 1341-1402, son of King Edward III and Philippa of Hainaut, subsequently Duke of York. Married 1. in 1372 Isabella of Castile, illegitimate daughter of King Peter I of Castile and Maria Padilla, and sister of Constance of Castile, wife of Edmund's older brother John of Gaunt and 2. in 1393 Joan Holland, daughter of Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent, and Joan the Fair Maid of Kent. In 1381 Edmund sailed to Portugal intending to support King Ferdinand of Portugal against King John of Castile. Kings Ferdinand and John agreed a peace leaving Edmund's expedition without a purpose.

Westminster Chronicle. Immediately afterwards, when a council was held at Westminster, the archbishop of Canterbury [aged 43] and other prelates of the churches, together with some of the temporal lords, complained gravely about those counsellors moving about the king, because they had induced the king to consent to the killing of the duke of Lancaster so cruelly in private. This was both because it was a matter of evil example, and because it would follow from this that whenever the king bore a hateful heart or mind towards some great or middling person, perhaps, in like manner, God forbid, he would order that person to be killed. Thus, by this, the approved laws and customs would suffer no slight injury, and quarrels, lawsuits, disputes, contentions, dissensions, and other such things would perhaps arise everywhere in the realm, God forbid. Therefore such crimes must be avoided in future, lest, because of unlawful acts of this kind, it should plainly happen that the realm be made worse. These words, or words like them, the archbishop of Canterbury delivered to the king on behalf of the lords then present there. When the king had heard them, he rose at once in anger against the archbishop and threatened him. On that day the king dined with the mayor of London. When the meal was finished, the king went onto the river Thames, and between his palace and Lambeth he met the archbishop. For the aforesaid archbishop had come to the king under the safe-conduct of the earl of Buckingham [aged 30]. Then, when the matter which the archbishop had pursued before dinner had been recited again, the king, drawing his sword, would have pierced the archbishop through at once, had not the earl of Buckingham, Lord John Devereux [aged 48], and Sir Thomas Trivet [aged 54] strongly resisted him. Since the king was angry with them, they immediately leapt out of the king’s boat, through fear, into the archbishop’s boat, and so at that time they departed from him in discord.

Incontinenti postea apud Westmonasterium consilio celebrato, archiepiscopus Cantuariensis, aliique ecelesiarum prælati ac de dominis temporalibus aliqui de istis consiliariis Circa regem conversantibus graviter sunt conquesti, co quod induxerunt regem assentire interfectioni ducis Lancastriæ tam crudeliter in privato tum quia fuit res mali exempli tum quia sequeretur ex hoc quod quandocunque rex versus magnam sive mediocrem personam cor sive animum gestierat odiosum consimili modo forsitan illam, quod absit, mandaret occidi. Ut sic per hoc leges et consuetudines approbatæ læsionem non modicam paterentur, rixæ lites jurgia contentiones dissensiones et cetera talia in regno, quod absit, ubique forsitan nascerentur, ‘Igitur abstinendum est a talibus sceleribus in futurum ne propter hujusmodi illicita deterioratio regni fieri manifesti contingat. Ista verba sive consimilia archiepiscopus Cantuariensis retulit regi ex parte dominorum tunc ibidem existentium. Quibus auditis rex iratus versus archiepiscopum illico surrexit et minas ei intulit. Ilo namque die comedit rex cum majore Londoniæ finito prandio rex flumen Thamense ,intravit et inter palatium suum et Lambheth archiepiseopum habuit obvium. Venerat enim præfatus archiepiscopus ad regem sub salvo conductu comitis de Buckyngham. Demum recitata materia quam ante prandium archiepiscopus fuerat proseeutus, rex extracto ense archiepiscopum illico perfodisset nisi comes Buckyngham, dominus Johannes Deuereye et dominus Thomas Tryvet eidem fortiter restitissent. Quibus rex iratus igitur de seapha regis propter metum in cymbam archiepiscopi statim prosiliebant et sic ab eo protunc in discordia recesserunt.

Westminster Chronicle. Therefore, on the eighteenth day of January, at the Guildhall of London, there assembled the Archbishop of Canterbury [aged 46], the Bishops of Winchester [aged 68], Bath, Ely [aged 35]¹, Hereford and Exeter, and the aforesaid lords, together with the clerk of the lord king’s privy seal and other noble, prudent and discreet men. First of all, since the Londoners were bound by unlawful oaths, the said archbishop absolved them from such oaths. Then the Bishop of Ely², Treasurer of England, said to them that no one should speak any ill of the aforesaid lords on account of the bad governance of the king and kingdom which had now been set in motion. Since they, and we all too for the greater part, have been wickedly and most falsely indicted, and since there are among you certain men who have also been indicted, whether justly or unjustly we do not know at all. It will, however, appear in the end when it has been declared by parliament. But now, if there are any grievances or complaints amongst you, bring them forward before us. Now is the time for hearing them, for it is clear to all of us that you are by no means of one mind on either side, since it appears that one craft of this city wishes to destroy another, which is absurd, especially to endure such discord among citizens of this kind. Indeed, if you are willing to foster peace and concord amongst yourselves, you may hope that no adversity will gain mastery over you. Yet little was brought forward in response to these things, because it seemed to them that the lords did not stand equally with all men, as was proper. Therefore perhaps they were unwilling to accept them as judges, nor to allege anything before them.

Igitur xviii die Januarii apud Gyldam Aulam Londoniensem occurrerunt archiepiscopus Cantuariensis, Wyntoniensis, Bathoniensis, Eliensis, Herefordiensis, Exoniensis episcopi et prædicti domini cum clerico de privato sigillo domini regis et aliis nobilibus providis et discretis. Primo quidem ante omnia quia Londonienses erant illicitis juramentis astricti dictus archiepiscopus ab hujusmodi eosdem absolvit. Tunc dixit eis episcopus Elyensis, thesaurarius Angliæ, quod nullus obloqueretur aliquod sinistrum de prædictis dominis propter malam gubernationem regis et regni jam motis. Cum ipsi etiam et nos omnes pro majore parte simus nequiter et falsissime indictati ac inter vos sunt quidam etiam indictati si vero juste sive injuste penitus ignoramus. Apparebit quoque in fine cum per parliamentum fuerit declaratum. Nunc autem si quæ gravamina sive querimoniæ inter vos versantur producite in medium coram nobis ; jam est tempus audiendi, nam constat omnibus nobis vos nullatenus esse unanimes utrobique quia ut apparet una ars istius civitatis aliam delere affectat, quod est absurdum, præsertim inter cives tales inter illos discordias sustinere. Immo si pacem et concordiam inter vos fovere volueritis nullam adversitatem vobis dominari sperare poteritis. Pauca vero ad ista erant prolata quia videbatur cis non æqualiter cos stare cum omnibus prout decet. Ideo forte noluerint eos tanquam judices acceptare nec coram illis aliquid allegare.

Note 1. Archbishop Thomas Fitzalan aka Arundel, a younger brother of Richard, Earl of Arundel and Surrey.

Note 2. The Latin text has the 'Bishop of Ely' but the Lord Treasurer at the time was John Gilbert, Bishop of Hereford.

Westminster Chronicle. Also, on the 4th day of May, the Lord de la Warre and Sir David Lindsay, a Scottish knight, well armed, first charged against one another on horseback with very sharp lances; then they fought on foot with axes, and finally with daggers. All these things, according to report, they performed very vigorously. Also, on the 8th day of May, Brother Alexander¹ was consecrated Bishop of Ross at Westminster by the Archbishop of Canterbury [aged 48]. He was the lord king’s confessor, of the Order of Preachers, and a master in theology. The king and queen, and other noble and gentle persons, came to that solemnity. Indeed, when this friar first came to the king, he was very humble and devout in gesture, expression, diet, manner of seeking, and in all his actions plainly moderate. He would not ride, but, following the court, went on foot from one place to another. At first he refused the bishopric; but a little afterwards, his will having changed, he began to act more insolently against all the aforesaid things, as the outcome of the matter has now proved.

Quarto quoque die Maii dominus de la Welle, et dominus David Lyndeseye miles Scoticus, bene armati primo cum lanceis acutissimis in equis hostiliter concurrerunt, deinde cum securibus postremo cum daggeris pedestres certarunt, quæ omnia peregerunt satis strenue seeundum relata. Item octavo die Maii consecratus est frater Alexander in episcopum Assanensem apud Westmonasterium ab archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, qui fuit et est confessor domini regis, de ordine prædicatorum magister in theologia. Ad istam solemnitatem accesserunt rex et regina ac alii nobiles generosi. Erat nempe frater iste quando primo venit ad regem satis humilis et devotus in gestu, vultu, in victu, in quæstu et in omnibus suis actibus perspicue moderatus nec voluit equitare, sed de uno loco ad alium sequendo curiam pedester transire, episcopatum vero primitus recusabat, sed parum postea mutata voluntate cœpit insolentius agere contra universa præmissa, ut jam rei effectus probavit.

Note 1. The surname is absent from the Latin text. Bishop Alexander de Kylwos, died 1398.

Westminster Chronicle. After these things, in the month of June, a council was held, and it was decreed in that council that the Bishop of Durham should cross to Calais to negotiate with the French about a final peace. He remained there negotiating until the 13th day of July. In that negotiation many things were asked for on both sides. All these were drawn up in writing and presented to both kings, so that they themselves, with their councils, might more advisedly settle the aforesaid matters. When the council at Westminster had ended, before his departure from London, the lord king caused solemn jousts to be proclaimed, to be held at Smithfield on the 10th day of October, declaring that he himself, with certain men joined to him, would very swiftly answer all who came. Immediately afterwards the king moved to Gloucester, greatly desiring to translate his great-grandfather¹, who lay there. There met him the Archbishop of Canterbury [aged 48], the Bishop of London, and certain other bishops, together with clerks and men learned in law, concerning the attestation of miracles to be sent to the lord pope. First, it was to be examined by them whether they were true miracles or fabricated ones. Concerning this business, the pope had previously sent a certain bull to the Bishop of London, ordering him to inquire into the truth of the said miracles and to certify him how the truth of the matter stood in the aforesaid business.

Post hæc mense Junii consilio celebrato decretum est in eodem quod episcopus Dunelmensis transiret Calesias tractaturus cum Francigenis de pace finali, fuitque ibidem tractando usque xiii diem Julii. In quo tractatu plura fuerunt petita ex utraque parte, quæ omnia erant in scriptis redacta, et ambobus regibus præsentata ut ipsi prædicta cum eorum consilio consultius terminarent. Consilio apud Westmonasterium terminato, dominus rex ante recessum suum de Londoniis fecit solemnia hastiludia prohæcclamari apud Smethefeld fieri xmo die Octobris prohæctestans quod ipse, cum certis sibi adjunctis, omnes adventantes citissime liberaret. Confestim post rex transtulit se Gloverniam multum appetens proavum suum ibi jacentem transferre, ubi occurrebant ei Canhæctuariensis archiepiscopus, episcopus Londoniensis et quidam alii episcopi cum clericis et juris peritis super attestatione miraculorum domino papæ dirigenda. Primo discutiendum per eos utrum sint vera miracula seu conficta, super quo negotio prius papa misit epishæccopo Londoniensi quandam bullam ad inquirendum veritatem dictorum miraculorum et ad certificandum sibi quomodo rei veritas se habeat in negotio antedicto.

Note 1. King Richard II's great grandfather was King Edward II who had died, probably murdered, at Berkeley Castle in 1327, and buried at Gloucester Cathedral.

Parliament Rolls Richard II. 27. Be it remembered that the venerable father Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, earnestly prayed to the lord king in the present parliament that whereas his church of Canterbury, by the gift and grant of his noble and holy progenitors, which the same king graciously confirmed, had such prerogative over the other churches of England that whatsoever archbishop of Canterbury for the time being had custody of all lordships, manors, tenements, and rents with appurtenances which were held of the same church in chief during the minority of the heirs of their tenants, even though the same tenants elsewhere held in chief of the lord king; and now concerning the castle and manor of Tonbridge, Kent [Map], which by virtue of this prerogative were in the custody of William de Courtenay, late archbishop of Canterbury now deceased, predecessor of the present archbishop, on the day on which he died, by reason of the minority of the heir of the earl of Stafford deceased, who held the aforesaid castle and manor from the aforesaid former archbishop in chief, dispute and controversy between the present archbishop and the executors of the will of the aforesaid late archbishop are pending at present. And whereas a certain composition was drawn up a short while ago between the archbishop of Canterbury and the prior and chapter of the church of Canterbury on the matter, it pleased the lord king, having inspected and examined that composition, to order a view and settlement of the matter for the peace and right of his said church of Canterbury, as should seem best to his royal majesty, to whose ordinance and decree on the foregoing the same archbishop proclaimed himself to be firmly obedient in all things, whereupon the same lord king immediately appointed the venerable fathers Robert archbishop of York, Robert Bishop of London and John Bishop of Ely, and John duke of Aquitaine and Lancaster, and John Earl of Huntingdon, and Thomas the earl marshal, to inspect and examine that composition, and further to discuss and settle the matter at their discretion, and fully to inform the lord king of what their deed and action should be. And later on Monday, the last day of the aforesaid parliament [10 February 1397], the archbishop of York, and the bishops, and the aforesaid duke and earls thus appointed by order of the lord king in the same parliament returned their decree and ordinance on the aforesaid matter by Walter Clopton, the lord king's justice, in this form - namely, that the third part of all manors, lands, and tenements of the inheritance of the aforesaid heir, and the issues, profits, and revenues of the same from the time of the death of the aforesaid late archbishop, should, according to the form of the aforesaid composition, remain and be in the hands of the aforesaid prior and chapter, to be used for their own purposes; and that two parts of the aforesaid lands and tenements, with the issues, profits, and revenues of the same two parts, should remain likewise in the hands of that prior and chapter, safely and securely to keep until the lord king shall have ordained to whom those said two parts of the issues, profits, and revenues shall be delivered and has declared his will thereon. And the castle of Tonbridge [Map] will be delivered to the aforesaid present archbishop of Canterbury without delay, to remain in his hands and keeping until the the coming of age of the aforesaid heir. The which ordinance and decree thus rendered by the archbishop of York, bishops, duke and earls, the aforesaid lord king, approving thereof, ordered to be placed on record on the roll of parliament at the request of the aforesaid present archbishop of Canterbury.

Westminster Chronicle. At that time a serious matter of dissension arose between the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of Exeter¹, in this way. The aforesaid archbishop had resolved to visit his province, and first began his visitation in Devon. He came to the cathedral church of Exeter. The canons of that same church were making certain accusations against their bishop. Therefore the archbishop sent for the aforesaid bishop, that he should come to him, answer the charges, and in other matters undergo his visitation as was fitting. But before the archbishop’s messenger reached the bishop, the bishop’s servants intercepted him. When they learnt the reason for which he had come, they made the messenger himself swallow the letters which the archbishop had directed to the aforesaid bishop. The archbishop, seeing his messenger so contemptibly dishonoured, became wholly inflamed with anger, and pronounced grave censures against the aforesaid bishop. Certain members of the archbishop’s household, with some others, entered a certain fair, and there found one of the aforesaid bishop’s esquires. They forced him to chew and swallow the points or tips of his shoes, [though he did not eat them, although he had been forced to eat them]². After these ridiculous acts had thus been wickedly performed on both sides, they quickly stirred up the fuel of greater hatred between them [....] whereupon the often-mentioned bishop, feeling himself aggrieved, went to Salisbury and there addressed the bishops gathered for the sake of parliament, explaining to them how, in certain matters, the said archbishop had exceeded due measure in his visitation, and that, if he ought to resist in such matters, he wished to use their counsel. The bishops said to him: "We consider you to be as powerful in your diocese as the archbishop is. Therefore defend yourself against him in the best way you can. As for us, when the aforesaid archbishop happens to turn aside to our churches for the purpose of visitation, we shall do as seems best and most expedient to us on our side." After the said bishop had learnt their will, he sent to the archbishop men of clear judgement and illustrious birth. Through their mediation and industry peace was restored between them, and the archbishop, having obtained what he wished, proceeded further in his visitation.

Quo in tempore inter archiepiscopum Cantuariensem et episcopum Exoniensem grave dissensionis materia hoc modo fuit exorta. Disposuit enim præfatus archiepiscopus suam provinciam visitare et primo in Devonia suam visitationem incepit, venitque ad ecclesiam cathedralem Exoniensem. Canonici vero ejusdem ecclesi; contra suum episcopum aliqua objieiebant. Quare archiepiscopus misit pro memorato episcopo ut veniret ad eum et ad objecta responderet ac in aliis prout decet suam visitationem subiret. Sed antequam archiepiscopi nuntius prevenit ad episcopum, ejus ministri ipsum interceperunt; cognita vero causa pro qua venerat literas quas archiepiscopus prwdieto episcopo direxerat per eundem ipsum deglutire fecerunt. Archiepiscopus namque videns suum nuntium ita contemptabiliter dehonestatum totus ira incaluit ac in episcopum prelibatum graves censuras dictavit. Familiares quidam dicti archiepiscopi eum quibusdam aliis in quasdam nundinas ingressi quendam sceutiferorum prefati episcopi ibidem inventum summitates sive aculeos sotularium suorum masticare et deglutire coegerunt, [sed non comedit licet comedere fuisset coactus] Istis ridieclis sic ex utraque parte nequiter peractis majoris odii fomitem inter illos citius [....]. Suscitavit unde ssepe dietus episcopus sentiens se gravatum perrexit Sarum et illie episcopos parliamenti causa congregatos alloquitur exponens eis qualiter in aliquibus dietus archiepiscopus in sua visitatione modum excessit; et si in hujusmodi debuerit resistere eorum consilio uti vellet. Cui episcopi dixerunt: "Nos reputamus te ita potentem in tua diocesi sicut archiepiscopum, igitur defende te ab eo meliori modo quo poteris. Nos vero cum præfatus archiepiscopus gratia visitandi ad ecclesias nostras contigerit declinare, faciemus prout nobis melius nostra parte videbitur expedire." Postquam vero dictus episcopus cognovit voluntatem eorum misit archiepiscopo viros perspicuos et genere przclaros quorum mediatione et industria pax inter illos reformata est archiepiscopus voti compos effectus ulterius in visitatione sua processit.

Note 1. Thomas Brantingham, died 1394. Appointed Bishop of Exeter in 1370, Lord Treasurer from 1377 to 1381, and again in 1389.

Note 2. The words in [ ] are on the margin.