Part 3

[Sidenote: He differeth from Master Speight on Chaucer’s family.] Under the tytle of chaucers countaye,[4] yo{u} seme to make yt probable that Richarde Chaucer vinetener of Londone, was Geffrye Chaucers father, But I holde that no moore the{n} that Johne Chaucer of Londone, was father to Richarde; of whiche Johne I fynde in the recordes in Dorso Rotulor. patent. 24 de anno 30. Ed. 1. in the towre. that kinge Edwarde the firste had herde the compleinte of Johne chaucer of London, who was beaten and hurte, to the domage of one thousand pownde (that some amountinge at this daye to thre thowsande pownde;) for whiche a comiss{i}one went forthe to enquire thereof. wherbye yt semethe that he was of some Reconynge. But as I cannott saye that Johne was father to Richarde, or hee to Geffroye: So yet this muche I will deliuer in settinge downe the antiquytye of the name of chaucer, that his anncesters (as you well coniecture) were strangers, as the etymon of his name (beinge frenche in Englishe synyfyinge one who shueth or hooseth a manne) dothe prove, [Sidenote: Chausier, one who hoseth or shueth a man.] for that dothe the Etymon of this worde chausier presente unto us, of whiche name I have founde (besides the former recyted Johne) on Elias chauseryr lyvinge in the tyme of Henrye the thirde and of Edwarde the firste, of whome the record of pellis exitus in the receyte of the Exchequier in the firste yere of Edwarde ye firste hathe thus noted: “Edwardus dei gra{tia} &c. Liberate de thesauro Nostro Elie chauseryr decem solidos super arreragia triu{m} obuloru{m} diurnoru{m} quos ad vita{m} sua{m} per litteras domini. H. Regis patris nostri, percepit ad scaccar{iu}m nostru{m}. datu{m} per manu{m} Walleri Merton cancellarii nostri apud West {minsteriu}m 24 Julii anno regni nostri primo.” with whiche carractres ys Geffry Chausyer written in the Recordes in the tyme of Edwarde the thirde and Richarde the seconde. So that yt was a name of office or occupat{i}one, whiche after came to be the surname of a famelye, as did Smythe, Baker, Porter, Bruer, Skynner, Cooke, Butler, and suche lyke, and that yt was a name of office apperethe in the recordes of the towre, where yt is named Le Chaucer, beinge more annciente then anye other of those recordes; for in Dorso clause of 10: H. 3 ys this: Reginaldus mirifir^s et alicia uxor eius attornaveru{n}t Radulfu{m} le Chausier contra Joh{ann}em Le furber et matildem uxorem eius de uno messuagio in London. This chaucer lyvinge also in the time of kinge John. And thus this muche for the Antiquytye and synificat{i}one of Chaucer, w{hic}he I canne prove in the tyme of Edward the 4 to signyfye also, in oure Englishe tonge, bootes or highe shoes to the calfe of the legge: for thus hathe the Antique recordes of Domus Regni Anglie, ca. 53 for the messengers of the kinges howse to doo the kings comanndementes: that they shalbe allowed for their Chauses yerely iiij^s viij^d: But what shall wee stande uppon the Antiquyte and gentry of Chaucer, when the rolle of Battle Abbeye affirmeth hym to come in with the Conquerer. [Sidenote: Chaucer his arms injustly undervalued.] Under the title of Chaucers countrye, yow sett downe that some Heraldes are of opyny-o{n}e that he did not discende of any great howse; whiche they gather by his armes. This ys a slender coniecture, for as honorable howses and of as greate Antiquytye haue borne as meane armes as Chaucer, and yet Chaucers armes are not so meane eyther for coolo{r}, chardge or partic{i}one as some will make them. And where yo{u} saye, yt semethe lykelye, Chaucers skill in Geometrye considered, that he tooke the groundes and reasons of his armes oute of seuen twentye and eight and twentye proposit{i}ones of Euclide’s first booke, that ys no inference that his armes were newe or fyrst assumed by hym oute of Geometricall proportions, because he was skyllfull in Geometrye: for so yo{u} maye saye of all the auncient armes of England w{hic}he consyste not of anymalls or vegitalls. for all other armes whiche are not Anymalls and vegitalls, as Cheuerons, pales, Bendes, Checkes, and suche lyke, stande uppon geometricall proport{i}one{s}. And therfore howe greate so euer their skyll bee, which attribute that choyce of armes to Chaucer [they] had no moore skyle in armes then they needed.

[Footnote 4: _Error for family?_]

[Sidenote: Philippa of Henault came not over with Prince Edward.] In the same title also, yo{u} sett downe Quene Isabell, &c. and her sonne prince Edwarde withe his newe maried wyfe retourned oute of Henalte. In whiche are two unperfect{i}ons. the first whereof ys, that his wyfe came oute of Henalte w{it}h the prince, but that is not soo, for the prince maryed her not before he came into England, since the prince was onlye slenderly contracted and not maryed to her before his arryvall in Englande, beinge two yeres and moore after that contracte, (betwene the erle of henalt and his mother,) about the latter ende of the seconde yere of his reigne, thoughe others haue the firste, the solempnytye of that mariage beinge donne at Yorke. besides she came not ouer with Quene Isabell and the prince, but the prince sent for her afterwardes, and so I suppose sayeth Hardinge in his cronicle, yf I do not mysconceve yt, not havinge the historye now in my handes. But whether he saye so or no, yt ys not materiall, because the recordes be playne, that he sent for her into Henalte in the seconde yere of his reigne in october, and she came to the kinge the 23 of Januarye followinge, w{hic}he was aboute one daye before he beganne the thirde yere of his reigne, wherunto he entred the 25 of Januarye. and for prooffe of the tyme when and whoome the Kinge sente, and what they were allowed therefore, the pellis exitus of the Exchequier remayninge in master warders office hathe thus sett downe to the forthe daye of februarye [Sidenote: Bartholomew de Burgersh sent for Philippa of Henault.] “Bartholomeo de Burgershe nuper misso ad partes Douor ad obuiandu{m} filiæ comitis Hannoniæ consorti ipsius Regis &c.” but this recorde followinge is most pleyne, shewing bothe who went for her, the day when they tooke their yourneye towardes henalte, with the daye when and where they presented her to the kinge after their retorne into Englande, and the daye one whiche they wer payed their charges, beinge the forthe of marche one w{hic}he daye yt is thus entred in the records of pellis exitus, Michaell. 2. ed. 3. “Rogero couentry &c Lichefeld episcopo nuper misso in nuntiu{m} domini Regis ad partes Hannoniæ pro matrimonio inter dominu{m} Regem et filiam comitis Hannoniæ contrahendo, ab octavo die octobris proxime preterito, quo die reessit de Notingha{m} ipso domino Rege ibidem existente, arripiendo iter suu{m} predictu{m}, versus partes predictas, usqu{e} vicesimu{m} tertiu{m} diem Januarii proxime sequente{m}, quo die rediit ad ipsu{m} Regem predictu{m} apud Eboru{m} in comitatiua filiæ comitis Hannoniæ predictæ utroqu{e} die computato pro cviij diebus percipiendo per diem iij.^li vj.^s viij.^d pro expensis suis.” Thus muche the recorde, whiche confirmethe that w{hi}che I go aboute to prove, that she came not into Englande with prince Edwarde, and that he was not maryed at that tyme, no, not contracted, but only by agremente betwene the erle and his mother. [Sidenote: The conjecture that Chaucer’s ancestors were merchants, of no valydytye.] Next yo{u} seme to implye by a coniecturall argumente, that Chaucers auncesters sholde be m{e}rcha{n}ts, for that in place where they haue dwelled the armes of the marchantes of the staple haue bin seene in the glasse windowes. This ys a mere coniecture, and of no valydytye. For the m{a}rchantes of the staple had not any armes granted to them (as I haue bin enformed) vntill longe after the deathe of Chaucers parentes, w{hi}che was aboute the 10 or 12 of Edwarde the thirde; and those merchantes had no armes before the tyme of Henrye the sixte, or muchewhat thereaboutes, as I dobt not but wilbe well proued, yf I be not mysenformed. But admytte the staplers had then armes, yt ys no argume{n}te that chaucers auncesters were merchantes because those armes were in the wyndowes, as you shall well p{er}ceave, yf yo{u} drawe yt into a syllogisme, and therefore yo{u} did well to conclude, that yt was not materiall whether they were merchants or noo.

[Sidenote: Master Speight misquoteth Gower.] In the title of Chaucer’s educat{i}one, yo{u} saye that Gower in his booke entituled confessio amantis termethe Chaucer a worthye poet, and maketh hym as yt were the iudge of his woorkes; in w{hi}che Booke, to my knowledge, Gower dothe not terme hym a worthye poet, (althoughe I confesse he well deserueth that name, and that the same may be gathered oute of Gower comendynge hym,) nether doth he after a sorte (for any thinge I canne yet see) make hym iudge of his workes, (whereof I wolde be glad to be enformed,) since these be Gowers woordes, vttered by Venus in that booke of confessio Amantis:

And grete well Chaucer when ye mete, As my disciple and my poet: for in the flowere of his youthe, In sondrye wise, as he well couthe, of dytyes and of songes glade the whiche for my sake he made, the laude fulfilled is ouer all: wherefore to hym in especiall aboue all others I am most holde; for thy nowe in his dayes olde, thow shalt hym tell this message, that he vppon his latter age sett an ende of all his werke, as he whiche is myne owne clerke do make his _testament of Love_, as thow hast done thy shrift ab[o]ue, so that my Courte yt may recorde, &c.

[Sidenote: Chaucer submitteth his works to Gower, not Gower to Chaucer.] These be all the verses w{hi}che I knowe or yet canne fynde, in whiche Gower in that booke mentioneth Chaucer, where he nether nameth hym worthye poet, nor after a sorte submyttethe his workes to his iudgmente. But quite contrarye Chaucer doth submytte the correctione of his woorks to Gower in these playne woordes, in the latter ende of the fyfte booke of Troylus:

O Morall Gower, this booke I directe To the, and the philosophicall stroode, To vouchesafe where nede is to correcte Of your benignityes and zeales good.

But this error had in you byn p{ar}doned, yf you had not sett yt downe as your owne, but warranted with the auctorytye of Bale in Scriptoribus Anglie, from whence yo{u} haue swallowed yt. [Sidenote: Gower the poet was not of the Gowers (or Gores) of Stittenham.] Then in a marginall note of this title yo{u} saye agayne oute of Bale, that Gower was a Yorkshire manne; but you are not to be touched therfore, because you discharge yo{ur} selfe in vouching yo{ur} auctor. Wherfore Bale hath muche mistaken yt, as he hath donne infynyte thinges in that Booke de scriptoribus Anglie, beinge for the most parte the collect{i}ons of Lelande. For in truth yo{u}r armes of this S^r Johne Gower beinge argent one a cheuerone azure, three leopardes heddes or, do prove that he came of a contrarye howse to the Gowers of Stytenham in Yorkeshyre, who bare barrulye of argent and gules a crosse patye florye sable. Whiche difference of armes semethe a difference of famelyes, vnlesse yo{u} canne prove that, beinge of one howse, they altered their armes vppone some iuste occas{i}one, as that soome of the howse maryinge one heyre did leave his owne armes and bare the armes of his moother; as was accustoomed in tymes paste. But this differe{n}ce of Cootes for this cause, or anye other, (that I colde yet euer lerne,) shall you not fynde in this famelye of Gower: and therefore seuerall howses from the fyrst originall. Then the marginall note goeth further out of Bale, that Gower had one his hedde a garlande of ivye and rooses, the one the ornamente of a knyghte, the other of a poet. [Sidenote: Gower’s chaplette for knighthood not for poetry.] But Bale ys mystaken, for yt ys not a garlande, vnlest you will metaphoricallye call euerye cyrcle of the hedde a garlande as Crownes are sometymes called garlandes, from whence they had their originall, nether ys yt of Ivye, as any manne whiche seethe yt may well iudge, and therefore not there sett for anye suche intente as an ensigne of his poetrye, but ys symplye a chapplett of Roses, suche as the knyghtes in olde tyme vsed ether of golde, or other embroderye, made after the fasshone of Roses, one of the peculier ornamentes of a knighte, as well as his coller of SSS, his guilte swoorde, and spurres. [Sidenote: The chaplette of roses a peculiar ornament of honour.] W{hi}che chaplett or cyrcle of Rooses was as well attributed to knights, the lowest degree of honor, as to the hygher degrees of Duke, Erle, &c. beinge knyghtes, for so I haue seene Johne of Gaunte pictured in his chaplett of Rooses; and kinge Edwarde the thirde gaue his chaplett to Eustace Rybamonte, only the difference was, that as they were of lower degree, so had the[y] fewer Rooses placed on their chaplett or cyrcle of golde, one ornament deduced frome the Dukes crowne whiche had thee rooses vppon the toppe of the cyrcle, when the knighte had them onlye vppon the cyrcle or garlande ytselfe. of whiche dukes crowne to be adorned with little rooses, [Sidenote: The knighting of Erle Mortone of Normandye.] Mathewe Paris, speakinge of the creatinge of Johne erle Mortone, duke of Normandye, in the yere of Christe 1199, dothe saye, Interim comes Johannes Rothomagu{m} veniens in octavis pasche gladio ducatus Normaniæ cinctus est, in matrice ecclesia, per ministeriu{m} Waltheri Rothomage{n}sis Archie{pisco}pi, vbi Archiepiscopus memoratus ante maius altare in capite eius posuit circulu{m} aureu{m} habente{m} in su{m}mitate per gyru{m} rosulas aureas artificialiter fabricatas, whiche chaplett of Rooses came in the ende to be a bande aboute oure cappes, sette with golde Buttons, as may be supposed.--In the same title yo{u} saye, yt semethe that these lerned menne were of the Inner Temple; [Sidenote: Chaucer being a grave man unlikely to beat a Franciscan Fryer but?] for that, manye yeres since, master Buckley did see a recorde in the same howse, where Geffrye Chaucer was fined two shillinges for beatinge a Franciscane Fryer in flete-streate. This is a hard collect[i]one to prove Gower of the Inner Temple, althoughe he studyed the lawe. for thus yo{u} frame yo{ur} argumente. Mr Buckley founde a recorde in the Temple, that Chaucer was fyned for beatinge the fryer; ergo, Gower and Chaucer were of the Temple. But for myne owne parte, yf I wolde stande vppon termes for matter of Antiquytye and ransacke the originall of the lawiers fyrst settlinge in the Temple, I dobte whether Chaucer were of the temple or noe, vnless yt were towardes his latter tyme, for he was an olde manne, as appereth by Gower in Confessione Amantis in the xvi yere of R. 2: when Gower wroote that Booke. [Sidenote: The lawyers not in the temple till the latter part of Edward III.] And yt is most certeyne to be gathered by cyrcumstances of Recordes, that the lawyers were not in the temple vntill towardes the latter parte of the reygne of kinge Edwarde the thirde; at w{hi}che tyme Chaucer was a grave manne, holden in greate credyt, and employed in embassye, so that me thinkethe he sholde not be of that howse; and yet, yf he then were, I sholde iudge yt strange that he sholde violate the rules of peace and gravytye yn those yeares. But I will passe over all those matters scito pede, and leave euerye manne to his owne iudgemente therein for this tyme.

[Sidenote: Speight knoweth not the name of Chaucer’s wife, nor doth Thynne.] IN THE TITLE OF Chawcer’s mariage yo{u} saye, yo{u} cannotte fynde the name of the Gentlewomanne whome he maryed. Trulye, yf I did followe the conceyte of others, I sholde suppose her name was Elizabethe, a waytinge womanne of Quene philippe, wyfe to Edwarde the thirde & daughter to Willi{a}m erle of Henalte. but I favor not their oppynyone, for, althoughe I fynde a recorde of the pellis exitus, in the tyme of Edwarde the thirde, of a yerely stypende to Elizabethe Chawcer, domicellæ reginæ Philippæ, wh{ic}he domicella dothe signyfye one of her waytinge gentlewomen: yet I cannott for this tyme thinke this was his wyfe, but rather his sister or kinswomanne, who after the deathe of her mystresse Quene philippe did forsake the worlde, and became a nonne at Seinte Heleins in london, accordinge as yo{u} haue touched one of that profess{i}one in primo of kinge Richarde the seconde.

[Sidenote: The children of John of Gaunt born pre-nupt, and legytymated by the Pope and the Parliament.] In the Latyne stemme of Chawcer you saye, speakinge of Katherine Swyneforde, Que postea nupta Johanni Gandauensi tertij Edwardi Regis filio, Lancastriæ duci, illi procreavit filios tres et vnica{m} filia{m}. Wherbye we may inferre that Johne of Gaunte had these childrene by her after the mariage. Whiche is not soo for he had all his children by her longe before that mariage, so that they beinge all illegitimate were enforced afterwarde vppon that maryage to be legytymated by the poope; & also by acte of Parliamente, aboute the two & twentythe of kinge Richarde the seconde; so that yo{u} cannott saye, que postea nupta procreavit Lancastriæ duci tres filios, etc.

[Sidenote: Chaucer’s children and their advauncement and of the Burgershes.] In the title of Chawcers children and their advauncemente, in a marginall noote yo{u} vouche master Campdene that Barthelmewe Burgershe, knyghte of the Garter, was he from whome the Burgershes, whose daughter & heyre was maryed to Thomas Chawcer, did descende. But that is also one error. for this Barthelmewe was of a collaterall lyne to that S^r Johne Burgershe the father of Mawde wyfe to Thomas Chawcer; and therefore coulde not that S^r Johne Burghershe be descended of this Barthelmewe Burgershe, though hee were of that howse. [Sidenote: Serlo de Burgo uncle and not brother to Eustace.] Then, in that title, yo{u} vouche oute of Mr. Campdene that Serlo de Burgo brother to Eustachius de Vescye builte Knaresborowe Castle. but that ys not right for this Serlo beinge called Serlo de Burgo siue de Pembroke was brother to Johne father to Eustace Vescye, as haue the recordes of the towre, and so vncle and not brother to Eustace. [Sidenote: Jane of Navarre maryed to Henry IV., in the 5th year of his reign.] for one other marginall noote in that tytle, yo{u} saye, that Jane of Navarre was maryed to Henrye the forthe in the fourthe yere of his reygne, wherein you followe a late englishe cronicler whome I forbeare to name.[5] But Walsingha{m} bothe in his historye of Henry the fourthe, & in his ypodigma, sayethe that she was maryed the 26 of Januarye in the yere of Christe 1403, whiche was in the fyfte yere of the kinge, yf you begynne the yere of oure lorde at the annu{n}tiat{i}one of the Virgine, as we nowe doo; but this is no matter of great momente. [Sidenote: The de la Pools gained advancement by lending the King money, but William was not the first that did so.] ffourthlye in that title yo{u} seme to attribute the advancemente of the Pooles to Williame de la poole, merchante of Hull, that lente the kinge a greate masse of moneye. But this Williame was not the fyrste advancer of that howse because his father Richarde at Poole beinge a cheife gouernor in hull, and serving the kings necessytye with money, was made pincerna Regis, one office of great accompte; by the same gyvinge the fyrste advancemente to the succedynge famelye. Whereof the Record to prove Ric. de la Poole pincerna Regis is founde in the pryvye seales of the eleventhe yere of kinge Edwarde the thirde, in master wardoures office, the lorde treasurers clerke. Where yt is in this manner: Edwardus dei gratia rex Angliæ et dux Acquitaniæ, &c. Supplicavit nobis dilectus noster Richardus de la Poole Pincerna noster, vt quum ipse de expensis officii Pincernariæ ac omnibus aliis officiu{m} illud tangentibus, ad dictu{m} Scaccariu{m} a festo sancti michaelis anno regni nostri decimo, vsque ad ide{m} festu{m} proxime sequens plenarie computaverit, et 2090^li: 13^s: et 11^d et vnus obulus sibi per computu{m} illud de claro debeatur: volumus ei solutione{m} inde, seu aliàs satisfactione{m} sibi fieri competentem: Nos eius supplicationi in hac parte, prout iustu{m} est, an{n}uentes, vobis mandamus, etc. Datu{m} apud Westmonasteriu{m} 14 Decembris, anno regni nostri vndecimo. To whose sonne this Williame de la Poole the older, and to his sonne Michaell de la Poole (who was after Chauncelor) and to his heyres, the kinge graunted fowre hundred markes by yere out of the custome of Hull, as apperethe in the record of pellis exitus of 46 Ed. 3. the same Michaell de la Poole recevinge the arrerages of that Annuytye. for thus yt is entred in Michaelmas terme one the first of December of that yere: Michaeli de la poole filio et heredi Will{iel}mi de la poole senioris per Tallia{m} levata{m} isto die continentem iij^c lxx^li xviij^s 1^d ob. eidem michaeli liberat per compotum suum factum ad Scaccariu{m} computator virtute cuiusdam brevis de magno sigillo, Thesaurario et Baronibus Scaccarii directum pro huius compoto faciendo, de quoda{m} annuo certo iiij^c marc. per annu{m} quas dominus rex Willielmo de la Poole seniori defuncto, et michaeli filio suo et heredibus suis de corpore suo exeuntibus, de Custumia in portis ville de kingeston super Hull per litteras suas patentes concess: percipendu{m} qua{m}diu vij^c xxxv^li xviij^s i^d ob. eidem Michaeli per compotu{m} predictu{m} sic debitu{m}, etc. D{omi}n{u}s Rex mandat vt ei satisfactionem vel assignationem competentem (in locis vbi ei celeriter satisfieri poterit) fieret et haberet, per breve de magno sigillo inter mandata de termino Paschæ anno quadragesimo tercio, etc. So that Richarde, Michaell de la Pooles grandfather, (a magistrate of greate welthe in Hull,) was the fyrste that gaue advancemente to that howse: although Williame, father to this michaell, were of lyke estate and a knyghte. nether canne I fynde (nor ys yt lyke) that michaell de la poole was a marchante, (havinge two such welthy marchantes to his ancestors before hym,) notwithstandinge that Walsingha{m} [Sidenote: The clergy offended that the temporal men were found as wise as themselves.] (moore offended than reasone, as all the Clergye were against temporall menne who were nowe become chief officers of the realme; and the spyrituall menne, till then possessinge those offices, displaced, w{hic}he bredd greate Sorseye in the Church menne againste them); sayethe that michaell de la poole fuerit à pueritia magis mercimoniis (vtpote Mercator Mercatoris filius) quam militia occupatus. [Sidenote: A merchant by Attorney is no true merchant.] And yet yt may bee that he mighte have some factors in merchandise, and deale by his attorneyes as many noble menne and great persons have donne, whereuppon Walsingham (who wroote longe after) might seme to call hym merchante by reasone of others mens dealinge for hym, althoughe in troothe he was neuer merchante in respecte of his owne persone, (for whiche they are properly called merchantes,) as may be supposed. [Sidenote: Alice, the wife of Richard Neville, was daughter of Thomas Montacute.] ffyftlye in the same title yo{u} saye, that Alice, wyfe of Williame de la poole duke of Suffolke, had a daughter, by her seconde husbande thomas montague erle of Sarisberye, named, after her mother, Alice, maryed to Richarde Neville sonne to Raphe Neuill erle of Westmerlande, by whome he had issue Richarde, Johne, and George. But this is nothinge so. for this Alice, the wyfe of Richarde Neville, (erle of Sarisbery in the righte of the same Alice,) was daughter of Thomas Montacute erle of Salisburye and of Alice his wyfe, daughter of Thomas Hollande erle of Kente; and not of Alice daughter to Thomas Chawcer and widdowe to William de la Poole duke of Suffolke.

[Footnote 5: Stowe.]