CHAPTER X

THE REVIVAL OF ENGLISH SCHOLARSHIP

Had the Duke of Gloucester confined his patronage to scholars of foreign birth, and taken no part in the intellectual life of England as a whole, he would deserve only a passing mention by those who would trace the development of English thought. His praises, however, were not sung by Italian humanist and French ecclesiastic alone. In England he was the acknowledged leader in the world of letters, the centre round which native scholar and poet alike revolved, and his patronage was extended to all who took an interest in intellectual pursuits. He therefore became the medium of introducing the new ideas from Italy to the English scholars, though it must be admitted that the latter were very slow to accept the message of the new movement. They were reared in an entirely different atmosphere to the Italians, and in most cases showed little or no interest in the new learning. Even Wheathampsted of St. Albans, who seems in some ways to have acted as the Duke's literary adviser, showed but scant sympathy with the scholarship fostered by his friend and patron. On the whole, it is probable that this Abbot was more a political than a literary friend to Gloucester, and it has been considered significant that he resigned the Abbacy in 1440, just when his friend and supporter was losing his hold on the politics of the country.[1265] Wheathampsted, however, was associated with the Duke in literary matters, and was employed by him to adorn and increase his collection of books, though our authority for this statement seems to suggest that this was only part of his policy of securing his patron's favour.[1266] He showed a distinct interest in books apart from his relations with Duke Humphrey, himself building a library for his monastery out of his own pocket,[1267] and presenting at least one book to the students at Oxford, probably to the foundation of Gloucester College, which was connected with the House of St. Albans.[1268] From time to time we find gifts of books to Humphrey entered in the accounts of the monastery, one of which alone cost £6, 13s. 4d.,[1269] a fact which may help us to estimate the enormous sums which the Duke must have spent in collecting his great library. On another occasion we hear of the gift of three books to the Duke of Gloucester, one of them being a _Cato Glossatus_, which we may identify with the _Catonem Comentatum_ presented to Oxford in 1443,[1270] probably an annotated copy of Cato's famous treatise _De Re Rustica_. The other two books of this gift were of the Abbot's own compilation,[1271] probably two parts of his three-volume work, the _Granarium de Viris Illustribus_, which we also find included in the Oxford gifts.[1272] From his connection with Wheathampsted and his Abbey of St. Albans Humphrey may have imbibed that love of astrology which was so unfortunately shared by his wife, but there is no recorded gift of a work on this subject to him, though Bedford received a treatise of this kind at the hands of these monks, who were famous for the study of the occult sciences.[1273]

JOHN CAPGRAVE

Amongst monkish scholars to be found in the Duke's following was John Capgrave, a native of Lynn, in Norfolk. He studied at Oxford, Cambridge, and London, and was for a time a tutor in the first-named University, ending his days as a member of the Augustinian community in its monastery at Lynn. He was a prolific writer on theological and historical subjects, and also a composer of English verse, into which he translated a _Life of St. Catherine of Alexandria_, attributed by some to St. Athanasius.[1274] He is said to have been intimate with Humphrey, who retained him to discuss matters of philosophy when the mood was upon him.[1275] It is interesting to note that Capgrave was one of the first monkish chroniclers to use the vulgar tongue for historical purposes, and his _Chronicle of England_ is one of the most useful contributions to the history of his times still extant. This adoption of English as a medium for the writing of history casts an interesting gleam of light on the position of Duke Humphrey in the Renaissance movement, one of the most important aspects of which was the abolition of 'Christendom' as a political term, and the development of the nationalities of Europe, a development which is mirrored by the adoption of the vernacular languages for scholarly purposes.

It was probably at the instance of Humphrey that the _Chronicle of England_ was compiled, as well as the _Commentary on Genesis_ which was dedicated to him. To this book, of which the original copy is preserved in the Library of Oriel College, Oxford, is prefixed a dedication to Duke Humphrey, in which he is described as the extirpator of heresy and the protector of the poor. The author goes on to say that no one was so worthy as Gloucester to receive the gift of such a book, for 'flourishing in the vigour of a most subtle intellect you give yourself, as is reported, with the greatest earnestness to the study of the works of ancient authors.' Most especially was the Duke famous for his studies in the Scriptures, and, much in the spirit of the Italian Humanists, Capgrave thanks God that such a prince should devote himself to the pursuit of knowledge, especially in an age when even ecclesiastics abandon the cloister for the field of politics, and without studying themselves, discourage studies in other people.[1276] Had he set out to paint Humphrey in relation to his times, this author could not have drawn the picture more accurately than he has here done. The scholars of the Middle Ages had lost all traces of enthusiasm; their scholarship was in that state of decay which preceded its entire abolition. To such a state of affairs came Humphrey, the first of that long line of laymen who were to usurp the place which the Church could no longer hold in the vanguard of the pursuit of knowledge. The domination of the ecclesiastical mind over the intellectual development of the world was about to pass away; no longer would it be possible for a Gregory the Great to order the destruction of a library of ancient classics, for a poet such as Alcuin of York to declaim against heathen authors, or for any one to cry in the words of Gregory of Tours, 'Let us shun the lying fables of poets, and forgo the wisdom of sages at enmity with God, lest we incur the doom of endless death by sentence of our Lord.' Humphrey and Capgrave were both faithful sons of the Church in which they had been born, yet they did not hesitate to denounce the scholarship of the mediæval ecclesiastics which had developed into a science of superstition, and to herald a new era in which knowledge was to be the birthright of all men, a means whereby they might perfect their lives by a realisation of the goodliness of humanity.

An equally interesting feature of this dedication is that Capgrave commends this commentary on Genesis to his patron on the ground that in it is to be found the science of judging literature.[1277] The new science of theology was to discard the crutches of tradition, and to take its place side by side with the other interests of the human mind. No longer was it to be a science apart, but rather one branch of a great and growing literature, which had for its object the improvement of man's state, both mentally and morally. In these words of Capgrave may we not see some indication of that critical faculty, which plays so large a part in the new birth of the mind of man? That Humphrey could be addressed after this manner clearly shows the position that he held among those who aspired to more freedom of thought; it is significant that a theological treatise should be dedicated to him on the ground that in it full play was given to the critical faculty.

It seems likely from the wording of the dedication of this _Commentary on Genesis_, that Capgrave was not at that time patronised by Humphrey, for he alludes to the Duke's love of learning as a matter of report and not of personal knowledge. Probably this book and its dedication served as an introduction for its author, even as the _Republic_ of Plato had served for Pier Candido Decembrio, and from the autograph at the end we gather that it was personally presented by Capgrave in the year 1438. We have no other work by Capgrave with a dedication to Gloucester, though four books written by this author, including this same copy of the _Commentary on Genesis_, were presented to Oxford; yet we know of one which would have been of immense interest had it survived, for it seems an undoubted fact that Capgrave wrote a _Vita Humfridi Ducis_. In his _De Illustribus Henricis_ he tells us that such a work was in contemplation,[1278] and it was known to exist in the days of Bale and Pits, the last of whom declares that in his time it formed part of the Library of Balliol College, Oxford.[1279]

Among other English authors patronised by Duke Humphrey we must place Nicholas Upton, a Fellow of New College, Oxford, who dedicated his work _De Studio Militari_ to 'Excellentissimio et illustrissimo Principi meo singulari, Humfrido.'[1280] It is a work of heraldic rather than of military interest, and bears more on the public than on the literary side of Gloucester's character. Also a host of quite forgotten men, mostly clerics, circled round this famous prince and patron, such as John Homme, Canon of Hereford, and at one time the Duke's secretary;[1281] Richard Wyot, his Dean of the Chapel;[1282] John Everdon, who successfully petitioned for a Canonry in the Collegiate Church of Hastings;[1283] and one Henry Abingdon, who for services rendered received an annuity of £8 per annum.[1284] All these probably were employed at one time or another in copying books for their master, and all found the reward they sought at the hands of their employer, a fact which leads us to believe that the complaints of Bruni and Candido were based more on cupidity than on justice.

ENGLISH POETS

More a friend than a follower was Thomas Beckington, a man of some political importance, at one time Lord Privy Seal, Private Secretary to Henry VI., and ultimately Bishop of Bath and Wells. He was elected a Fellow of New College, Oxford, in 1408, a position which he held till 1420, about which time he probably became Gloucester's chancellor, for he is alluded to as such in a letter written by Henry V. to Pope Martin V.[1285] He was a man who leant towards the new learning, led thereto probably by the example of his friend, and we find him in communication with Italian Humanists, such as Flavio Biondo of Forli and Piero del Monte, while at home he was connected with such scholars as Adam Moleyns, Thomas Chandler, and William Grey,[1286] the last of whom was the first great scholar churchman of England whose enthusiasm for the new learning was anything but a passing fancy. It may be that, through Beckington, Humphrey had some connection with these men, though all trace of this has vanished; at least he probably knew Grey, who claimed a distant relationship with the royal House. Lastly, it has also been stated that Reginald Pecock, the famous heretical Bishop of St. Asaph, was patronised by Gloucester, and we are told that he was 'quiet and safe, and also bold to dispute and to write his mind' so long as his patron was alive.[1287] Moreover, he is said to have been appointed Master of Whittington College, London, in 1431, through the influence of Duke Humphrey.[1288] The original authorities for these statements cannot be found, but it is significant that Pecock began the propaganda which ended in his disgrace immediately after the death of the man who is said to have been his patron. It may be that the orthodoxy of Humphrey acted as a restraint on the Bishop so long as he lived. However, this cannot be anything but supposition, as there is no real authority on which to base this hypothetical connection.

While speaking of the English writers patronised by the Duke of Gloucester, some mention must be made of a small band of poets--or perhaps it would be more correct to term them writers in verse--who had some relation with Gloucester. The fifteenth century was entirely barren of English literature. After the bright sun of Chaucer had set, a period of darkness arose, unrelieved by the slightest gleam of brilliancy or genius. An unheroic age produced a race of unheroic versifiers, men who slavishly followed in the steps of Chaucer, hailed him as their master in all their works, and exemplified the law that a literature which looks for its ideals to the age that has just passed must be devoid of all originality and of all real power. Interested as he was in the rediscovery of the lost literature of the past, Humphrey did not patronise the poets with the fervour he showed in reading the ancient classics, yet most of the versifiers of the day seem to have had some connection with him. Most famous of these was John Lydgate, who was responsible for about fifteen thousand of the worst lines of poetry that have ever been produced. He acted as a self-appointed poet-laureate, writing a poem to celebrate every important national event. Thus he described the triumphant entry of Henry V. into London after Agincourt; he welcomed the attempts at peace in 1443; Queen Margaret's advent and the truce she brought with her were celebrated in the same manner.[1289] His output of bad verse is amazing, and, with the exception perhaps of his 'London Lyckpenny,' it is totally devoid of interest whether literary or personal. The greater part of his life was spent as an inmate of the great Benedictine monastery at Bury St. Edmunds, and it was probably here that he first met Gloucester. Several of his all too frequent poems were written to celebrate Duke Humphrey. He produced one of these on the occasion of his patron's first marriage, and entitled it 'A comendable balade by Lydgate dame John at ye reverence of my lady of Holland and of my lord of Gloucester to fore ye daye of there maryage in the desyrous tyme of their true louynge.'[1290] In another poem he bewailed the sad fate of Jacqueline in a way which was not very complimentary to Humphrey, though this production of his has not survived in a complete state, two whole folios being mercifully missing.[1291] Finally, he lived long enough to write the 'Epitaphium Ducis Gloucesterie,' a piece of doggerel which almost surpasses its predecessors.[1292]

JOHN LYDGATE

Apart from these original poems, Lydgate produced one work commissioned by the Duke. This was a verse translation of Boccaccio's encyclopædic Latin work _De casibus Virorum et Feminarum illustrium_, though a French translation by Laurent de Premierfait and not the original was used by the English versifier. The title runs, 'Here beginneth the book callyd I Bochas, descriuyng the falle of Pryncys, pryncessys, and other nobles, translated into Inglish by John Ludgate, monke of the Monastery of Seynt Edmundes Bury, after commaundment of the worthi prynce Hunfrey duk of Gloucestre, beguning at Adam and endyng with Kyng John taken prisoner in France bi Prince Edward.'[1293] Humphrey showed considerable interest in the works of Boccaccio, for he possessed other translations of this master's writings. To his copy of the _Corbaccio_ we have already alluded, and a French version of the _Decameron_ was presented to him by the Earl of Warwick.[1294] His appreciation of Italian literature was not confined to these items, though it is evident that he had no knowledge of the Italian language. To Oxford he gave a copy of Dante's works, and a commentary thereon, together with several volumes of Petrarch and Boccaccio, all in Latin, but these may well have contained translations of the Italian compositions of these writers, as well as those originally written in the scholarly language of the time. Italian literature was undoubtedly known in England before Humphrey's day. Richard of Bury had been the friend of Petrarch, who, together with Dante, was the acknowledged inspiration of Chaucer's poetry,[1295] and so there is no occasion for surprise at finding that these works formed part of the literary equipment of the Duke of Gloucester.

The translation of Boccaccio's work must have cost the Duke dear, for in the midst of the translating he received a rhymed communication from Lydgate, urging penury as an excuse for a request for money, and asking him at least to give a moment,

'To so th' entent of this litel bille, Whiche whan I wrote my hand felt I quake.'[1296]

There is something peculiarly modern in this appeal, and to judge by the fervent thanks in the text of the work, it was not in vain. A tribute is paid to the munificent patron of the work in the Prologue, which is interesting as evidence of what was the general opinion about Humphrey's humanism in England. His ability and energy in governing the kingdom occupy two stanzas, and still more space is devoted to his exertions in support of Holy Church, which were so successful,

'That in this londe no lollard dar abide.'

The greatest stress, however, is laid on the Duke's literary qualities:

'He doth excelle In understandyng alle othir off his age, And hath gret joie with clerkes to commune, And no man is more expert off language. Stable in study alwey he doth contune, Settyng a side alle changis of fortune. Duc off Gloucestre men this prynce calle, And notwithstanding his staat and dignite, His corage never doth appalle To studie in bokis off antiquite. Therin he hath so gret felicite Vertuously himselff to ocupie Off vicious slouthe to have the maistrie.'[1297]

Strangely enough, this encomium on the literary character of Gloucester runs on very much the same lines as the praises of the Italian Humanists, and though it may have been written by a grateful poet about a munificent patron, yet there is a certain restraint about it, unusual in Lydgate's verses, which leads us to believe it is prompted by genuine feeling. It would seem that the book was not dedicated to the Duke, though undertaken at his request, and these lines occur unheralded in the midst of the prologue to the reader.

SOME OTHER POETS

Lydgate was not the only English poet who owned Gloucester as a master, though there is no other mention of poetical work being either composed at his request, or dedicated to him when finished. On the title-page of his _Boke of Nurture_, John Russell describes himself as 'Sum tyme seruande with Duke Ufrey of Glowcetur, a prynce fulle Royalle, with whom Uschere in Chambur was I, and Mershalle also in Halle,' and in the course of the poem, which is interesting as an indication of contemporary manners and customs, we read:

'Pray for the soule of John Russelle that God do hym mede. Sum tyme seruande with duke umfrey due of Glowcetur in dede,'[1298]

a couplet which gives a clear indication of the poetical qualifications of Gloucester's usher. George Ashley, who was clerk of the signet to Queen Margaret, and compiled a moral poem for the instruction of her ill-fated son, Prince Edward, was also at one time in Humphrey's service, at least so we would gather from a statement made by his mistress that at the time of his death the Duke owed him money.[1299]

A closer connection existed between Humphrey and Thomas de Norton, who was his chaplain[1300] and chancellor of his house.[1301] This post was probably one of importance, for he assisted materially in securing the renewal of the St. Albans charter, and was in correspondence with Abbot Wheathampsted on this subject. Norton was a man of more eminence than these other English versifiers, though he was probably but a young man when his master died. A native of Bristol, he became one of the most noted alchemists of his day, and embodied his knowledge in a poem called the 'Ordinal,' using this form and the vernacular, in order that he might instruct the unlearned in a science so useful to them,[1302] a reason which bears some affinity to the remarks made by Dante to the Prior of the Convent of Santa Croce when explaining his use of Italian in the _Divina Commedia_. It was most likely in his primary capacity as a scientist, and not as a poet, that Norton appealed to Humphrey, who died long before this poetical scientific treatise was written.

ENGLISH VERSION OF PALLADIUS

There is still one more versifier to be mentioned in connection with the Duke of Gloucester, though his name has not survived, and perhaps, considering the quality of his verse, he was wise not to betray his identity. Indeed, he is so conscious of his feebleness as a poet that he alludes to it more than once in the prologue which precedes his verse translation of the _De Re Rustica_ of Palladius.[1303] This prologue, which, consists of sixteen stanzas, is not directly addressed to the Duke, nor is there any formal dedication of the poem to him. Nevertheless, frequent mention is made of the writer's patron, and in a few introductory verses to the second book of the work it is obvious that the translation was undertaken for him.

'I wul assay hem up to plowe and delue; A lord to plese, how suete is to laboure,'[1304]

writes this rhymester, and there is no doubt as to the identity of this lord, for he tells us plainly,

'My blissed lord, mene I the duc homfrey.'[1305]

The writer was well acquainted with the life of his 'blissed lord,' most especially with his literary leanings, and he devotes nearly two whole stanzas to retailing his benefactions to Oxford, and the nature of the books given to that University.[1306] He also mentions the famous men in the Duke's following, making special allusion to Wheathampsted, Piero del Monte, Livius, and Antonio di Beccaria, and he further gives us a speaking picture of the extensive field which his master's studies covered.[1307] He also makes the somewhat startling statement that 'he taught me meter make,'[1308] which we may well discount as a poetical exaggeration, not to be taken too literally. Doubtless it was at the Duke's bidding that the translation was undertaken, and the author was probably a member of the foundation of St. Albans. This last supposition is suggested by the placing of Wheathampsted first on the list of Humphrey's literary friends, and by an allusion in the course of the prologue to the robber Wawe, whose crimes were only of local importance, and would be unknown to us save for the account of them given by the St. Albans chronicler.[1309] The poem must have been written between the years 1439 and 1447, that is, after the first gifts to Oxford, and before the death of the writer's patron, who was obviously still alive at the time of writing. The literary form of the poem cannot enhance Gloucester's reputation, but it bears interesting testimony to the important position held by him amongst the scholars of the kingdom.

The list of English poets connected with Duke Humphrey is not brilliant, but this was not his fault. There was no great light in the poetic firmament whom he could patronise in the way his grandfather had patronised Chaucer, though it may seem a strange omission that this dead poet was totally unrepresented as far as we know, in his library, We must qualify our surprise by remembering that we possess no complete list of Gloucester's books, so that a copy of Chaucer may have been among them, but at least we have sufficient evidence to prove that he did not despise the vernacular languages as did so many of the earlier humanists. True, we can only directly connect three books written in English with his name, and he seems to have found French more natural to his use than the language of his native land, since all the inscriptions in his books are written in that language, but practically all the writers of his age who wrote in English enjoyed his patronage, and we have the evidence of the University of Oxford to prove that he encouraged the production of books in the national language.[1310] Humphrey was not so busy in the rediscovery of the forgotten poets and philosophers of the past, as not to realise that the knowledge he was acquiring was to be the basis of the vernacular literature of the future, that the spirit of the new learning, while it liberated men's minds from bondage, must also find a means of expression for itself. Though intent on building the foundations, he did not fail to consider the nature of the edifice which should crown his labours.

* * * * *

THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

The historian of Literature is little more than the historian of exploded reputations; the great men with whom we must deal are the great men who no longer loom large on the horizon, and this is doubly true of a patron of literature. Humphrey's reputation as scholar and patron, though it flourished in his day in countries far distant from England, is now not even a distant memory, save perhaps in that society which frequently in his lifetime expressed the conviction that his fame would be immortal, not so much for his military or political glories, though indeed they were great, as for his constant liberality to its members, and that the University of Oxford would ever be the home of his glory.[1311] In Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, Oxford found one of her most generous and constant patrons of any age, one who laid the University under an obligation which not all her sons are ready to recognise. Certainly no contemporary of the 'Good Duke' could rival his generosity to the 'clerks of Oxenford,' though they were not destitute of important patrons. Henry IV. was numbered amongst the benefactors of the early library;[1312] Henry V. took an interest in the welfare of the University, on one occasion making special ordinances to be proclaimed and observed therein,[1313] and at his death bequeathing certain books to the Library.[1314] It is said that he had intended to found a great college there, and though this plan was never carried out, Archbishop Chichele built and endowed his foundation of All Souls in memory of his royal master. Of Henry's sons, Bedford had the intention of founding lectures in the seven liberal arts and the three philosophies, but it is uncertain whether this project was ever brought to fruition.[1315] Henry VI. was but a churlish friend of the University in spite of the obsequious flattery he received therefrom, and on more than one occasion we find him as a harsh landlord raising the rent of 'Bedel Hall,' or cutting down the hard-earned fees of the masters teaching in the arts.[1316] On the other hand, Queen Margaret was the founder of a lectureship in theology,[1317] whilst Cardinal Beaufort, who had neglected his Alma Mater during his life, thought it well to add to his chances of eternal salvation by bequeathing five hundred marks towards the completion of the Divinity School, in return for which he was to be remembered in all the University prayers.[1318]

GLOUCESTER AND OXFORD

Oxford, therefore, was a fashionable subject of interest, though the benefits gained were not in proportion to the giving capacity of the donors. Humphrey was not only a liberal benefactor, but a faithful and trusted friend to the University. We may smile at the servility of the eulogies, and the extravagances of the compliments in the letters addressed to him, and also at the obvious suggestion in these utterances that there was a distinct hope of favours to come, yet with all this we can trace a note of genuine admiration and respect in these flowery effusions. For many years the Duke of Gloucester was the 'great protector'[1319] of Oxford outside the confines of the University, a power in the land who would stand up for the privileges and rights of Chancellor and Proctors in a way that was far more valuable than many liberal donations at a time when the majesty of the law was a very venal sovereign. In a case of trouble or danger, whether from within or from without, the University would invariably appeal to her good patron, and did not find him wanting. Even when it was a matter of a quarrel with the members of the Benedictine order, of whose monasteries he was acknowledged to be _quasi fundator_, the University did not hesitate to appeal to the Duke to use his influence with the Chancellor in stopping the proceedings instituted by these monks in the Court of Arches against the usual payment of six shillings and eightpence made by each student to the master whose lectures he attended. At the same time he was besought to bring the presidents of the Benedictine order, namely the Abbots of St. Albans and Abingdon, to reason in this matter.[1320] The appeal was probably successful, for Humphrey's sense of justice was seldom subordinated to his predilections, and he had already upbraided the Prior of the monks in Oxford for unseemly behaviour towards the scholars of Glastonbury.[1321] At any rate, no further appeal was found necessary, so that it may be presumed that the monks were compelled to yield the point. The incident recalls an interesting aspect of Gloucester's relations with Oxford, in that he devoted his sympathies to the University as a corporate body, and neglected the separate foundations which made up the whole, even to the extent of having no connection with Gloucester College, the home of these monks of the Benedictine order, and the offshoot of his beloved monastery of St. Albans.

But while Gloucester favoured Oxford, he was not unduly partial, and in one case at least the University had to compromise. A certain friar, William Mussilwyk, had been deprived of his doctor's robes, and his supporters had been suspended, whereupon Gloucester wrote to remonstrate. The University declared that their patron had been misinformed as to the rights of the case, but after considerable correspondence with him on the subject, a compromise was arranged, and it was agreed that the disgraced friar was to be reinstated if he acknowledged his fault; it was, however, emphatically explained that this course was adopted merely as a personal favour to the Duke, and was in no way a confession of error.[1322]

The University had reason to be grateful to Gloucester, for he had taken it under his special protection, at least so one would gather from the phraseology of a letter written to him in 1430, wherein elaborately worded thanks are given him for his great generosity towards it ever since he had been its protector.[1323] He was not the man to give his protection without his interest, and he wrote to the University in 1431, requesting that certain reforms which he suggested should be carried into effect. An evasive reply explained that at present this could not be done, as so many members of the University were then absent from Oxford, and the time was too short for so important a question to be decided; however, it was hoped that a more definite answer could be sent before Christmas.[1324] Of this promised answer there is no trace, and the event passed into oblivion as one of no importance, save that it might suggest a marked continuity in the history of the University. This is the only record of unsolicited interference in the internal history of Oxford on the part of Humphrey, and it comes somewhat as a surprise that a man who has the reputation of being overbearing and interfering should not have tried to stamp his individuality more clearly on the University of which he was the protector.

Throughout the earlier years of the connection between Humphrey and Oxford it is the latter that invokes aid, not the former who would press his own wishes. Each may occasionally ask the other's help for a friend,[1325] but the letters addressed by the University to their patron were mainly written in pursuit of some benefit from outside, or in the hope of the pacification of some internal quarrel. At one time the Duke is besought to use his influence in securing for them the books bequeathed by Henry V.;[1326] at another, as protector of the realm, he is asked, together with the King's Council, to advise as to the treatment of certain defiant heretics, who are preaching 'uncircumcised and seditious words';[1327] or again he is appealed to in matters of purely internal concern--the disputes between Town and Gown, or the insubordination of the members of the University themselves. Thus in 1434 the authorities sought aid in enforcing a statute which had been passed in the interests of peace, which was meant to satisfy both the townsmen and the scholars, but the opposition thereto threatened to render it a nullity.[1328] The very next year a claim made by the Bachelors to be called Masters threw the University into a state which bordered on civil war, and caused a total cessation of lectures and all teaching. Urgent letters were written to Gloucester asking his assistance in quieting these disturbances, and Kymer was petitioned to use his influence with the Duke to beg him to grant their supplication.[1329] No sooner was the town reduced to quiet than the scholars of Devon and Cornwall organised a riot, and bearing off the image of St. Peter from a parish church, they placed it in the monastery of St. Frideswide, and desired all other scholars to attend Mass there. An attempt on the part of the University authorities to allay the tumult resulted in armed resistance, in which the law-students took the lead. Oxford, in a state of anarchy, once more appealed to its patron.[1330] We have none of the replies to these various petitions, but from a subsequent letter from the University it would seem that Gloucester had shown sympathy, and had intervened, for peace, though not entirely restored, was then at least in sight.[1331]

Interesting though they are, Gloucester's relations to the University in his capacity of a great prince have not the importance of his intercourse with her as a man of letters. Noisiness and a tendency to tumult have not always been signs of decay in Oxford, but at this moment they were the outward tokens of inward debility. Poverty, 'the step-mother of learning,' was the bane of university life, and we have seen the efforts of some students to escape paying their fees. A large percentage of the letters written by the University had this lack of money as their theme, and it was not greediness for more of the good things of life, but a desire for mere necessaries, that obliged them so to write. The University was as Rachel weeping for her children--so says a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1438: once she was famous in the world, and students flocked to her from all parts; then she possessed many men learned in the arts and sciences, her schools were not depopulated, nor were her halls empty. Now there was a scarcity both of food and money, and learning was so little rewarded that few came to acquire it; scarcely a thousand scholars and masters remained in the University, doors were locked, the buildings in ruins. Those who still remained had to be content to see ignorant and unlettered men promoted over their heads in the world outside, whilst they were left to starve.[1332]

Oxford had indeed fallen from her high estate, and was experiencing a period of affliction. The scholarship of the Middle Ages was worn out, the gospel of the New World had not yet been preached to her, but when, as in all its troubles, the University turned for help to the Duke of Gloucester, it had taken the first step towards better things. To him its grievances were told, and it was his generosity that resuscitated the lectures on the seven liberal arts and the three philosophies.[1333] Still, there was not sufficient for their continual maintenance. The lectures were carried on for some time, till the expense was more than could be borne, and again an appeal was made to the Duke. It was imperative that they should have a permanent foundation for three more lecturers, and they must have books, and money to buy more. Yet another important corollary to these demands was that more suitable appointments should be made by those in authority in the kingdom, and that a man who had been educated at Oxford should not be at a disadvantage by reason of his superior knowledge.[1334] We have here the grievance in a nutshell. University education was unpopular, no one was ready to provide the means for that education, and the existing means were at present wholly inadequate.

GIFTS OF BOOKS TO OXFORD

Probably the lack of books was the greatest want, for beyond a very few volumes in the chests of the Library named after Bishop Cobham, and some others possessed by masters more wealthy than their fellows, there were no books at all in the University. The students had no access to books, all the teaching had to be done orally, and hence the knowledge acquired was of that purely hereditary type which could not be enlivened by the infusion of new ideas. To a lover and student of books such as Duke Humphrey this defect in the equipment of both teachers and taught must have come home very strongly, and his reply to the appeal, which was made in April 1438, was not tardy. Already his name, together with those of his father and brothers, was written on that tablet in the Oxford Library which recorded the benefactors of that institution,[1335] and in 1435 he had presented both money and books to the University, for which he had received the warmest thanks, and a promise of renewed diligence in study, as recognition that it was his wisdom that had brought about a revival of learning in Oxford.[1336] In answer to the direct appeal he had received in 1438, he forwarded what must have been an important part of his library, in the shape of one hundred and twenty-nine volumes,[1337] 'a more splendid donation than any prince or king had given since the foundation of the University,' valued as it was at more than £1000.[1338] The letter of thanks spoke in naturally high terms of the Duke's wisdom and learning, and compared him to Julius Cæsar, who founded a library in Rome, for he, like Gloucester, combined the attributes of a great soldier with those of an enthusiastic scholar.[1339] Not content with their own thanks, these grateful scholars wrote to Parliament, urging its members to thank the Duke, since both they and their relatives had been, or in the future would be, beholden to the University for their education[1340]--a request which, it is hardly a surprise to find, went unheeded. On November 5, 1439, an indenture in receipt of the books was drawn up, and thereon were inscribed the first word or words occurring on the second folio of each volume, so that identification in case of loss might be possible.[1341] This last precaution, which was customary in most libraries of that period, is still of immense value in verifying the authenticity of manuscripts said to have formed part of the donations of Duke Humphrey to Oxford. Two more gifts followed in 1441, the first consisting of seven, the second of nine books, of which we have only the names of the latter preserved.[1342] It is noticeable that on both these occasions the books were conveyed to Oxford by Sir John Kirkby, a soldier who had served under Humphrey in the campaign of 1417. Finally, in 1444, came a gift of one hundred and thirty-four volumes, which were indented for in the usual manner.[1343]

Gifts of books in such numbers were unique in the history of the University, and continued to be so for some time to come. Other donors there were, amongst whom may be numbered Bedford, Wheathampsted, the Duchess of Suffolk, Thomas Knolles, and John Somersett.[1344] These, however, were all either small collections or single books, and even a gift by Henry VI. to the foundation of All Souls only numbered twenty-three volumes.[1345] Throughout, Duke Humphrey had led the way in the patronage of the University. He had befriended it at a time when it sadly needed support, and he now endowed it with a library, which in numbers compared very favourably with any similar collection in England. It was a deed of open-handed generosity, which well deserved all the thanks it provoked, for in all he must have given quite three hundred volumes to the University[1346]--by no means an insignificant collection of books when all had to be copied by hand. They were drawn undoubtedly from his own private library, as there had been no time between the request and the donations to collect for the purpose, and the gift becomes thereby all the more interesting to us, and all the more honourable to the donor. Humphrey cared not for books merely for the sake of collecting them; he valued their teaching, and did his utmost to give them every opportunity of spreading their gospel abroad among the students of the land.

Special arrangements were made by the University for the preservation of these additions to their Library. Already since 1412 there had been a Librarian, who cared for the books collected in the room over the porch of St. Mary's Church. He was in receipt of a salary of one hundred shillings per annum, besides six shillings and eightpence for every university Mass that he said, and the right to receive robes from every beneficed graduate at the time of his graduation. Only graduates and members of the religious orders who had studied philosophy for eight years were given access to the Library, though certain exceptions, as in the case of sons of members of Parliament, might be made. Oaths must be taken by all readers not to mutilate the books by erasures or blots, an ordinance, let us hope, which was observed more carefully at that time than it is now in modern libraries. The Library was open from nine to eleven and from one to four o'clock, except on Sundays and certain specified days, including the Librarian's holiday of one month in the long vacation.[1347]

Fresh provisions were drawn up in 1439 in view of the recent additions. All books were to be entered on a list kept in the Library, and their titles were to be clearly marked on the first page with a list of the contents; none were to be alienated or removed from the Library, save for the purpose of rebinding, though the Duke might borrow any volume after having submitted a written request to that effect. The books were to be kept in chests for the use of lecturers and masters, and in the absence of lectures students might have access to them. In case of loss the loser was to pay to the University the sum marked on the book, which was to be in excess of its real value.[1348]

The possession of a useful library did much to restore the old position of the University. From having almost no books--so wrote the authorities to Gloucester--they now had plenty, so that both the Greek and Latin tongue was there studied--that is, both the Greek and Latin authors, for no Greek books were included in the gift. Men from all lands came to study in Oxford now, as they had done before, and the letter concludes with a phrase couched in more intimate terms than had been hitherto customary; 'we wish you could see the students bending over your books in their greediness and thirst for knowledge.'[1349] So great were the crowds that used these volumes, that the accommodation afforded by the old library was insufficient, and so the University wrote to Gloucester, suggesting that the new Divinity school, then in course of construction, should be used for the purpose. It was in every way suitable for a library, being retired and quiet, and the idea that this new home for his books should be called by his name was submitted to the donor thereof for his approbation.[1350] Herein we may see a polite hint that money as well as books would be acceptable. We have no evidence that the Duke responded to this appeal at the moment and he died before the building was completed by the munificence of Thomas Kempe, Bishop of London, who gave one thousand marks for the purpose. With a conveniently short memory the University alluded to the finished Library as _tuam novam librariam_ when writing to Kempe in 1487.[1351]

LAST RELATIONS WITH OXFORD

This last request of Oxford, though only suggested, did not go unanswered, for Humphrey appeared in the House of Congregation, and publicly promised to give the rest of his Latin books to the University together with £100 towards the new Divinity school, a promise which he renewed just before his death. But this promise was never fulfilled, and in spite of numerous letters to the King, the executors of the Duke's will and many other influential persons, neither the books nor the money ever found their way to Oxford.[1352] Even as the library bequeathed by Petrarch to Venice in the preceding century never reached its destination, so did Oxford never benefit by the last promise of her friend and patron.

It was with genuine regret that Oxford learned the death of the Duke of Gloucester, and an invocation, inspired by sorrow and fear for the future, appears in their letter-book.[1353] His obsequies were performed with great pomp,[1354] and an ordinance was issued enjoining all graduates to pray for him at the beginning of all sermons preached before the University, at St. Paul's Cross, and at St. Mary's Hospital, Bishopsgate.[1355] Every year Mass was said on the anniversary of his death for the repose of his soul, and later of that of his wife Eleanor.[1356]

The Oxford masters had reason to be grateful to Gloucester, and in the later epistles to him we can trace a growing simplicity and a growing genuineness in their tone--'unable to repress our feelings, we pray you of your goodness accept our simple gratitude.'[1357] Like the Italian Humanists, they dwelt on that great combination of qualities which made him a great soldier and a great man of letters in one,[1358] and speaking of his books given to them, they cried, 'Statues, sculpture, and graven brass will not so long preserve the memory of the great, as will the living records of history.'[1359] The prophecy was justified, but later events mitigated the exactitude of its operation. When the ecclesiastical reformers, whom Humphrey had suppressed, won their final triumph in the unlovely days of Edward VI., the tangible evidences of the 'Good Duke's' benefactions to his University were lost. How or exactly when this happened we cannot tell, but of the original manuscripts not one was left in the Library. A fanatical abhorrence of illuminations and rubricated initials, combined with a mediæval disregard of the intellectual side of life, destroyed, scattered and lost, in most cases for ever, these interesting relics of an interesting personality.[1360] The student of the early Renaissance in England has good ground of complaint against the Protestant Commissioners of King Edward VI. Yet in the University which educated him, and which he helped to educate, the memory of Duke Humphrey is not entirely forgotten. For long it treasured a silver-gilt belt known as 'le Duke Humfrey's gyrdyll' as a remembrance of their benefactor,[1361] and to this day every preacher in the University pulpit still recalls to his hearers the bounty of this fifteenth-century prince. The building which was erected to contain his manuscripts, now the central part of the larger room in which the present students 'studie in bokies off antiquite,' still bears his name, and beyond that barrier where visitors dare not--or rather should not dare to--tread lies 'Duke Humphrey's Library.' Though Oxford may call her Library by the name of its restorer, Sir Thomas Bodley, yet there is an older tradition which never dies, the tradition of the man who, with all his faults and with all his vices, did not forget his debt of gratitude to his Alma Mater--'literatissimus princeps, amicissimus noster.'[1362]

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY TASTES

All that we know of Gloucester's literary career tends to prove that his patronage of Oxford was only one branch of his scholarly activities. It is evident that he had an extensive collection of books over and above those that he gave to the University, and it is the loss of nearly all knowledge regarding this private library which is our most serious disadvantage when estimating his literary tastes. We have but little evidence of the nature of the books which belonged to the Duke and never reached Oxford, or of the subjects of a less classical bias that he studied; had we even the catalogue of books in his possession that he sent to Candido, we might be able to estimate his position in the literary life of his age more justly, but this also seems to have gone to that bourne from whence no knowledge returns. Apart from the zeal of the reformers and the carelessness of the ignorant, we doubtless owe the loss of many of these books to that discovery which has helped to perpetuate the learning of the past. Humphrey stood on the threshold of the age of printing, that age when the multiplication of printed books cast their written forebears into the lumber-room. A manuscript of which the contents had been printed was then regarded as a cumbrous method of imbibing learning; its historical value was not recognised. Humphrey's library was not long to remain as a monument to his memory, as the University of Oxford had predicted that it would; it no longer remains to help us to gauge with any hope of exactitude the breadth of his interests, or the nature of his talents. That he loved his books, and took an interest in them for what they contained, is beyond dispute, though in those copies that survive there is no evidence that he wrote in them 'Moun bien mondain,' as Leland asserted, and Hearne either copied or confirmed.[1363]

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY TASTES

The fact that a large proportion of the books which once belonged to Humphrey, and are still extant, did not form part of the gift to Oxford, leads us to believe that a considerable part of his library must remain unknown to us, even as to the titles of the various volumes. From the Oxford lists, however, it is evident that the scholarship of the Middle Ages had but little interest for him. Theology holds an important place among the gifts to Oxford, but the schoolmen are but scantily represented on the list. Bede, William of Occam, Pietro Damieno, and Albertus Magnus, the master of Thomas Aquinas, are there, but there is no trace of the writings of Aquinas himself, Peter Lombard, Bradwardine, Duns Scotus, and many other famous schoolmen. The early Fathers are well represented, some only by volumes of letters, others by their better-known works, and these last seem to be more the imaginative than the doctrinal theologians of their day. Taken as a whole, the theology of Humphrey's library betrays a tendency to ignore mediæval doctrinaires, and to turn to the early Fathers, who wrote before Imperial Rome had passed into final decay. Mediæval law shared the fate of mediæval theology, and even more markedly. Hardly any of the numerous treatises on a subject which formed part of the staple food of the mediæval mind appear on Humphrey's lists; canon law is but sparsely represented, civil law is almost entirely neglected.

Humphrey's library was fairly well supplied with historical writers. We find the works of Suetonius, the historian of the twelve Cæsars, the Jewish historian Josephus, Tragus Pompeius, and Cassidorus; among later historians Eusebius and Vincent of Beauvais, Bede, and Higden. Among other historical works were a copy of the _Flores Historiarum_, an _Eulogium Historiarum_, a volume entitled _Tripartita Historia_, a _Polycronicon_, the _Granarium_ of Wheathampsted, and other anonymous chronicles. These were a goodly number of historical books for the times in which Humphrey lived, but more remarkable is the large quantity of medical and astronomical treatises. A long list of books from the pens of doctors ancient and modern belonged to him, beginning with the early Greek writers on medicine, and ending with the compilations of his own physician-in-chief, Gilbert Kymer. Side by side with these stand all the leading authorities on astronomy and astrology, including the works of the chief Arabian philosophers and Roger Bacon's _De Celo et Mundo_. No mention is made of Bacon's _Opus Majus_, nor are there any traces of any scientific treatises outside those known to the mediæval scholars. The interest evinced by the Duke in medicine is both interesting and unusual; his knowledge of astrology proved one of the most fatal of his accomplishments in the days when his wife was accused of sorcery. A word should be said about the recurrence of several works on agriculture, both in Humphrey's library and amongst the books he requisitioned Candido to procure for him. Whether this points to a practical interest in agriculture we cannot tell, though the probability is against it, and there seems no reason to believe that the Duke anticipated that other disappointed politician, who forgot grief at the loss of power in the useful, if unheroic, occupation of growing turnips.

Humphrey's chief distinction as a collector of books lies in the possession of those copies of the ancient classics which he had procured from Italy. Though the _Cosmography_ of Ptolemy, the _Politics_ of Aristotle, and the _Lives_ of Plutarch were absolutely unknown in Western Europe till Palla degli Strozzi had them brought to Italy from Constantinople, yet within a few years of this they were to be found in Latin translations among the Duke of Gloucester's books. Other classical works there were in that collection. Five more volumes of Aristotle, the _Republic_, the _Meno_, and the _Phædrus_ of Plato, all the known works of Cicero, and a volume of that 'most learned of the Romans,' Varro; Sallust, the historian of the Cataline conspiracy; grammarians such as Aulus Gellius and Priscian; rhetoricians such as Quintilian; poets such as Ovid and Terence, all stood side by side in this wonderful library. Seneca was represented both by his philosophical and by his dramatic writings, and criticisms on the philosophy of Aristotle might be found from the pen of Averrois or John of Damascus. The Greek language had been relearned in Italy during the Duke's lifetime, and a step towards bringing it to England was taken in the presentation of a Greek dictionary to Oxford. Finally, Humphrey showed his sympathy with the men of the new learning by possessing five volumes of Boccaccio and seven of Petrarch, and his appreciation of what was best in mediæval thought by the inclusion of a volume of Dante and a commentary thereon amongst his books.[1364]

None can doubt the catholicity of Gloucester's tastes after a glance at the names of the books which he collected, and we must believe that they genuinely manifested his predilections, and that Leland was clearly in the right in praising his sound judgment in matters literary.[1365] His taste was developed by genuine study. Numerous references to him by contemporaries prove that his patronage of literature was no pose adopted for the sake of the popularity it might bring. Livius declares that he surpassed all other princes of his time in his devoted study of letters both humane and divine;[1366] Basin bears the best testimony,[1367] Capgrave follows suit,[1368] and an unknown hand has left a record of high praise for his love of study on the fly-leaf of an Oxford manuscript.[1369] It is, moreover, obvious that the Duke's interests were not confined to the volumes presented to Oxford, and it is noteworthy that among the survivals of his library there is a great contrast in subject-matter between the books of the Oxford donation and those which were retained in his own hands. While the Oxford books are strictly classical and scholastic, the others show a wide range of subjects, and give us reason to believe that they must have formed part of a collection of considerable literary interest. This shows at once the wisdom of the Duke in making his selection of works to give away to a great educationary foundation, and his great range of knowledge, which in many cases stepped outside the traditional limits both of the Schoolmen and of the Humanists. Perhaps the most striking fact is the existence of so many French works in Gloucester's library.[1370] The large majority of these are translations from the Latin, which might at first glance seem to imply that Humphrey was but an indifferent Latin scholar, and preferred to read his books in French. It is undoubtedly true that French was to him the most natural language; he invariably used it in inscribing his name in his books, and he even went so far as to possess a French translation of Livy.[1371] But we must remember that in those days of infrequent and costly manuscripts a collector was only too glad to secure a copy of the author he wanted in whatever language it was written, and moreover a large number of these French books, notably the Livy, were presents from friends, and not private purchases on the part of the Duke. It is, however, interesting to note that whilst he gave a Latin version of the military treatise of Ægidius Romanus to Oxford, he retained in his own hands a French version of the same work.[1372] Undoubtedly, Humphrey read gladly and largely in French, but there is ample evidence that he was also a finished Latin scholar, and deeply versed in the classics. This alone can explain the wealth of classical quotations in letters addressed to him on matters purely personal, when the writer was trying to ingratiate himself with his princely correspondent.[1373] Moreover, his letters to his Italian friends, though doubtless they owe their final shape to a secretary, make constant allusion to classical reading. He was never separated from his copy of the _Republic_ of Plato, and on one occasion at least he borrowed a book from the Oxford Library for his own private use.[1374] On this showing he must have been able to read Latin with ease, and his favourite study was the works of Plato, whose philosophical system was the chief new discovery of the Italian Humanists.[1375]

Earnest though he was in the study of the ancient classics, Gloucester did not allow it to restrict his mental vision. As a practical soldier he was interested in the theory of military operations, and besides his copy of the work of Ægidius Romanus he possessed in his private library a French version of the _Epitome Institutionum Rei Militaris_ of Vegetius.[1376] This treatise, which deals with the organisation of armies, the training of soldiers, and other kindred subjects, was doubtless used by him as a basis for his military theories, and proved a useful handbook on which to found a system more in accord with the circumstances of his day. In general literature, apart from the English poetical works composed for him, Humphrey showed an interest in early French romance by the possession of a copy of the _Roman du Renard_[1377] and at the same time this shows how his political inclinations affected his literary outlook. The _Roman du Renard_, unlike its predecessors of the Carlovingian and Arthurian epic cycles, was produced by the growing sense of independence in the French towns. It has a direct bourgeois inspiration, which must have appealed to a man who found his chief supporters among the burgesses of the City of London. Gloucester's personal tastes may also be traced in his possession of a copy of the resolutions passed at the Council of Basel,[1378] and in the _Songe du Vergier_, which also formed part of his library.[1379] This last consists of a discussion on the relative spheres of the spiritual and temporal powers, and shows us the learned Duke applying his intellect to the pressing ecclesiastical problems of his day, problems about which he had taken a very definite stand in his public actions. Closely connected with this was his interest in matters theological, his acceptance of Capgrave's _Commentary on the Book of Genesis_,[1380] and his possession of numerous tracts by Athanasius,[1381] and of both an English and French version of the Bible.[1382]

Apart from matters purely literary, we have reason to believe that Humphrey's interests were very wide. He showed considerable artistic taste in the beautifully illuminated manuscripts which formed part of his library, though the books that were written specially for him were not often very elaborately adorned. Like his brother Bedford, he knew how to appreciate this kind of artistic work, and we need but allude to the beautiful edition of the Psalms compiled for him, to the St. Omer _Psalter_ once in his possession, and to his copies of the _Decameron_ and of Livy, to realise how he was able to gratify this taste.[1383] In an age when artistic values were still the monopoly of Italians, the illuminated books in the Duke's possession, if of no great artistic value, were excellent examples of the decorative work of the period.[1384] In the kindred art of music also Gloucester probably took some interest. We find frequent mention of 'The minstrels of the Duke of Gloucester,' who visited Winchester, Reading, Lydd, and many other towns 'as a courtesy,' for which they received monetary recognition from the inhabitants.[1385] Possibly these were a band of strolling musicians who enjoyed the patronage of the 'Good Duke,' much in the same way as at a later date actors were known as the 'King's servants.' In any case there is a strong presumption that musicians as well as scholars enjoyed the bounty of the Duke of Gloucester.

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY POSITION

Just as Humphrey was a great student so was he a great personality in the life of England, the Mæcenas of the new learning, and the friend of all scholars. A considerable portion of his books were presents from various people, and he seems to have been always approachable by any one who could take an interest in any branch of knowledge. Those who gave books to him were drawn from various classes of the community. Men who would earn his patronage presented their work to him as did Capgrave;[1386] his friend Wheathampsted cemented their friendship in the same way.[1387] Frenchmen as well as Englishmen knew of his tastes, and approached him with literary gifts, whether it were the learned Bishop of Bayeux,[1388] or an insignificant Canon of Rouen.[1389] The Duke of Bedford chose a choice treasure from the library of Charles VI. as a gift for his brother,[1390] and the Earl of Warwick, the 'Father of Courtesy' and the tutor of the young King Henry VI., offered a French translation of the Decameron as a mark of friendship and esteem for the man under whom he had served.[1391] Men of less mark followed the lead of the princes of the land. Sir Robert Roos, a public servant of some eminence, gave yet another French work to the then Protector of England,[1392] and Sir John Stanley, possibly the Sir John Stanley who was king of the Isle of Man, hastened to add his tribute of homage in the shape of a French Bible.[1393]

It is hard to say whether these gifts were in all cases indications of literary esteem, or merely means towards securing the favour of a powerful prince. At least they show that Humphrey's interest in all kinds of literature and learning was not assumed as a pose, but was a veritable passion, ministered to by all who desired his friendship. To no other man of his time were such gifts in such profusion given, gifts, moreover, which came not only from the needy scholars who desired his support, but from prince, noble, priest, and humble gentleman alike. There is, too, a remarkable absence of party politics in the literary friendships which these gifts manifest. Bedford not once nor twice was compelled to condemn his brother's action. Warwick was a member of the Council of Regency which withstood the Protector's ambitious claims. Sir Robert Roos, though he accompanied Beckington on his embassy to the Court of Armagnac, was prominent in carrying out the peace policy which Humphrey opposed, and in 1445 was intrusted with bringing Henry VI.'s Queen over to England. Sir John Stanley may possibly be the man to whom the Duchess of Gloucester was intrusted when she was confined in Leeds Castle, and when we look further afield we find that Piero del Monte, the friend of Duke Humphrey, did not hesitate to give the papal blessing to the union of Margaret and Henry VI. when they were married by proxy at Tours.

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY UNDERSTANDING

Humphrey therefore was more than a mere patron of scholars, and more than a mere literary dilettante. He was known to be more devoted to literature of all kinds than to anything else, and the subtle monks of St. Albans knew well how to win his favour by enlarging his library. His powers of criticism and appreciation are, however, hidden from us. Beyond the nature of the books he collected and a few words of formal appreciation of the works of Plato, we have nothing to guide our judgment, for though a patron and a student, he was not himself an author, in spite of statements to the contrary.[1394] There still exists a copy of certain astrological tables entitled _Tabulæ Humfridi ducis Gloucestriæ in judiciis artis geomansie_, but this was merely a compilation made at his command.[1395] He was content to encourage learning, and to qualify himself for this rôle by study. Thus the Duke of Gloucester devoted a large amount of his superfluous energy to the really great work of encouraging learning in England; yet at first sight it may seem that he laboured in vain. England did not at once adopt the new doctrines that were paving the way to modern methods of study, and it has been thought that Humphrey simply worked in the spirit of the mediæval scholar, and did not in any way appreciate the importance of his actions. England had lagged behind other nations in accepting the doctrines of the Renaissance scholars. Men imbued with the scholastic spirit had journeyed to Italy before the days of Duke Humphrey, but they had not understood the message which the Italians taught them. Richard of Bury had been the friend of Petrarch, but had entirely failed to understand his point of view, and when the future Duke of Gloucester was but five years old, a certain Augustinian monk, known in Italy as Thomas of England, was lecturing in Florence, but was said by Leonardo Bruni to have loved Humanism only so far as an Englishman could understand it.[1396] The Italian scholar therefore had been contemptuous of his English contemporary, but a new era dawns when Humphrey begins to take an interest in Italian scholarship. The Italians who wrote to him showed clearly in their letters that they understood their patron's interest to be intelligent and quite different to the mediæval conceptions of his predecessors, and in some cases we can see the genuine appreciation of the scholar peeping through the adulation of the retainer. His love for Plato, and his clear understanding of the contrast between his philosophy and that of Aristotle, show how entirely he had thrown off the intellectual fetters of the Middle Ages, and in his selection of books we clearly see that he understood that the progress of the future must be based on an understanding of the past. In Humphrey, too, we see traces of that critical faculty which characterised the new movement. He did not look on the classics as an allegorical commentary on the Scriptures, and as a basis for Christian Theology; he studied them from the literary and philosophical point of view, and refused to accept the system laid down by the mediæval schoolmen. He was the first great Englishman to introduce these new ideas into England, though there were other scholars of the period who understood the new doctrines, if they did not preach them; men like Andrew Holles, who after long study in Italy retired to a country benefice, and did nothing towards spreading the new ideas he had acquired.[1397]

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY INFLUENCE

Herein lies the importance of Duke Humphrey's career. He not only understood the meaning of the new doctrines, but he paved the way towards their fuller appreciation by the nation as a whole. As a layman and a man of affairs he was able to take a more comprehensive view of the significance of the new learning than the churchmen who hitherto had held the monopoly of English knowledge, and he laid the foundations on which others were to build. In the first place he taught men that it was to Italy that they should look for direction in their studies. He himself had not visited that country as so many of his contemporaries had done, but he had brought himself into nearer touch with its intellectual life than any other Englishman. The man who was the patron of Leonardo Bruni, the constant correspondent of Pier Candido Decembrio, the friend of Piero del Monte, and the literary acquaintance of Alfonso of Aragon, the man who more than once was picked out by Æneas Sylvius for literary appreciation, was far more in sympathy with Italian aspirations than such a one as Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, who showed no signs of having been influenced in any way by his sojourn at the University of Padua.

Yet the interest of Humphrey's Italian sympathies lies not so much in his connection with Italy as in the fact that he never set foot in the country. He did not take himself and his energies to be expended in a selfish pursuit of learning in Italy, like his contemporary Holles, but he helped to bring the intellectual aspirations of the Italians over to England. He not only taught men to study Italian wars, but also led them to bring the results of that study home to their own doors. And he was not without disciples. It is customary to believe that the humanistic aspirations of the 'Good Duke' received no echo in the England of his day, but we cannot but think that his example helped to inspire the exertions of that devoted band of scholars which included the princely ecclesiastic, William Grey, poor students such as John Free, Fleming, and Gunthorpe, and the notorious but scholarly John Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester. Indeed there is much to suggest this, and perhaps the most curious of all our evidence centres in the name of Guarino da Verona, the great schoolmaster of Ferrara, who was intrusted with the education of Lionello and Borso d'Este. Every one of this band of English students studied under the direction of this famous scholar. Grey attended his instructions while living in princely state at Ferrara; Free journeyed from his home in Bristol to get the benefit of his teaching; Tiptoft turned aside during his wanderings in Italy to visit him in his adopted home; all at one time or another joined that ever-increasing band of English scholars who flocked to the Ferrarese school in such numbers as to be specially mentioned by Lodovico Carbone in his funeral oration over the dead scholar.[1398] Humphrey's influence is to be traced here, for it was he who had first pointed to Guarino as the fountain of true learning. When commissioning Zano of Bayeux to buy him books in Italy, he had laid special stress on his desire to possess anything that had been written by this teacher.[1399] By selecting Guarino as the mentor of his intellectual aspirations, he had pointed out the road for future scholars to tread.

All these scholars followed in the steps of the Duke of Gloucester, and had all grown up before he passed from the scene of his activities. They, however, failed to carry out his theories to the full. Though they submitted themselves to the desire for the new learning, they did but little to bring it home to the great mass of Englishmen. They studied, but they did not teach. They had all learnt the earliest lesson of the new ideas under the shadow of the University of Oxford; all were Oxonians, and thus were direct products of Duke Humphrey's patronage of that home of learning, and they so far followed in his footsteps as to give or bequeath the books they collected either to the University itself, or to some College within it. It was in this way that Gloucester had most conspicuously prepared the high-road to learning. By his gifts of books he had given Oxford students the opportunity of further researches into the human mind, he had thrown open the doors which had hitherto barred the way to Englishmen who desired a knowledge of what the past had thought of life and its component elements. For the first time in England men were able to know something of what the ancients had written. In the book-chests of Oxford lay the seeds of the English Renaissance. The immense importance of access to these books may easily be misunderstood at the present day; it is hard to realise completely the limitations which surrounded the mediæval scholar, but once this is achieved, the presence of these works, which reflected, if they did not very accurately represent, the ideas of classical writers, will be fully appreciated.

By his patronage of Oxford and his gifts of books Humphrey had inspired his immediate successors to carry on his work, and to bring together the materials for future generations to use. His work was crowned when Greek came to be taught in England. He himself had known no Greek, Grey and his friends had known but not imparted it; it remained for William Selling of All Souls at Canterbury, and Thomas Linacre, William Grocyn, and Thomas Latimer at Oxford, to bring this language and the literature which it voiced to the knowledge of educated Englishmen. Linacre, perhaps even more than his fellows, was cast in the mould that Humphrey would have approved. Like Humphrey, he was a man of immensely wide interests, not the dry-as-dust scholar, but the man of the world; like Humphrey, he was a special student of medicine, a science which owed its development in Italy to the discovery of the works of Hippocrates. At the same time he, more than any one else, completed the edifice of which Humphrey had built the foundations. Again we can trace the direct influence of the Duke. This last band of scholars who finally established the new learning in England were, like their predecessors, all Oxonians. The University which Gloucester had started on the way of good things was the parent of the new school of thought, it carried on the work of its great patron. It is to the lasting fame of this indifferent politician that through him the humanities came to be taught in England, that through him Oxford was induced to lead the van in introducing the new culture. We are apt to forget the debt we owe to the work of these early intellectual reformers, and to minimise the influence of the ideas they introduced on every aspect of our lives. Yet reflection will give its due meed of praise to their laborious efforts, and if it goes far enough back, will, like the Bidding Prayer read from the pulpit of the University Church, place Duke Humphrey's name first on the list of benefactors.

GLOUCESTER'S TITLE TO FAME

It is a relief to turn from the stormy political career of Duke Humphrey to that sphere of his activity where undiluted praise can be given; to forget that public life which was marred by instability and prejudice, and to admire that industry which won him a great reputation both with his contemporaries and with posterity. Yet we must not forget that many of the qualities which led him to court disaster in public life were due to his leanings towards a life of study. The circumstances of his life and the tendencies of his age were against him. A student by nature and a politician by birth, he had too much ambition and too little restraint to choose the better path, and confine his energies to spreading the gospel of the new learning. The man of letters is seldom wise in adopting a life of political activity, and the case of Humphrey was in some ways repeated later in the life of Bacon. Even if we place the Duke of Gloucester amongst the worst types of political criminals--and we have no adequate reason for so doing--we must accord him a position of honour amongst those to whom posterity should be grateful. By those who have laboured under the shadow of his personality in the Library which preserves his name the memory of the 'Good Duke' must be cherished as an inspiration. They indeed must catch something of the spirit which enabled Hearne to speak of him as 'that religious, good and learned prince whose handwriting I us'd, whenever I saw it in the Bodleian Library ... to show a particular sort of respect to, as some little Remains of a truly great Man, one that was both a Scholar himself, and the chiefest Promoter of Learning and Scholars at that time.'[1400]

The first page of the Renaissance in England consists of the life of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, and all who value the inspiration to be drawn from the new era in human thought which dates from that great movement, must respect the memory of this great Lancastrian Prince.

FOOTNOTES:

[1265] Admundesham, _Annales_, ii. 233, and Introduction to vol ii. p. liv.

[1266] Bale (1559 edition), 584.

[1267] Wheathampsted spent much money on other improvements to the monastery as well. Dugdale, _Monasticon_, 199, 200.

[1268] Bodley MS., F. _infra_, i. 1. Inscription.

[1269] Arundel MS., 34, f. 666.

[1270] _Epist. Acad._, 237.

[1271] Amundesham, _Annales_, ii. App. A. 256.

[1272] _Epist. Acad._, 235. These two parts of his _Granarium_ which Wheathampsted gave to Humphrey were at one time amongst the books of Thomas Allen of Gloucester Hall. Twyne, _Collectanea_, in the Oxford University Archives, vol. xviii. p. 123.

[1273] Arundel MS., 34, f. 67.

[1274] See Early English Text Society's edition, 1893.

[1275] Bale, 582; Leland, _Commentarii_, 453.

[1276] Oriel MS., xxxii. f. 1vo. This dedication is printed in Appendix IV. to Capgrave's _De Illustribus Henricis_, pp. 239-301.

[1277] Oriel MS., xxxii. f. 1vo.

[1278] Capgrave, _De Illustribus Henricis_, 109.

[1279] Bale, 583; Pits, 672.

[1280] Nicolaus Uptonus, _De Studio Militari_ (London, 1654), p. 2.

[1281] _History from Marble_, i, pp. 79 and clxviii.

[1282] _Ordinances_, iv, 345.

[1283] _Ibid._, iii. 99.

[1284] _Rot. Pat._, 25 _Henry VI._, Part i. m. 16.

[1285] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 255.

[1286] _Beckington Correspondence, passim._

[1287] Foxe, _Acts and Monuments_, iii. 731.

[1288] Ramsay, ii. 203. No authority is given for the statement.

[1289] See _Political Songs, passim_. Cf. Stow, 385.

[1290] Harleian MS., 2251, ff. 279vo-282vo; Additional MS., 29, 729, ff. 157vo-161.

[1291] Ashmole MS., 59, ff. 57-59.

[1292] Harleian MS., 2251, ff. 7-8vo; Additional MS., 34, 360, ff. 65vo-67vo.

[1293] Caxton's edition of the _Falls of Princes_ (1494). Cf. MS. 23 of the Library of the Earl of Jersey at Osterley Park, _Hist. MSS. Report_, viii. Part i. p. 100.

[1294] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,421.

[1295] On this point see Hortis, 646.

[1296] _Minor Poems of Lydgate_, Percy Society Publications (London, 1840), ii. 49-51.

[1297] Bodley MS., 263, ff. 5, 6.

[1298] The poem is printed in F. J. Furnivall's _Manners and Meals in Olden Times_ (Early English Text Society, 1868), pp. 115-198.

[1299] _Letters of Queen Margaret_, edited by Cecil Monro (Camden Society, 1863), p. 114.

[1300] Amundesham, _Annales_, ii. Appendix D, p. 295.

[1301] Cotton MS., Claudius, D. I, f. 8vo; Letter of Wheathampsted to Norton.

[1302] See Warton, iii. 131.

[1302] Bodley MS., Arch. F. d. 1. A photographic reproduction of a MS. once in the possession of Earl Fitzwilliam at Wentworth-Woodhouse, but now denied to be there. It has been published by A. S. Napier.

[1304] Palladius, p. 66.

[1305] _Ibid._, p. 85.

[1306] Palladius, p. 22.

[1307] _Ibid._, pp. 21, 22.

[1308] Bodley MS., Arch. F. d. 1, f. 12; Palladius, p. 22.

[1309] Palladius, p. 21. Cf. _St. Albans Chron._, i. 12-17.

[1310] _Epist. Acad._, 103.

[1311] _Epist. Acad._, 198-241.

[1312] _Munimenta Acad._, 266.

[1313] _Ibid._, 277-279.

[1314] _Epist. Acad._, 152.

[1315] _Ibid._, 106.

[1316] _Ibid._, 201-211.

[1317] _Ibid._, 645.

[1318] _Munimenta Acad._, 333-335; _Epist. Acad._, 266.

[1319] _Epist. Acad._, 61.

[1320] _Ibid._, 77-79.

[1321] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 256-258.

[1322] _Epist. Acad._, 162-168.

[1323] _Ibid._, 61, 62.

[1324] _Epist. Acad._, 64, 65.

[1325] _Ibid._, 105, 196.

[1326] _Ibid._, 152.

[1327] _Ibid._, 35-37.

[1328] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 249, 250; _Epist. Acad._, 110.

[1329] _Epist. Acad._, 115-133.

[1330] _Ibid._, 134, 135.

[1331] _Ibid._, 136.

[1332] _Epist. Acad._, 155-157.

[1333] _Ibid._, 139, 140. It was also through Gloucester's influence that Bedford was induced to promise to endow his lectureships; _Ibid._, 81-83, 95.

[1334] _Ibid._, 152, 153.

[1335] _Munimenta Acad._, 266, 267.

[1336] _Epist. Acad._, 114, 115.

[1337] The numbers are variously stated in different letters as 120, 126, and 129. This last corresponds with the number of books in the indenture; _Ibid._, 179-183.

[1338] _Ibid._, 177-179, 184.

[1339] _Ibid._, 177-179. This was not the first time that Gloucester had been likened to Julius Cæsar.

[1340] _Epist. Acad._, 184.

[1341] _Munimenta Acad._, 758; _Epist. Acad._, 179.

[1342] _Epist. Acad._, 198, 204, 205.

[1343] _Ibid._, 232-237. The indenture mentions one hundred and thirty-five volumes as the total, but only one hundred and thirty-four are given in the list.

[1344] _Ibid., passim._

[1345] Additional MS., 4608, f. 100, 100vo.

[1346] By counting the same items more than once Anthony Wood brings the total to five hundred and thirty-nine; Wood, _History of the Antiquities of the University of Oxford_, 914, 915.

[1347] _Munimenta Acad._, 261-266.

[1348] _Ibid._, 326-328; _Epist. Acad._, 188-191.

[1349] _Epist. Acad._, 245.

[1350] _Epist. Acad._, 245, 246.

[1351] _Ibid._, 533.

[1352] It has been stated that these books were ultimately obtained, but there is no reason to believe this, though ten years later thirteen volumes, originally bequeathed by some one, were recovered; _Epist. Acad._, 483. Cf. Wood, _History of the Antiquities of the University of Oxford_, 915. In 1453 we hear that all the volumes of this bequest were scattered in private hands; _Epist. Acad._, 318, 319.

[1353] _Epist. Acad._, 254.

[1354] _Munimenta Acad._, 735.

[1355] _Munimenta Acad._, 376.

[1356] _Ibid._, 329, 330; _Epist. Acad._, 256.

[1357] _Epist. Acad._, 241.

[1358] _Ibid._, 178.

[1359] _Ibid._, 198.

[1360] See Macray, _Annals of Bodleian_, 13.

[1361] On 1st March 1544 a certain John Stanshawe, gentleman, stole from the church of St. Mary 'unam Zonam de argent. aurat. voc. le Duke Humfrey's gyrdyll.' _Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII._ (London, 1905), vol. xx. Part 1. p. 655.

[1362] _Epist. Acad._, 373. Letter of the University of Oxford to Wheathampsted.

[1363] Leland, _Collectanea_, iii. 58; Hearne, MS. Diary, xxxvi. f. 199. It is probable that this motto was used by Gilbert Kymer. It is found stamped on the binding of a medical work written for him and now preserved in the Bodleian Library (Laud MS., 558). Another binding which encloses another medical treatise written by the same scribe, and presumably also for Kymer, now in the Merton College Library, bears the same legend. (Merton College MS., 268.) My attention has been drawn to this by Mr. Gibson of the Bodleian Library.

[1364] The books alluded to are to be found in the indentures printed in _Epist. Acad., passim_.

[1365] Leland, _Commentarii_, 453.

[1366] Livius, 2.

[1367] Basin, i. 189.

[1368] Capgrave, _De Illustribus Henricis_, 109.

[1369] Lincoln MS., 106, f. 359vo.

[1370] See Appendix A.

[1371] Bibliothèque de Ste. Geneviève, MS. français, 777.

[1372] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1373] See letters in _Beckington Correspondence_, i. 283, 284, 290-293.

[1374] _Epist. Acad._, 246.

[1375] The book borrowed from Oxford was a copy of the _Phædrus_ of Plato. In the _Epistolæ Academicæ_ this volume is called the 'Phædo,' but a reference to the entry in the Register shows it to be a misprint for the _Phædrus_, a mistake first discovered by Mr. Gibson of the Bodleian Library.

[1376] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1377] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,583.

[1378] Cotton MS., Nero, E. v.

[1379] Royal MS., 19, C. iv.

[1380] Oriel College MS., xxxii.

[1381] Harleian MS., 33; King's College MS., 27.

[1382] Egerton MS., 617, 618; Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 2.

[1383] For a description of these volumes see Appendix A.

[1384] Leland tells us that Gloucester received many beautiful illuminated books as presents from religious houses. _Collectanea_, iii. 58.

[1385] _Hist. MSS. Rep._, v. 517, and xi. 174.

[1386] Oriel College MS., xxxii.

[1387] Corpus Christi College MS., ccxliii.

[1388] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. latin, 8537.

[1389] Bodley MS., Hatton, 36.

[1390] Bibliothèque de Ste. Geneviève, MS. français, 777.

[1391] Bibliothèque Nationale MS., français, 12,421.

[1392] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1393] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 2.

[1394] Bale (1559 ed.), 583.

[1395] Arundel MS. 60, ff. 277vo-287vo. Cf. Tanner, _Bib. Brit._, 420, 421.

[1396] Einstein, 15.

[1397] See Vespasiano, 238; and Sir Arthur Collins's _Collections for the Family of Holles_ (1752), 52, 53.

[1398] Leland, _Commentarii_, 462.

[1399] Above, p. 351.

[1400] Hearne's Introduction to _Peter Langtoft's Chronicle_ (Oxford, 1725), p. xx.

APPENDIX A

BOOKS ONCE BELONGING TO GLOUCESTER STILL EXTANT

The dispersion of a Library is in all cases unfortunate, but most especially so when it serves as a monument to a great personality. Even as Petrarch's two hundred manuscripts are scattered and lost so that not forty of them can be now identified, so Duke Humphrey's private library and the books he presented to Oxford, which in all must have numbered five hundred at least, are now recognisable only in a very few instances. Only three of the manuscripts given to Oxford repose now on the shelves of the Bodleian, and these have not continued there since the days when they were transferred thither from the chests of Cobham's Library. The first of these is a copy of the letters of Nicholas de Clemenges (Hatton MS., 36), a French theologian and Rector of the University of Paris, who died about 1440. The book was a present to Gloucester from one of the Canons of Rouen, and formed part of his last donation. The first folio has been torn out, but the opening words of the second are 'O nos,' which corresponds to the entry in the University indenture, though the scribe by a slip of the pen has transcribed it 'O vos' (_Epist. Acad._, 235). The last folio bears the Duke's inscription, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don maistre Guillaum erare docteur en theologie chanoyne de Ram.' A still more interesting volume in the same library is that which contains the Letters of the Younger Pliny (Bodley MS., Auct. F. 2, 23, at present on view in glass case No. 1), probably one of the books sent over from Italy by Candido. It also bears the Duke's autograph, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre,' and formed part of the same gift as the letters of Nicholas de Clemenges (_Epist. Acad._, 235). Both these manuscripts were in private hands in the seventeenth century, the former owned by Henry Holford of Long Stanton, the latter by Dr. Robert Master, Bishop of Lichfield. Notes to this effect are appended in the respective manuscripts.

A more doubtful authenticity attaches to a third manuscript in the Bodleian Library, which contains Bruni's translations of Aristotle's _Politics_ (Bodley MS., 2143 [Auct. F. 27]). Therein is contained a dedication to Humphrey and the letter from the translator quoted in the text (see p. 352). At the end there is an erased and unrestorable inscription placed exactly in the position that Humphrey almost invariably used for his autograph. Unfortunately the two first folios of the text proper are missing, though the prefatory letter is intact, but in no case did the University scribes count the folios from anywhere but the beginning of the book itself, all prefatory matter being disregarded. The possibility of proving that this is the actual volume presented to Oxford is thus removed, and when we remember that the terms of the letter preceding the translation show that the original copy had reached its destination before this letter was written, we must doubt that this was the volume received from Italy. Possibly, and almost probably, this manuscript in the Bodleian was a copy of the original translation, made by one of Gloucester's secretaries, with the letter written by Bruni introduced by way of preface. Two other manuscripts in the Bodleian Library are copies of work given by Humphrey to Oxford, one the 'De Regimine Principum' of Egidius (Hatton MS., 15), the other the moral treatise dedicated by Piero del Monte to the Duke (Bodley MS., 3618 [E. Museo, 119]). Neither of these belonged to Gloucester, nor do they correspond to their fellows in the indenture. By a strange error another manuscript in the same Library, containing the last six books of the historical anecdotes of Valerius Maximus and notes thereon (Bodley MS., F. _infra_, i. 1), has been numbered among Gloucester's books (Macray, _Annals of the Bodleian_). The mistake probably arose from the fact that the Duke's arms appear on the first folio, but an inscription plainly refutes the theory, and shows that the book was given 'ad usum scolarium studencium Oxonie' by Abbot Wheathampsted. It was given therefore for the use of the 'scholars' of the University, and the presence of the arms is explicable, if we remember that Humphrey was Wheathampsted's friend and patron, and that another copy of this book was probably given by the Abbot to Gloucester. It is even possible that the copying of the book was undertaken at Gloucester's suggestion, and that his arms were placed there in token of this.

Outside the University Library three Oxford Colleges can boast the possession of a manuscript which belonged to Humphrey. In the Library of Corpus Christi there is preserved a large folio volume (Corpus Christi MS., ccxliii.), containing numerous treatises of a philosophic nature in Latin, all in the handwriting of 'Fredericus Naghel de Trajecto,' and dated 1423 'in alma Universitate Oxoniensi.' Amongst the most interesting items are Latin translations of the _Phædo_ and _Meno_ of Plato, the last of which concludes the volume, and is followed by Gloucester's autograph, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don (some words are here erased) treschier en Dieu labbe de seint Albon.' A note in a later hand tells us that in 1557 the manuscript belonged to a certain John Dee, who had bought it by weight. Though it cannot be stated definitely, as the earlier folios are missing, yet there seems little doubt that this volume did not ever belong to the University Library. At Oriel there is a manuscript to which we have already had reason to refer, the 'Commentary on the Book of Genesis' by John Capgrave (Oriel MS., xxxii.), which according to a concluding note was written between October 1437 and September 1438. The initial letter of the dedication contains a miniature in which a very simple-minded-looking monk is presenting his book to a still more simple-minded patron, evidently meant to represent Capgrave and Gloucester, though it gives no suggestion of portraiture. At the end of the Commentary the Duke has appended his autograph, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don frere Jehan Capgrave quy le me fist presenter a mon manoir de Pensherst le jour de lan lan [M] ccccxxxviii.' This book formed part of the last donation of Gloucester to the University (_Epist. Acad._, 233).

In the Magdalen College Library another of Gloucester's books is to be found. This is the copy of Ptolemy's 'Cosmographia' (Magdalen MS., 37), which was given to Oxford in 1443, though the scribe who drew up the indenture of books transcribed the first words of the second folio as 'vel toto' (_Epist. Acad._, 236), while in the manuscript they are 'vel tota,' obviously merely a clerical error. At the end of this work an erased inscription, when treated with chemicals, reveals Humphrey's autograph, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre.' Bound up with the 'Cosmographia' in a sixteenth-century binding are three translations from the Greek by Antonio Pasini. The first of these is Plutarch's 'Life of Marius,' which is dedicated to Gloucester, but the other two, though in the same hand, have no mention of the Duke. This volume, which in the present manuscript occupies the first sixty folios, has an erased inscription at the end, but all efforts to restore it fail to reveal any more than 'Cest livre' at the beginning, and a date at the end. No mention is made of this work amongst the books of Humphrey's gifts, and therefore it probably never belonged to the Oxford Library; on the other hand, it may be one of the volumes that belonged to the Duke, for the inscription is placed at the end in the not very usual place that he nearly always used, and the first two words, in so far as they can be read, seem to be in his handwriting. Added to this, I believe this copy to be unique, so it is possibly a book acquired by Humphrey late in life, and never copied by his secretaries. It may be one of the volumes so vainly sought for by the University after the death of the donor.

In the British Museum there are nine volumes that once belonged to Gloucester. Among the Harleian manuscripts there is a treatise on heretics by William of Occam (Harleian MS., 33), which was one of the books conveyed to Oxford in 1443 (_Epist. Acad._, 233). Unlike all the other books known to have belonged to Humphrey, it bears no inscription, and depends for its verification solely on the correspondence of the first words of the second folio. The volume has been bound up with what seems to be part of a fourteenth-century collection of extracts from the Fathers, two folios of which appear at the beginning and two at the end. On the second of these folios is pasted a square slip of paper bearing Gloucester's arms, roughly executed, and the inscription 'Ex dono illustrissimi principis et domini. Domini Humfredi filii fratris regum et patrui. Ducis Gloucestrie comitis Pembrochie et magni camerarii Anglie.' The wording of this label suggests that it was a kind of book-plate placed on the volumes of the Duke's gifts to distinguish them from the other books in the Oxford Library, and the present appearance almost conclusively proves this. It is very dirty, and has evidently been exposed on the outside of a book, and the corners are worn away, as though it had been lifted from some other place. In all probability its original position was on a panel of the binding, and when this was renewed, it was removed to its present position on the spare leaves, which must have been inserted at the time of re-binding. That no other volume known to have been in the Oxford Library bears this label is no argument against the theory that all the books of Duke Humphrey's gifts were thus marked, for the plunderer does not expend his pains in preserving the indications that his booty was once the property of another. The absence of these book-plates is only the result of the policy which has erased so many of the autograph inscriptions in Gloucester's books, and thus increased the difficulty of tracing these volumes tenfold.

A still more interesting manuscript in the Harleian collection contains the first five books of Candido's translation of Plato's _Republic_ (Harleian MS., 1705), and is evidently the same copy which was sent over from Italy by the translator, for the inscription in Gloucester's handwriting on the verso of the last folio runs, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don P. Candidus secretaire du duc de Milan.' The volume is beautifully written on fine vellum with many illuminated letters, but many of the leaves are now missing, and some of the illuminations have been cut out. Prefixed to the actual translation are the earlier letters exchanged between the Duke and his translator. The book has never belonged to the Oxford Library, doubtless because it contains only the first half of the _Republic_, and so Candido's request that it should not be shown abroad in view of the corrections he had made in the translation was respected (_Eng. Hist. Review_, xix. 516). The translation of the _Republic_ given to Oxford we must believe was the complete work, and this did not reach the Duke till some time after the copy of the first five books. These two Harleian volumes must be the books which Hearne refers to, when he says in 1714 that the Earl of Oxford possessed two manuscripts once the property of Gloucester (Hearne, _Remarks and Collections_, Oxford Hist. Society, 1885-1898, iv. 421).

A book from the Oxford Library is preserved amongst the Cottonian manuscripts in the British Museum, and consists of the collected ordinances and decrees of the Council of Constance (Cotton MS., Nero, E. v.). The last two folios are devoted to a short description of the origin of the Scotch nation, and the rights of the Kings of England over those of the sister kingdom. At the end of the last sentence Gloucester has written, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre lequel jachetay des executeurs maistre Thomas Polton feu eveque de Wurcestre.'

Several more of Humphrey's books are still extant in the old Royal Collection of manuscripts, now in the British Museum. A beautifully illuminated fourteenth-century volume entitled _Chroniques des Roys de France jusques a la mort de St. Loys l'an 1270_ (Royal MS., 15, G. vi.) bears the inscription, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don des Executeurs le Seigneur de Faunhere,' but it was not included in the gifts to Oxford. In the same collection there is a volume containing several translations of the works of St. Athanasius (Royal MS., 5, F, ii.). The original format of this manuscript is a matter of uncertainty. The first treatise begins abruptly without title or address, save in small letters above the text, 'lege feliciter serenissime Princeps'; at the beginning of the second book of the treatise the title runs 'Athanasii viri sanctissimi de humanitate verbi contra gentes liber secundus incipit ex graeco in latinum conversus per antonium Beccariam veronensem ad serenissimum ac illustrissimum principem ducem Gloucestrie dominum suum singularissimum.' A fly-leaf, which may have been originally the termination of a volume, divides the first from the second treatise, which begins on folio 70. This ends on folio 91, and on the verso stands the Duke's autograph, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre lequel jay fait translater de grec en lattyn par Antoyne de Beccara Veroneys mon serviteur.' This may be the end of one volume, and the treatise which begins on the next page may be the opening of another one. It begins with a dedicatory epistle to Gloucester, which by its phraseology seems to be the opening of a new book (see p. 377, note 1247), and whereas the earlier part of the present volume is illustrated, this second portion has only the blank spaces left for such adornment. There are on this page none of the signs of wear which might suggest that it had been the first sheet of an independent volume, but it is possible that it was never much used, and only acquired late in life by Gloucester. A later owner may have bound up the two volumes together, and handed them down to us in their present shape. It seems thus most probable that in Duke Humphrey's day this manuscript consisted of two volumes, else he would not twice have appended his autograph, nor probably have varied it in the same book, for an inscription at the end of the last treatise reads 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucester lequel je fis translater de grec en latin par un de mes secretaires Antoyne de Beccara ne de Verone.' The first volume corresponds in its second folio to an entry in the Oxford Register (_Epist. Acad._, 767. The second folio in the register is marked 'racti quae,' whilst in the manuscript it is 'rati quae,' probably only a clerical error. The University scribe also misnamed the volume as 'Athanasius, de Trinitate'), and so was part of the gifts to that University; the second probably never passed out of its owner's hands till his death. At one time this manuscript, in its present shape, was in the possession of a certain Mr. Fowler of Hampton, near Cirencester (James MS., 30, p. 84).

A very interesting copy of the 'Historia Anglie' of Matthew Paris (Royal MS., 14, C. vii.) likewise belonged to Duke Humphrey, though it was not presented to Oxford. The 'History' is in the author's own hand, but is continued down to 1273 by some other chronicler. When finished by Paris it was presented by him to the Abbey of St. Albans whence it may have been given to Gloucester by Wheathampsted. At the end there is an inscription, which when restored by a chemical reagent was read by Sir Frederick Madden as 'Cest livre A moy Homffrey duc de Gloucestre' (Introduction to Matthew Paris, _Historia Anglorum_ (Rolls Series, 1866-1869), pp. xxxviii-xl). The erasure has been so carefully effected that under all circumstances the words are hard to decipher, but a close inspection seems to reveal that the inscription is that of Humphrey, and that it follows the spelling which he invariably used: 'Cest (not ceste) livre est A moy Homfrey (not Homffrey) duc de Gloucestre.'

Also in the Royal Collection there is a French version of the 'Somnium Viridarii,' originally written about 1376 (Royal MS., 19, C. iv.). 'Le Songe du Vergier,' as the French title runs, is in the form of a discussion, a method so popular at that period, between a knight and clerk on the question of the relative spheres of the spiritual and temporal powers. This manuscript, which was once the property of King Charles V. of France, is beautifully illuminated throughout, and is illustrated at the beginning of each of the two books of which it is composed. At the end an erased but just decipherable inscription reads, 'Cest livre est a moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre (see Paleographical Society's _Facsimiles_, Second Series, Plate 169, and also Paulin Paris, _Manuscrits Français_ (Paris 1840), iii. 299-328). Neither this nor a still more beautifully adorned volume containing certain selected Psalms (Royal MS., 2, B. i.) was given to Oxford. This last is ornamented throughout with initial letters and pendants in gold and colours, those in the calendar at the beginning being particularly finely executed. On the first page of the text Gloucester's arms appear in two different places, and the next page is headed by a minature, which we may perhaps take to represent the Duke kneeling at a Prie-Dieu, and being presented to the Saviour by one who may be St. Alban, or more probably David. Humphrey is here represented as quite a young man, which would agree with the date of the volume, which may be fixed about 1415. (See _Facsimiles of MS. and Inscriptions_, published by the Palæographical Society, Second Series, Plate 201.) Besides the Psalms and calendar above mentioned a few Latin prayers are added, and the whole is preceded by a dedication to God's service. At the end stands the inscription, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre des seaulmes les quels jay esleus du saultier,' of which the first part is only legible when restored by chemicals. Those who secured the books of the dead Duke were remarkably anxious to remove the traces of his ownership, even when they were not part of his gifts to Oxford. This book is an interesting personal relic of Gloucester, and apart from this it is also a very favourable specimen of the art of the period.

Amongst the Egerton manuscripts in the British Museum there is an English version of the Holy Scriptures, usually called Wycliff's Bible, in two volumes, with the books up to the Proverbs omitted (Egerton MSS., 617 and 618). At the end is a calendar of the Gospels and Epistles for the year according to the Sarum use. The manuscripts bear no inscription, but we may surmise that it belonged to Humphrey by the presence of his coat of arms in the centre of the second folio above the text. This is not a conclusive proof of possession, as we have seen in the case of the book given by Wheathampsted to Oxford, but in the absence of any hostile evidence it may be accepted.

Yet one other book which may be put down among the possessions of Duke Humphrey survives in the British Museum, a vellum folio containing a medical treatise by the most famous of all the Arabian writers on surgery, Aboo-l-Kassim, who flourished in the latter part of the eleventh century. The title runs 'Albucasis sive Albukassem Khalof Ebn Abbas Al-Zaharias Antidotarium per Lodaycum Tetrafarmacum e lingua Arabica translatum' (Sloane MS., 248). At the end of the text an inscription has been erased and its restoration is impossible, though the first three words, 'Cest livre est,' can just be made out, and after this there seem to be traces of the big 'A' with the particular flourish the Duke always used when writing his name in his books. On the top of the first leaf is written 'Loyale et belle a Gloucester,' and again on a blank leaf at the end in the same hand occurs 'Loyale et belle de Gloucestre. Loyalement voster la Duchesse.' These last two sentences are repeated on the next blank leaf. The meaning of these inscriptions is not evident, though we know that the Duke adopted the motto, 'Loyale et belle.' In default of better evidence they seem to suggest that the book, once the property of Gloucester, was given by him to his wife.

Outside Oxford and the British Museum there are in England four manuscripts which are thought to have once formed part of the Duke's library. In the possession of Mr. Henry Yates Thompson, of 19 Portman Square, London, there is a Psalter with an erased inscription at the end of the text, which, when treated with a chemical reagent, reveals the words, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey fiz frere et uncle de roys duc de Gloucestre comte de pembroc grant chambellan dangleterre, etc.' (Henry Yates Thompson MS., 58. Cf. the descriptive _Catalogue of the Thompson Collection_ (Second Series, Cambridge, 1902), pp. 75-81). This book was originally copied for the family of St. Omer of Mulbarton in Norfolk, and the illuminations, which make it one of the most beautiful examples of English art in two periods, are distinctly of the East Anglian school. The latter part of the volume was left unfinished, though part of the illuminating work must have been executed early in the fifteenth century. The absence of the Gloucester coat of arms in any part of the book shows that it must have been in its present state of completion when it came into the Duke's hands.

Another brightly decorated manuscript was till lately preserved in the library of Earl Fitzwilliam at Wentworth-Woodhouse in the shape of an English verse translation of Palladius, _De Re Rustica_ (Wentworth-Woodhouse MS., Z. i. 32). It is brilliantly illuminated, the poem being written in scarlet, crimson, blue, and green, with a few words in gold, and the effect is naturally more startling than beautiful. The book is bound richly but roughly in Russian leather, and inserted in the cover is an enamel of a woman of good but heavy features. Round this enamel runs the legend, 'Jacqueline, Dutchess of Bavaria, Countess of Holland, Zealand, and Hainault, wife to Humfrey, Duke of Gloucester, 1427.' We gather from a modern fly-leaf that this manuscript was in a 'rotten wood binding' in 1767, and the enamel was 'judged proper to make a part of the new binding.' According to the canons of Labarte this portrait cannot be earlier than the sixteenth century. (Inquiry at Wentworth-Woodhouse has resulted in a declaration that no such volume is now known to exist there. In the Bodleian Library, however, there is a photographic facsimile of it made in 1888. Bodley MS., Arch. F. d. 1.) The proem to this translation contains a good deal about Gloucester's books at Oxford, and his relationship to the Italian Humanists in England. This, together with the portrait, have been declared undoubted evidence that it was the copy presented to Humphrey, and the presence of his arms in the initial letter of the poem strengthens, though it does not entirely confirm, this suggestion (see article in the _Athenæum_ for November 17, 1888, p. 664). On the other hand, the fact that the introduction and text are written in different hands, would lead us to think that this was not the copy presented by the author to his patron.

The Cambridge University Library possesses a volume at the end of which occurs the inscription, 'Cest livre est A moy Honfrey duc de Gloucestre du don mess Robert Roos chevalier mon cousin' (Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17. It is described by P. Mayer in _Romania_, xv. 264, 265). It contains the last two sheets of a French translation of the _De Regimine Principum_ of Ægidius Romanus, and the _Rei Militaris Instituta_ of Flavius Renatus Vegetius, also translated into French by Jean de Vignai. Also at Cambridge, in the Library of King's College, there is a manuscript which is thought to have once belonged to Duke Humphrey. This is a translation of some of the speeches of St. Athanasius by Antonio Beccaria, and is written in an Italian hand of the fifteenth century (King's College MS., 27). Prefixed is a dedication to the Duke, one leaf of which is missing, but it bears no inscription, nor are there signs of there ever having been one. This volume is the only surviving relic of the original library of the college, and it has been suggested that, since it is dedicated to Humphrey, it was part of his library, and given by Henry VI., with others of his uncle's books, to the college of his foundation, as some part of the spoils shared among the King's favourites after the tragedy of Bury. The old library catalogue, which dates from 1453, helps to confirm this theory, for in it occur translations of Plato and Plutarch, and several of the Latin classics, which give a tone to the collection unlikely to be borrowed from any one but the late Duke of Gloucester (see _Catalogue of MSS. of King's College_, by Montague Rhodes James (Cambridge, 1905,) pp. 46, 47, 70, 71). The theory is ingenious and worth considering; at any rate it suggests a possible destination for those books which the University of Oxford sought so long and so vainly to obtain.

Some of Gloucester's books in course of time have found their way across the Channel, and six volumes, once part of his library, are now extant in France. In the Bibliothèque Nationale there are two Latin books which bear his autograph. The first is a collection of ancient panegyrics (Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. latin, 7805), on the first fly-leaf of which is written in the scribe's hand, 'Est illustrissimi domini ducis Gloucestrensis,' which shows that the volume was written for Gloucester himself. These panegyrics are addressed by ancient writers to various emperors, the most interesting being one composed by the Younger Pliny for the benefit of Trajan. The whole manuscript is written in a neat Italian hand of the fifteenth century, and bears an illuminated letter at the beginning of each panegyric. On the verso of the last folio Humphrey has written 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre,' and by him it was given to Oxford in 1443 (_Epist. Acad._, 235). The other Latin work is a collection of the letters of Cicero, which was given to the Duke by his friend Zano, Bishop of Bayeux (Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. latin, 8537). It is written in a clear, clerkly hand of the fifteenth century, and adorned with occasional illuminated letters. The copyist was evidently no Greek scholar, for there are frequent gaps left for words of that language, which are supplied in a scrawling hand, with the Latin equivalents above. Several letters to Atticus are included, and the earlier ones are either addressed to or received from Brutus. At the end of the last folio is written, in large uncertain capital letters, 'Rudolfus Johannis de Misotis de Feraria SS. MCCCCXV.' Below this again the Duke has written, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don Reverend piere en Dieu Zanon eveque de Bayeux.' The volume was probably purchased by Zano in Italy and presented to his friend when he returned to England to visit him, later passing by the gift of 1439 into the possession of the University of Oxford (_Epist. Acad._, 183).

In the same library we find three French manuscripts which Gloucester once possessed, and which, owing to the language in which they are written, do not naturally form part of his gifts to Oxford, consisting as these did exclusively of Latin works. An elaborately illuminated manuscript bearing the title 'Le Bible hystoriaux' (Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 2) bears on the last folio written in a large hand, not that of the scribe, the inscription, 'Le dixiesme jour de Septembre lan mil quatrecens vingt sept fut cest livre donne a tres hault & tres puissant prince Humfrey duc de Gloucestre Conte de Haynau Holland, etc., & protecteur & deffenseur d'engleterre par Sire Jehan Stanley Chevalier ledit prince estant en l'abbaye notre dame A Chestre.' In this French version of the Scriptures the books are arranged in an arbitrary order, and in the New Testament everything after the Epistle to the Hebrews is omitted. The pages are all adorned with elaborate floral decorations, and they also bear numerous small illustrations of varying artistic value, some reaching a respectable standard, others being grotesque even for the age in which they were produced. The volume was originally written for William, Bishop of Sens, and in 1451 was bought in London by Philip de Loan, who was in the service of Philip, Duke of Burgundy. Thus one at least of Gloucester's books passed to the Court of his great enemy.

The second of the French books once belonging to Humphrey, and now in this library, is a translation of the _Decameron_ of Boccaccio (Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,421). It is but poorly written, though a small portion of it is in a slightly better hand than the rest. A few coloured letters relieve the monotony of bad writing, and some fairly frequent illustrations help to give colour to the manuscript. Some of the last are typical fifteenth-century work, possibly slightly less grotesque than those in the last-mentioned volume. Others, however, are beautifully executed in water-colours, and appear to be of a much later date. The presumption is that the original illustrator did not fill up all the spaces at his disposal, and that a later artist, who betrays more technical ability than even the fifteenth-century painter, Jean Fouquet, completed the work. At the end of the last folio there is to be found a faded yet quite legible inscription, which shows traces of an attempt at erasure. It reads, 'Cest livre est A moy Homfrey duc de Gloucestre du don mon tres chier cousin le conte de Warwic.' Less ornate is the third French manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale, which we can trace back to Duke Humphrey's library (Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,583). This is a poorly written copy of the early French romance, _Le Roman de Renard_. At the head of the first words stands a picture of inferior execution, and beyond this no adornment is attempted. The text ends abruptly on the 48th folio, and shows traces of mutilation. The fly-leaf at the beginning is pasted down, and on it is cut 'Homfrey' in fairly large characters. This seems to be a later addition, as an experimental 'H' has been cut higher up on the page, and its tail cuts the 'de' in the following inscription, 'Cest livre est a Humfrey duc de Gloucestre.' The writing of this is not in the hand of Duke Humphrey, though there seems no reason to doubt the accuracy of the statement.

The list of Gloucester's books now extant in Paris is brought to a conclusion with a large folio volume of 433 folios containing Livy's _Roman History_ translated into French by Pierre Bersuyre, or Bercheure, or Berchoire, and dedicated to King John of France (Bibliothèque de Ste. Geneviève, MS. français, 777). The manuscript is beautifully illuminated, and at the head of the title-page there stands a painting divided into nine medallions showing various episodes in the history of Rome. There are two other large title-pages in the volume, and others have been cut out. This manuscript must have formed part of Charles V.'s library, for the colours of the illuminations are blue, red, and white, such as are found in all his books. Thence it probably passed into the possession of Charles VI., for a volume closely resembling it is to be found in the catalogue of this king's library drawn up by order of Bedford (_Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de Sainte Geneviève_, par Ch. Kohler (Paris, 1893), vol. i. p. 370, quoting a MS. in the same library). The English regent sent it to his brother, who in his turn possibly sent it to Alfonso of Aragon. Below a rubbed space at the end of the last sentence, which is supposed to have held the _ex libris_ of Charles VI., stand these words, 'Cest livre fut envoye des parties de France et donne par mons le regent le royaume duc de Bedford a mons le duc de Gloucestre son beau frere l'an mil quatre cens vingt sept.'

Thus of the great library, at the size of which we can only guess, only some twenty-seven works in twenty-nine volumes, at the most generous computation, survive. Others there may be which have escaped the notice of librarians, cataloguers, and the researches of the present writer, or may lie buried in the dust of unexplored libraries. Yet even were this list of survivals to be doubled or trebled the loss would be enormous.

APPENDIX B

THE TOMB OF HUMPHREY, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER

In Cotton MS., Claudius, A. viii. ff. 195-198, there is an entry of which the title runs: 'In this sedule be conteyned the charges and observances appointed by the noble Prince Humfrey late Duke Gloucester to be perpetually boren by thabbot and Convent of the Monastery of Seint Alban.' The entries contained in the schedule are as follows:--

Paid by the said Abbot and convent 'for making of the tombe and place of sepulture,' £433, 6s. 8d.

To two priests for saying Mass daily at the altar of the tomb at the rate of 6d. a day each. £18, 5s. per annum.

To the Abbot for his expenses on the 'day of anniversary of the Duke,' 40s. per annum, and to the Prior for the same, 20s. per annum.

To 40 monks in orders, to be paid on this 'day of anniversary' every year, 6s. 8d. each, £13s, 6s. 8d.

To 8 monks as above on the same day, 3s. 4d. each, £1, 6s. 8d.

To an 'ankress' at St. Peter's Church and another at St. Michael's on that same day each year, 20d.

To be distributed to the poor on that day each year, 40s.

To 13 poor men bearing torches round the tomb on that day each year, 2s. 6d. each, £1, 8s. 2d.

To wax burnt daily at the Duke's Mass and torches at his anniversary, £6, 13s. 4d.

To the kitchen of the monastery 'in relief of the great decay of the livelod of the said monasterie in the marches of Scotland, which before time had been appointed to the said Kechyn,' £60 per annum.

In payment for these expenses, the Duke transferred to the monastery the alien Priory of Pembroke in his possession.

(This schedule is printed in Dugdale's _Monasticon_, ii. 202, and in the notes to the _English Chronicle_, edited by J. S. Davies, p. 195.)

On the south wall of St. Alban's shrine, close to Humphrey's tomb, an epitaph was once written, but it is now lost owing to restoration. It was the work of Dr. John Westerman, Vicar of Bushey early in the seventeenth century, and was placed under Gloucester's arms, which were surmounted by a coronet.

PIAE MEMORIAE V. OPT.

SACRUM

SEROTINUM

Hic jacet Humfredus dux ille Glocestrius olim Henrici Regis protector, fraudis ineptae Delector; dum ficta notat miracula caeci, Lumen erat Patriae, columen venerabilis regni: Pacis amans, musisque favens melioribus, unde Gratum Opus Oxonio, quae nunc schola sacra refulget Invida sed mulier regno, regi, sibi nequam, Abstulit hunc, humili vix hoc dignata sepulchro Invidia rumpente tamen post funera vivit. Deo Gloria.

(Weever, _Ancient Funeral Monuments_, p. 555, writing in 1631; Ashmole MS., 784, f. 41, writing in 1657; Sandford, _Genealogical History_, 309, writing in 1677 and dating the epitaph about 60 years earlier; _History of the County of Hertfordshire_, by Robert Clutterbuck (London, 1815), i. 73.)

The third line of this epitaph refers to a legend which first appears in the works of Sir Thomas More, and which had a great popularity at one time. It recounts how a man, who declared that he had been blind from birth and that he had been miraculously cured at the shrine of St. Alban, was proved to be lying by the Duke of Gloucester, who asked him the colours of the coats of the various people standing round and was answered correctly. As the man declared that his sight had been restored that very day, the impossibility of his having learned the various colours in so short a time proved the baselessness of his story. (Foxe, _Acts and Monuments_, iii. 713; cf. Shakespeare, Second Part of _King Henry VI._, Act II. Scene i.)

Later generations made a strange mistake with regard to the place where Duke Humphrey was buried. The reverent affection with which his name was regarded, after the defamations of the Lancastrians had caused a reaction which went to the opposite extreme, led the Londoners to do him honour, and for this purpose they selected a tomb in the old St. Paul's Cathedral. By what chance the mistake was made cannot be known, but in the days of John Stow, the chronicler, the tomb of Sir John Beauchamp, son of Guy, Earl of Warwick, who died in 1358, was thought to contain the remains of the 'Good Duke.' Every year a ceremony was observed when 'on May Day tankard-bearers, watermen, and some other of like quality beside, would use to come to the same tombe early in the morning' and strew herbs and sprinkle water thereon. The precise significance of this proceeding seems to be unknown. (Stow's _Survey of London_, ed. Thomas, 1842, p. 125.)

In connection with this mistake as to Gloucester's tomb, there grew up a saying, which is known to most people at the present day, though in many cases the origin is forgotten. 'To dine with Duke Humphrey' was till comparatively recent years synonymous with not dining at all, and the saying arose from the mistaken idea, that the tomb in St. Paul's was Gloucester's last resting-place. In the days when the Cathedral was a public meeting-place for Londoners, and a centre of social and commercial life, it was the custom for certain gallants, whose pretensions were greater than their purses were full, to hang about there in the hopes of receiving an invitation to dinner, and failing in their quest, they were compelled to dispense with dinner altogether. The rendezvous of these hangers-on of society, who sought to live on men whose social position they despised, was opposite the tomb of Sir John Beauchamp, and it is of them that Thomas Dekker, who has left us so many interesting facts relating to the early seventeenth century, wrote, when he said: 'Such schemes are laid about eleven o'clock in St. Paul's (even amongst those that wear gilt rapiers by their sides), where for that noone they may shift from Duke Humphrey, and be furnished with dinner at some meaner man's table' (Dekker's _Dead Terme_, D. 3). Those that failed in their endeavours, and were left dinnerless near the tomb where they had taken their stand, were therefore said 'to have dined with Duke Humphrey.' A reflection of this same phrase is to be found in Bishop Corbet's 'Letter to the Duke of Buckingham,' where he alludes to

'Poets of Paules, those of Duke Humfrey's messe, That feed on nought but graves and emptiness.'

APPENDIX C

GLOUCESTER'S WILL

Wheathampsted tells us that the Duke died intestate (Whethamstede, i. 74), and on March 24, 1427, a commission was issued to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Say de Sele, Sir Thomas Stanley, John Somerset, and Richard Chester, empowering them to dispose of the goods and chattels of the late Duke of Gloucester, since he had died intestate (_Rot. Pat._, 25 _Henry VI._, Part ii. m. 35; Rymer, V. i. 171). On the other hand, there is a strong presumption that a will did really exist, and that the Duke's enemies suppressed it. No such document has survived, but in one of their frequent letters written to various persons in the hope of securing the books promised to them, the authorities of the University of Oxford ask for a copy of Gloucester's will, as though it were a well-known fact that such a document existed (_Epist. Acad._, 285). In several other letters the will is referred to, though it is noticeable that when writing to the King on the subject, its existence is not mentioned (_Epist. Acad._, 252). The date of this last letter is 1447, whilst the former was written in 1450, which seems to imply that the University had obtained evidence of the existence of a will in the interval. Moreover, in one letter there is a thinly veiled suggestion that those in power were diverting the property of the late Duke to their own private ends (_Epist. Acad._, 286). It seems likely that Gloucester's enemies seized the majority of his property, and that the King himself presented some of his uncle's possessions to the foundations at Eton and Cambridge in which he was so much interested. Certainly some church ornaments and jewels, which had belonged to Humphrey, and were then in the keeping of the Abbey of St. Albans, found their way to these institutions, though the monks were to a certain extent compensated for the loss (_Rot. Parl._, v. 307; Whethamstede, i. 65), and we have already shown the probability that the Library of King's College, Cambridge, was begun with a collection of Humphrey's books. It is noteworthy that a loving-cup, now in the possession of Christ's College, bears the arms of Gloucester quartered with those of his Cobham wife; (_ex relatione_ Sir Alfred Scott-Gatty, Garter); this, too, was probably part of the plunder which fell to the King on his uncle's death. The supposition that there was a will, and that it was suppressed, is strengthened by the fact that the Parliament of Bury passed an ordinance annulling Eleanor of Gloucester's right to any dower, or to any freehold or other possession left to her by her husband (_Rot. Parl._, v. 135). Apart from the question of dower, how could Eleanor have any claim to the late Duke's possessions except under the terms of his will?

It is significant that the question of the settlement of Duke Humphrey's affairs was reopened by the Parliament which was called after the first battle of St. Albans under Yorkist influence, the same assembly that petitioned the King for the vindication of his uncle's memory. In another petition this Parliament besought the King to provide for the administration of Gloucester's estate, since his creditors had not been paid, and were in great want. It was suggested that fresh commissioners for this purpose should be appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that they should have right of action against those who were detaining the property of the Duke illegally. It was definitely stated that the existing goods and chattels would not both pay his debts and fulfil his will, a statement which cannot be regarded as consistent with the assertion that he died intestate (_Rot. Parl._, v. 339). The petition was dismissed with the familiar formula 'Le roi s'advisera,' but some steps were ultimately taken, and in 1462 we find the Archbishop of Canterbury busy in arranging for 'the performance of the will of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester' (Westminster Abbey MSS., Miscellanea, Press 6, Box 2, Parcel 20; see _Hist. MSS. Rep._, iv., Appendix, p. 176). All the facts suggest that Wheathampsted was once again mistaken with regard to the events which surrounded his friend and patron's death, and that a will was made by Gloucester, but suppressed by his triumphant enemies, and probably in the end never completely executed.

APPENDIX D

GLOUCESTER'S RESIDENCES

There are indications that Duke Humphrey possessed several houses scattered about the country in which he dwelt from time to time. We have seen him residing and holding his Court at Pembroke Castle (_Rot. Parl._, iv. 474); on one occasion, at least, he was resident at his manor of Penshurst in Kent (Oriel MS., xxxii.); and he is said to have at one time dwelt at the Manor of the Weald, near St. Albans (Newcome, _History of Abbey of St. Albans_, 510). Another story declares that he held the castle of Devizes and had a mansion there (Holkham MS., p. 68), but there is no trace of the possession of the castle in official records, and it is known to have been demolished towards the end of the reign of Edward III. It would seem likely that he resided at Leicester and Pontefract at certain times, as on the fly-leaf of a book that he gave to his wife there are scribbled certain accounts relative to his household, dated at the two above-named places (Sloane MS., 248). The most famous of Gloucester's residences was the one situated at Greenwich. This mansion is supposed to have been a royal residence as far back as the days of Edward I.; Henry IV. was constantly resident there, and from it his will is dated. Henry V. gave it to Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, for his life, and within two years of the latter's death, we find it in the possession of Duke Humphrey (_St. Albans Chron._, i. 32)--possibly under the provision in Henry V.'s will that gave all his castles in the south of England to his youngest brother (_Test. Vetust._, i. 21). Henceforth it was Duke Humphrey's favourite resort, and between 1432 and 1437 he transformed it into a far more important house than it had been hitherto. He was given permission to increase his possessions in the immediate neighbourhood by exchanging some lands for seventeen acres belonging to the Carthusian Monastery of Jesus of Bethlehem at Shene (_Ancient Petitions_, File 113, No. 5612; _Rot. Parl._, iv. 466; _Ordinances_, iv. 136-138), and ultimately he surrounded the manor with a wall, embattled the mansion itself, and built towers and turrets within the park, one of which stood on the spot on which Greenwich Observatory is now placed. The house was surrounded by a park of some two hundred acres, most of which had been enclosed and afforested by special permission of the King (_Rot. Parl._, iv. 498, 499; _Ordinances_, iv. 136-138; _Cal. Rot. Pat._, 277). Both in official documents and in letters written from Greenwich this residence is called 'the manor of Plesaunce,' and at Humphrey's death it reverted to the Crown and was inhabited by Henry VI., when Jack Cade's rebellion had made the capital unsafe (Fabyan, 623). Edward IV. enlarged and furnished this palace, Henry VII. spent much time there, his son Henry VIII. and his grand-daughters Mary and Elizabeth were all born there. At the Restoration, the King pulled down the old building, and in the days of Humphrey's seventeenth-century biographer hardly a stone of it was left; and a new building was rising on the site (Holkham MS., p. 68). This new house, by the gift of William III. and Mary, became, and still is, the National Hospital for Seamen. (See _Gentleman's Magazine_, New Series, vol. xiii. pp. 21-24; 'Cygnea Cantio auctore Joanne Lelando,' in Leland's _Itinerary_, ed. by Thomas Hearne (Oxford, 1768), vol. ix. p. 17.)

Besides his residence in Greenwich, Humphrey possessed a house in London, 'a place callid the Duke's Wardrobe atte Baynardes Castel in London, otherwise called Waterton's Aley' (_Rot. Parl._, v. 239). This mansion was situated on the banks of the river, just west of Paul's Wharf, and bounded on the north by what is now Queen Victoria Street. It has been thought that this was the same site as the original castle of Bainard and the Fitzwalter family (Stow's _Survey of London_ (London, 1720), Book i. pp. 60, 61), though modern research tends to prove that this earlier fortress was in another parish (_London_, by J. W. Loftie, Historical Towns Series (London, 1887), p. 80). Possibly the palace of the earliest Saxon kings stood on this spot, and in Chaucer's day it seems to have been a royal residence, to which Edward II. had added a lofty tower (_The Pageant of London_, by Richard Davey (London, 1906), i. 42, 188). In 1428 a devastating fire reduced this quarter of London to ashes, and it seems that it was at this time that Humphrey built the palace associated with his name, though no documentary evidence exists to justify the suggestion (Stow's _Survey_, Book i. pp. 60, 61; _London City_, by W. J. Loftie (London, 1891), p. 249). The fact that in 1427 the Duke was at an 'Inn,' when the representatives of Parliament called upon him, supports the theory that at that time he had no permanent residence in the city. The house was called Baynard's Castle after the ward in which it was built, extensive grounds surrounded it, and it was only second in magnificence to the palace at Greenwich, if we are to believe a political songster of the time, who makes Eleanor sadly take leave of 'fayer places on Temmy's side' ('The Lament of the Duchess of Gloucester,' in _Polit. Songs_, ii. 207). Mansion, gardens, and all pertaining thereto were given by the King in 1447 (when they reverted to him at the death of his uncle) to King's College, Cambridge (_Rot. Parl._, v. 132), but in the reign of Edward IV. we find the King's mother there resident, and it was at Baynard's Castle that the Mayor of London waited on Richard of Gloucester in 1483 with the formal offer of the English Crown (_London City_, pp. 76, 116). Henry VII. rebuilt the palace early in his reign, but it was not then embattled, 'or so strongly fortified castle-like,' as in Duke Humphrey's days, but was more of a royal and family residence (Stow's _Survey_, Book i. pp. 60, 61). We next find it in the possession of the Herbert family, and on July 19, 1553, the Privy Council met there to proclaim Mary queen, the owner being then William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke (_The History and Survey of London_, by B. Lambert, London, 1806, iii. 98). John Cooper, the seventeenth-century biographer of Duke Humphrey, had himself visited Baynard's Castle, and by that time, he tells us, the property had been split up, and was intersected by streets and lanes, but they still bore 'the name of Duke Humphries.' Indeed there stood an inn which bore the sign of the Duke just on the edge of the site of the old mansion, and at the time of writing was famous for a recent brawl on the premises (Holkham MS., pp. 68, 69). The whole district was swept away by the great fire of 1666, but in 1809 two towers of the old castle were still standing, and to this day Castle Street and Castle Yard commemorate the past glories of Gloucester's London residence (Davey's _Pageant of London_, i. 337).

APPENDIX E

PORTRAITS OF GLOUCESTER

I. In a book of portraits in Vol. 266 of the _Bibliothèque de la ville d'Arras_, on folio 37, there is a portrait bearing Gloucester's name, a reproduction of which hangs in the Bodleian Library. It appears among a series of portraits of people from the fourteenth to the seventeenth century, which represent in most cases Flemish grandees and prominent courtiers of the Court of Burgundy. On folio 36 there is a portrait of Jacqueline of Hainault, and on folio 35 another of the Dauphin John, her first husband. All are in crayon, and are probably the work of Jacques Le Boucq, a herald of the Toison d'Or, who was known as a painter in the days of Philip II. of Spain. It has been thought probable that he copied contemporary portraits for these crayon drawings, and if this be true, he provides us with the only attempt at real portraiture of Duke Humphrey (_Catalogue of the Arras Library; Les Portraits Aux Crayons_, by Henri Bouchet, Paris, 1884).

II. In the initial letter of the dedication to Duke Humphrey, prefixed to Capgrave's _Commentary on Genesis_, a miniature portrays the author in the act of presenting his book to his patron. The workmanship of this miniature is too coarse to allow of any portraiture, though a slight likeness to the Arras portrait may be traced (Oriel MS., xxxii.). A line reproduction of the Duke's head, taken from this manuscript, is given in Doyle's _Official Baronage_.

III. In a register at St. Albans Abbey there is a small illumination representing Duke Humphrey and his wife Eleanor, painted on the occasion of the latter's reception into the confraternity of St. Albans. There is here a more successful attempt at portraiture than in the Oriel manuscript, and the type of face, long, clean shaven, almost apathetic, is similar to that in the Arras drawing. Nevertheless, here as elsewhere there is no real character in the face of Humphrey, and still less in that of his wife; there is, indeed, a strong suggestion of mediæval formalism (Cotton MS., Nero, D. vii. f. 154).

IV. Among the royal collection of manuscripts in the British Museum there is a Psalter which was prepared for Duke Humphrey, and which, besides being beautifully illuminated, bears a miniature which may contain a portrait of the owner (Royal MS., 2, B. i.). It represents a man kneeling at a Prie-Dieu, with a patron standing behind him. The kneeling figure may very well be taken to represent the owner of the book. Again there are very few signs of portraiture, but such as it is, the miniature seems to be the likeness of Humphrey when still a young man The manuscript was written about 1415, which would lead us to suppose that the artist here tried to present the Duke's features at the age of twenty-five.

V. In the church at Greenwich which was destroyed in 1710 there was a stained-glass window representing the Duke in a kneeling posture. A copy of this window is still extant, and is to be found as the headpiece of the preface to the old catalogue of manuscripts contained in the Bodleian Library (Oxford, 1697). A rough drawing thereof, executed in 1695, is also to be found in Tanner MS., 24, f. 107, and another, dating from some seventy-five years earlier, exists in Ashmole MS., 874, f. 113vo. Humphrey is represented in armour, and in appearance he is here totally unlike any of the above-mentioned portraits, being represented as wearing a beard. The window was probably placed in Greenwich church some time after his decease.

VI. In the year 1610 there was at the west end of the church of St. Helen's, Abingdon, a glass window, in which were portraits of Henry V. and his three brothers. 'These Dukes be in their robes and their coronalls with their arms over their Hedds, and their names written under their feet.' No drawing of this window has survived, and it has disappeared as completely as the one in Greenwich church. (Ashmole MS., 874, f. 113vo.)

VII. Horace Walpole possessed amongst his collection of pictures at Strawberry Hill three paintings in which he claimed there were portraits of Duke Humphrey. The first was a representation of the marriage of Henry VI., and Walpole thought that it was probably designed for the King, but executed after his death. The King and Queen stand in the front of the picture, and behind the former is a nobleman, bald headed, with a beard, and wearing a furred mantle. The workmanship throughout shows considerable power and expression, and would seem to be of a later date than is supposed. (Walpole, _Anecdotes of Painting in England_, London, 1876, i. 34, 35; _Catalogues of Strawberry Hill Sale_, p. 197.) The second picture was once part of the doors of a shrine in the Abbey of St. Edmundsbury, which Walpole had sawed into four panels. According to his judgment two of the panels bear portraits of Cardinal Beaufort and Archbishop Kemp; the third may represent St. Joseph in adoration, or more probably the donor, the fourth is described as a portrait of Duke Humphrey of Gloucester, and corresponds exactly in dress and appearance with the figure said to be a likeness of the same Duke in the 'Marriage of Henry VI.' The third and fourth panels 'are so good that they are in the style of the school of the Caracci. They at least were painted by some Italian; the draperies have large folds, and one wonders how they could be executed in the reign of Henry VI.' (Walpole's _Letters_, Mrs. Paget Toynbee's edition, xi. 183, 184; _Catalogue of Strawberry Hill Sale_, p. 211.) Probably neither of these pictures was painted in the reign of Henry VI. The King would not have wished to have the uncle whom he had been taught to hate introduced into a picture of his marriage, nor would a contemporary have painted Cardinal Beaufort, Kemp, and Gloucester on adjoining panels. Far more probably the marriage picture represents the union of the houses of Lancaster and York in the persons of Henry VII. and his wife Elizabeth, an event fraught with far more significance than the one suggested by Walpole, and the shrine is most likely of much the same date. However, Walpole's theory had been universally accepted, and prints of the figure from the panel of St. Edmundsbury were made, as being an authentic likeness of the Duke of Gloucester (Ackerman's _History of Oxford_ (London, 1814), ii. 272; _Collections for the History of Hertfordshire_, by N. Solomon, i. 87: Extra illustrated copy of Wood's _History and Antiquities of the University of Oxford_ in the Bodleian, MS. Top. Oxon., c. 16, p. 914). George Perfect Harding also painted one of his well-known water-colour portraits from this panel, and it is now in the possession of Miss C. Agnes Rooper, Per Selwood, Gervis Road, Bournemouth. It is to be noticed that the likeness between the two so-called portraits of Gloucester is not so exact as Walpole would have us think, for whereas, in the marriage of Henry VI., he is represented with a beard, in the panel he is clean shaven. This last, though probably not contemporary, seems to possess some indications that it represents the same face as the Arras manuscript, but at a later stage of life. Also it was quite possible that when personal rivalries had been forgotten in the lapse of years, the monks of Bury might erect a memorial to one of their patrons, along with others who had not been his friends during his life. Nevertheless, we cannot generalise as to Humphrey's appearance from this portrait, which, to say the least, has a doubtful authenticity. The third picture of the Strawberry Hill collection, said to contain a portrait of the Duke of Gloucester, was once an altar-piece at Shene, and was probably painted for Henry VII. It represents Henry V. and his three brothers, together with his wife and other ladies, but the faces have no individuality, and are too conventional to be taken as portraits. These three pictures were sold to two different buyers at the Strawberry Hill sale. The 'Marriage of Henry VI.' and the panels from St. Edmundsbury were bought by the Duke of Sutherland, while the picture of Henry V. and his family went to the Earl of Waldegrave (_Catalogue of the Strawberry Hill Sale_).

VIII. In St. Mary's Hall, Coventry, there is an Arras tapestry, which hangs below the north window. It is divided into six compartments, the two centre ones containing allegorical figures, and in the upper ones to left and right certain saints are represented. In the remaining two compartments a king and queen kneel before desks with their suite in attendance. The king and queen are supposed to be Henry VI. and his wife. Behind the king stands a bearded figure, which 'is with no small reason supposed to be the good Duke of Gloucester' (Thomas Sharp, _Dissertation on the Pageants or Mysteries at Coventry_ (Coventry, 1825); _The Coventry Guide_ (Coventry, 1824), p. 46; _The History of the Antiquities of the City of Coventry_, No. vi. pp. 187, 188; _Handbook of the Arts of the Middle Ages and Renaissance_, by M. Jules Labarte (London, 1855), p. 90. An illustration of the tapestry is to be found in this last). However, the workmanship of this tapestry tends to prove that it dates from Tudor rather than Lancastrian times, and in all likelihood it was made to celebrate the visit of Henry VII. and his Queen to Coventry, not that of Henry VI. and Margaret. Both these monarchs and their consorts were members of the Guild of the Holy Trinity in that city.

APPENDIX F

A LEGEND OF GLOUCESTER'S DEATH

Amongst seventeenth-century chroniclers there are many accounts as to the way in which Gloucester was murdered, the most popular of which, perhaps, is the one that he was smothered to death between two pillows. A contemporary Frenchman gives a different version, which has an extraordinary resemblance to the stories which surround the death of George, Duke of Clarence, in 1478. This occurs in a rhymed account by George Chastellain of the unusual and interesting events which happened in his days and runs as follows:

'Par fortune semestre Veis à l'oeil viviment Le Grant duc de Glocestre Meurdrir piteusement; En vin plain une cuve Failloit qu'estranglé fust Cuidant par celle estuve Que la morte n'y parust.'

(Introduction to Georges Chastellain, _Chronique_ (ed. Buchon), p. xlviii). The rhyming chronicle in which this is found is not extant in manuscript, but in a printed form bearing the date 1528; and appended to it a continuation by Jacques Le Bouvier. Chastellain died at least three years before Clarence, so that he could not have borrowed the idea from the latter event. Nevertheless, it seems too obvious that the circumstances of the two deaths have been confused with one another to lightly dismiss its possibility. Bouvier mentions the death of Clarence and the well-known legend, putting it quaintly as follows:

'Le roi le fist noyer Dedans mallevisee Pours le moins ennuyer.'

(Introduction to Georges Chastellain, _Chronique_ (ed. Buchon), p. liii), but none the less he may have interpolated the passage about Gloucester into his predecessor's poem.

The theory of drowning, however, finds some support from an English authority. In a popular poem called 'The Dyrge of the Commons of Kent,' sung by the rebellious followers of Jack Cade in 1450, the following passage occurs:

'Arrys up Thorp and Cantelowe, stand ye together And synge _dies illa dies ire_, Pulford and Hanley that drownyd ye Duke of Glocestar As two traitors shall synge _ardentes anime_.'

(_Three Fifteenth-century Chronicles_, Camden Series p. 103.) It is possible that from these two legends we can get an indication of what nature Humphrey's end really was. The story of Clarence's drowning can have no share in suggesting the earlier poem of Jack Cade's followers, and here may be the solution of the problem which has puzzled modern historians. It must be remembered, however, that in another work, already cited in the text, Chastellain gives the more usual story of Gloucester's murder, when he describes his death to a red-hot spit thrust into his body. (Chastellain, _OEuvres_, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, vii. 87.) In both cases, however, he lays stress on the fact that the manner of death was devised so as to prevent the appearance of murder.

APPENDIX G

GLOUCESTER'S ARMS, BADGES, AND SEALS

I. ARMS

Like his brothers, the Duke of Gloucester adopted the arms of England and France quarterly, but whereas their arms were differentiated with various labels, his own were surmounted with a border argent (Garter Types, College of Arms). At this period the arms of France, as borne by the English Kings, were changed from 'azure semée of fleur de lys or' to 'azure three fleur de lys or,' and this is the only difference which marks Humphrey's arms from those of a predecessor in the Gloucester title, Thomas of Woodstock. Nicholas Upton, a follower and friend of Humphrey, describes his arms as follows: 'Portat Integra Arma Francie et Anglie Quarteriata, Cum Una Bordura Gobonata De Argento et Nigro ... Il port lez Armes de Fraunce et D'engleterre quarterlez ovesque ung bordure gobone d'argent et d'asor' (Nicholaus Uptonus, _De Studio Militari_, London, 1654, p. 238). This is not strictly accurate, as the border was argent only. These arms were carved on the Duke's tomb at St. Albans with their supporters, antelopes gorged and chained, and the shields were alternately 'ensigned' with his ducal coronet on his cap of estate, and with his crest, 'a Lyon passant guardant crowned and accolled.' This part of the tomb is so mutilated that all the crests are gone; and only fragments of the other heraldic adornments remain (cf. Sandford, _Genealogical History_, p. 307; Gough, _Sepulchral Monuments_ (London, 1776), vol. ii. part III. p. 142).

Gloucester does not seem to have altered his armorial bearings after his marriage to Jacqueline of Hainault, for a seal attached to a charter in the archives of Mons seems to be the same one he had hitherto used (_Cartulaire_, iv. 440). After his marriage with Eleanor Cobham, however, he impaled the Cobham arms with his own, of which we have two recorded instances. In the east window of the church of Cobham in Kent there stood his arms 'in two several places, dimediated with those of the Duchess Eleanor Cobham' (Sandford, _Genealogical History_, p. 308), and they appeared in a similar form in a window of Greenwich Church before its destruction. A reproduction of this east window is to be found as the headpiece to the preface of the old catalogue of manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford (_Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum_, Oxford, 1697), and the following description thereof was written in 1695: 'An Helmet and crest with Mantles, and the Antelopes holding it up with Humphrey Duke of Gloucester kneeling, and his Arms, scilt. quarterly France and England within a bordure argent on one side, and the same arms impaling Cobham, viz., Gules on a Cheveron or, three Estoils sable, on the other side, a good distance from him; stand all in one of the south windows near the Belfry of Greenwich Church' (Tanner MS., 24, f. 107). The manuscript also contains a rough drawing of the window, as is also the case in an Ashmole record written about 1659, which gives the same information, though at less length (Ashmole MS., 1121, f. 228). Humphrey, it will be noticed, used as one of his supporters an antelope, which had been borne by Henry IV., and had appeared on the trappings of his horse in the Lists of Coventry (Tyler, _Henry of Monmouth_, p. 30). It appears from a manuscript in the Heralds' College that his supporters were to the Dexter a Greyhound argent collared and leashed or, to the Sinister an Heraldic Antelope argent Ducally gorged and chained or (Heralds' College MS., 14, f. 105, B.).

II. BADGES

Humphrey bore no less than three badges. From a political song, written probably about 1449, it appears that he was known by the title of 'the Swan,' a name taken from the badge he had adopted from his Bohun ancestors. In the course of the poem the phrase 'the Swanne is goone' appears, and in a different though contemporary hand the word 'Gloucetter' is written above the word 'Swanne' (_Political Songs_, ii. 221. Cf. _Excerpta Historica_, p. 161)

The second badge was on a shield sable three ostrich feathers argent surrounded by the Garter and supported to the Dexter by the Greyhound, to the Sinister by the Antelope. (Window in Greenwich Church, College of Arms MS., L. 14, 105, B.) These appear in the Greenwich window (Ashmole MS., 1121, f. 228. Cf. _Archæologia_, xxxi. 368), though from impressions of his seal he seems then only to have used two feathers. (Seal described in Cartulaire, iv. 440, and Seal attached to British Museum, _Additional Charters_, 6000.)

The third badge has a particular interest. It is found at frequent intervals on the St. Albans tomb, and it appears in a slightly different form in other places. It seems to represent a cup with sprays of some plant issuing from the top. On the tomb the sprays look like daisies or their foliage, whereas in drawings of this same badge that occur in several manuscripts in the College of Arms and elsewhere, they seem to be laurels. They vary, too, as to the number of sprays. On the tomb there are seven or eight in each cup, whilst in the extant drawings, which date mostly from the seventeenth century, they vary from one to three (College of Arms, Garter Types and Badges, and MS., L. 14, f. 105, B.). Gough thought that this badge was the rebus of Wheathampsted, and represented wheat sheaves (Gough, _Sepulchral Monuments_, vol. ii. part III. p. 142). This, however, is disproved by the fact that it was not Wheathampsted who built the Duke's tomb, and it was unlikely that Abbot Stoke would put his predecessor's mark on a monument built by himself, and secondly by an entry which we find in more than one place under the drawings of the cup, which reads, 'Humfrey Duke of Gloucester bare this cup with a Laurell branch, in the respect he bore to Learning' (College of Arms, Miscellanea Curiosa, i. 105, B. Cf. Ashmole MS., 1121, f. 227).

III. SEALS

There are few impressions of Gloucester's seal still surviving. In the British Museum there is attached to a warrant a very small seal bearing the Duke's coat of arms and round it the motto 'Loyalle et Belle' (_Additional Charters_, xxxvi. 146). This is the only evidence to prove the use of this motto by the Duke, save some rather inconclusive remarks on the fly-leaf of one of his manuscripts (Sloane MS., 248). A larger impression is attached to a grant of custody given by Gloucester and dated September 22, 1426 (_Additional Charters_, 6000). This seal is in fairly good preservation and on one side bears the Duke's arms between two feathers and surmounted by a cap, on the other a representation of the Duke himself holding a drawn sword and riding on a horse.

In the Mons archives attached to a charter granted by Gloucester there is a round seal which is described as follows: 'Il represente un ecu ecartele aux 1 et 4 a trois fleurs de lis et aux 2 et 3 trois lions passants, surmounté d'un heaume qui a pour cimier un léopard, et accosté de deux plumes; supports: deux beliers.' The legend runs: 'Sigilu. Humfridi. filii et fratris. regis. ducis Glocestrie. comitis Pembr. et camerarii Anglie' (_Cartulaire_ iv. 440).

Two more seals are preserved amongst the deeds in Magdalen College, Oxford. Both are attached to warrants issued by Gloucester in his capacity of Chief Keeper of the King's Forests on this side of the river Trent. The first is a round brown seal bearing the ducal arms within a border of antlers rising from a deer's head. Above is the figure of an heron, which with the antlers were the signs of this particular office. The inscription so far as it can be read runs: 'S. H. duc Glouc ... Angl ac just. et capit. cust. forestr' (_Magdalen College Deeds_, Selborne, 112; cf. Selborne, 115). The second is a seal of green wax, hollow on the reverse, and though much broken, still reveals the stag's head and antlers surrounding Gloucester's arms (_Magdalen College Deeds_, Shotover, 4).

SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES

_I. PRINTED BOOKS_

DOCUMENTS AND ORIGINAL LETTERS CITED AS

Rotuli Parliamentorum. London, 1767-77. _Rot. Parl._ Comprises Petitions, Pleas, and Proceedings in Parliament, 1278-1503.

Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council _Ordinances._ (1386-1542). Ed. by Sir H. N. Nicolas. London, 1834-37.

Rotuli Scotiae in Turri Londiniensi asservati. _Rot. Scot._ London, 1814-19.

Calendarium Rotulorum Patentium in Turri _Cal. Rot. Pat._ Londiniensi. London, 1802.

This calendar only contains excerpts from the Patent Rolls. The new calendars published do not as yet include the important periods of the Duke of Gloucester's life.

Issues of the Exchequer. Collected by Frederick _Devon, Issue Devon. London, 1837. Roll._

Calendar of Norman Rolls:--

For the year 1417. Rotuli Normanniae, vol. i. _Rot. Norm._ (all published). Ed. by T. D. Hardy. London, 1835.

For the year 1418 and onwards. Reports of the _Cal. of Norman Deputy Keeper of the Public Records. Nos. 41 Rolls._ and 42. Appendices. London, 1880, 1881.

Calendar of the French Rolls. Reports of the _Cal. of French Deputy Keeper of the Public Records. Nos. 44 Rolls._ and 48. Appendices. London, 1883, 1887.

Catalogue des Rolles Gascons, Normans et Français. _Carte._ By Thomas Carte. London, 1743. Certain selections from these rolls only.

Reports of the Lords' Committees touching the _Lords' Reports._ Dignity of a Peer of the Realm. London, 1829.

Foedera Conventiones Litterae et cujuscumque Acta _Rymer._ Publica inter Reges Angliae et alios. Collected by Thomas Rymer. Third ed. by George Holmes. 'Hagae comitis apud Joannem Neaulme.' 1745. Miscellaneous documents illustrative of English History.

Memorials of London. Extracts from the early _Memorials of Archives of the City of London, 1276-1419. By London._ H. T. Riley. London, 1868.

Collection Générale des Documents Français. _Delpit, Doc. Fr._ Publiés par Jules Delpit. Paris, 1847. Documents drawn mainly from the Archives of the City of London.

Testamenta Vetusta. By Sir Harris Nicolas. London, _Test. Vetust._ 1868.

A collection of Ancient Wills, from Henry V. to Elizabeth inclusive.

Excerpta Historica. Ed. by Samuel Bentley. London, _Excerpta 1831. Historica._ Miscellaneous documents, collected from various sources; published originally in four parts during 1830, but unfortunately discontinued owing to a lack of support.

Rechnungen über Heinrich von Derby's _Prutz._ Preussenfahrten, von Dr. Hans Prutz. Leipzig, 1893. Accounts of Henry's Treasurer. A similar volume has been edited by the Camden Society by Lucy Toulmin Smith.

Ordinances for the Government of the Household, _Ordinances of the Liber Niger Domus Regis Edwardi quarti. London, Household._ 1790.

Preuves de l'Histoire de Bourgogne. In vol. iv. of _Plancher, Histoire Générale de Bourgoyne par Urbain Preuves._ Plancher. Dijon, 1781.

Particularités Curieuses sur Jacqueline de Bavière, _Particularités Comtesse de Hainaut. Première Partie ed. by Curieuses._ A. D. No. 7 des Publications de la Société des Bibliophiles de Mons. Mons, 1838. Extracts from the Register of the City of Mons.

Cartulaire des Contes de Hainaut. Vols, iv., v., _Cartulaire._ vi. Bruxelles, 1889-96. Collections des Chroniques Belges inédites. A collection of documents taken from the various city registers and other sources.

Beiträge zur Geschichte der Jakobäa von Bayern. _Beiträge._ In Abhandlungen der Historischen Classe der Königlichen Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Band x. Munich, 1867. Erste Abtheilung (1401-26), pp. 1-112. Zweite Abtheilung (1426-36), pp. 205-336. A miscellaneous collection of extracts from documents and chroniclers.

Aus der Kanzlei Kaiser Sigismunds. Urkundliche Beiträge zur Geschichte des Constanzer Concils. Herausgegeben von J. Caro in Archiv für Oestreichische Geschichte. Vol. 59. Vienna, 1880. Contains some documents relating to Sigismund's visit in England.

Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hiberniae. By David _Wilkin's, Wilkins. London, 1737. Concilia._ A collection of letters and documents relating to ecclesiastical matters.

Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers, _Papal Letters._ illustrating the History of Great Britain and Ireland. Papal Letters. Vol. vii. London, 1906.

Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the _Stevenson, English in France during the reign of Henry VI. Letters and Ed. by J. Stevenson. Rolls Series, No, 22. Papers._ London, 1861-64.

Registrum Abbatiae T. Whethamstede. Ed. by H. T. _Whethamstede._ Riley. Rolls Series, No. 28. London, 1872-73.

Munimenta Academica. Ed. by Henry Anstey. Rolls _Munimenta Acad._ Series, No. 50. London, 1898. Documents illustrative of Life and Studies at Oxford.

Epistolae Academicae Oxon. (Registrum F.) Ed. by _Epist. Acad._ H. Anstey. (Oxford Historical Society.) Oxford, 1898.

The Paston Letters. Ed. by J. Gairdner. London, _Paston Letters._ 1872-75.

Official Correspondence of Thomas Beckington. _Beckington Ed. by G. Williams. Rolls Series, No. 56. Correspondence._ London, 1872.

Æneae Sylvii Piccolominei, Opera quae extant omnia. _Æn. Sylv., Basel, 1851. Opera._

Leonardi Bruni Aretini Epistolarum, Libri viii. _Leonardi Bruni Ed. by Lorenzo Metus. Florence, 1741. Epistolae._

Original Letters illustrative of English History. _Ellis, Letters._ Ed. by Sir Henry Ellis. Three Series. London, 1825-45.

The English Historical Review:-- _Eng. Hist. Vol. x. 1895. Correspondence of Humphrey, Duke Review._ of Gloucester. Ed. by Bishop Creighton.

Vol. xix. 1904. Correspondence of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Ed. by Mario Borsa.

Vol. xx. 1905. Correspondence of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Ed. by W. L. Newman, D. Litt.

Archivio Storico Lombardo. Vol. x. Anno xx. _Archivio Milan, 1893. Lombardo._ Pier Candido Decembri e L'Umanesimo in Lombardia, da Mario Borsa. Contains some original letters printed in an appendix.

Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum amplissima _Amplissima collectio. Ed. by Martène and Durand. Paris, Collectio._ 1724-33.

Reports of the Historical Manuscripts Commission. _Hist. MSS. Rep._ London. Various dates. Cited under the Number of their Report.

Political Poems and Songs. Ed. by Thomas Wright. _Polit. Songs._ Rolls Series, No. 14. London, 1861.

CONTEMPORARY CHRONICLERS WHO WROTE IN ENGLAND

Annales Henrici Quarti Regis Angliae. In H. T. _Annales Henrici Riley's Johannis de Trokelowe Chronicon and Quarti._ others. Rolls Series, No. 28. London, 1886.

Incerti Scriptoris Chronicon Angliae de regnis trium regum. Lancastrensium. Ed. by John Allen Giles. London, 1848. Certainly not all by the same author. The Chronicle of Henry V.'s reign stops at 1416, and is the same as the Gesta Henrici Quinti below. The most valuable of the three is the Chronicle of Henry VI.'s reign, probably written by a contemporary and a cleric, and therefore having numerous references to church matters. 1st chronicle, _Chron. Henry IV._ 3rd chronicle, _Chron. Henry VI._

Gesta Henrici Quinti. Ed. by Benjamin Williams. _Gesta._ London, 1850. The first part of this Latin Chronicle down to 1417 was written by a chaplain in Henry's army, being the same chronicle as Nicolas translated at the end of his 'Battle of Agincourt.' The continuation is by some other chronicler, and is largely borrowed from Elmham.

A 'Chronique de Normandie' is printed at the end _Chronique de of this chronicle, and is attributed to George Normandie._ Chastellain by the Editor, though this has been denied. It is, however, obviously written by a contemporary.

Vita et gesta Henrici Quinti Anglorum Regis, by _Elmham, Vita._ Thomas de Elmham. Ed. by Thomas Hearne. Oxford, 1727. Elmham was a monk of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, of which he was treasurer in 1407, and ultimately became Prior of Lenton, Notts. He died some time during the reign of Henry VI. The attribution to him of this chronicle is doubted.

Titi Livi Foro-Juliensis Vita Henrici Quinti. Ed. _Livius._ by Thomas Hearne. Oxford, 1716. Written at the suggestion of the Duke of Gloucester by an Italian attached to his household. The chronology is not always quite accurate.

Wilhelmi Wyrcester Annales Rerum Anglicarum, _William of 1324-1491. In Hearne's Liber Niger Scaccarii. Worcester._ Vol. ii. Oxford, 1774.

App. ix. excerpti Gilbert Kymeri. Dietarium de Sanitatis Custodia.

Historia Anglicana, by Thomas Walsingham. Ed. by _Walsingham, Hist. H. T. Riley. Rolls Series, No. 28. London, 1864. Angl._ Walsingham was one of the St. Albans Chroniclers, and wrote about 1430.

Ypodigma Neustriae, by Thomas Walsingham. Ed. _Walsingham, by H. T. Riley. Rolls Series, No. 28. London, Ypodigma 1876. Neustriae._

Chronica Regum Angliae, by Thomas Otterbourne. _Otterbourne._ Ed. by T. Hearne. 1732. A very brief record of events.

Annales Monasterii S. Albani a J. Amundesham. Ed. by H. T. Riley. Rolls Series, No. 28. London, 1870.

Contains-- (1) 'Chronicon Rerum Gestarum in Monasterio _St. Albans S. Albani,' by an unknown author. It Chron._ covers the years 1421-31.

(2) Annales of Amundesham. _Amundesham, Amundesham was Prior of Gloucester Hall Annales._ at Oxford. His Annales extend to the year 1440.

Historiae Croylandensis Continuatio. Printed by _Hist. Croyland. Thomas Gale in vol. i. of Rerum Anglicarum Contin._ Scriptores Veteres. Oxford, 1604. An unknown chronicler of the monastic house of Croyland.

Memorials of Henry V., King of England. Ed. by C. A. Cole. London, 1858.

Contains-- (1) Vita Henrici Quinti. Roberto Redmano _Redmayne._ Auctore. Redmayne wrote in the early part of the sixteenth century.

(2) Elmhami Liber Metricus de Henrico _Elmham, Liber Quinto. Metricus._

Liber de Illustribus Henricis, by John Capgrave. _Capgrave, De Ed. by F. C. Hingeston. Rolls Series, No. 7. Illustr. Hen._ London, 1858. Capgrave was an inmate of the Augustinian monastery of Lynn in Norfolk, and was a friend of the Duke of Gloucester.

Chronicle of England, by John Capgrave. Ed. by _Capgrave, Chron. F. C. Hingeston. Rolls Series, No. 1. London, of Eng._ 1858. The Chronicle does not go further than the year 1417.

The Historical Collections of a London Citizen. Ed, by James Gairdner. Camden Society, 1876.

Contains--

(1) Poem on the Siege of Rouen, by John Page. _John Page._ The author was present at the siege.

(2) Lydgate's verses on the Kings of England.

(3) William Gregory's Chronicle of London. _Gregory._ Begun by Gregory, but probably continued by another writer.

A Chronicle of London from 1089-1483. London, _Lond. Chron._ 1827. One of the series of London Chronicles of which Gregory's Chronicle is another. Lydgate's poem on the Battle of Agincourt is printed in the Appendix.

Chronicles of London. Edited, with an Introduction, by C. H. Kingsford. Oxford, 1905. [See Manuscript Authorities, British Museum, p. 472.]

An English Chronicle of the Kings' reigns from Richard II. to Henry VI. Ed. by J. S. Davies. Camden Society, No. 64. London, 1856. Contains--

(1) A Chronicle founded on the English _Eng. Chron._ Chronicle called the Brut by an unknown author who must have died between 1461 and 1471. It was used by Stow in his 'Annals.'

(2) An account of the Parliament of Bury held _Richard Fox._ in 1447 and the death of the Duke of Gloucester, by Richard Fox of St. Albans, who wrote it probably within a few months of the events recorded.

Three Fifteenth-century Chronicles. Ed. by James Gairdner. Camden Society. London, 1880. Contains--

(1) A Short English Chronicle. Written _Short Eng. probably about the time when it ends, Chron._ 1465. Not very full till Jack Cade's Rebellion.

(2) Historical Memoranda in the handwriting of _Stow Memoranda._ John Stow. Evidently copies of the original documents.

(3) Brief Notes in a late fifteenth-century _Brief Notes._ hand. Probably written by a monk of Ely.

(4) A Short Latin Chronicle. By an unknown _Brief Lat. compiler who lived in the time of Henry Chron._ VI. and Edward VI.

The Chronicle of John Hardyng, with the _Hardyng._ continuation of Richard Grafton. Ed. by H. Ellis. London, 1812. Hardyng was a servant of the Percys, and after Shrewsbury of Sir Robert Umfravile, whom he accompanied in the Agincourt campaign.

A Latin Journal of the 1415 campaign is inserted _Hardyng's in the above at the end of the reign of Henry V. Journal._

Caxton's edition and continuation of Higden's _Higden._ Chronicle 'In the Abbey of Westminster ... Accomplished the V day of August the yere ... MCCCCLXXX.' Higden died in 1370. The continuator was probably not Caxton.

Polychronicon. Imprented in Southwerke for John _Polychronicon._ Rey, 1527. An English Chronicle founded on the 'Brut,' and brought up to date.

CONTEMPORARY FOREIGN CHRONICLERS

Chroniques de Enguerrand de Monstrelet. Ed. _Monstrelet._ Buchon. Paris, 1826-27. A Burgundy in sympathy, Monstrelet continued the Chronicles of Froissart. He died in 1453.

Recueil des croniques et anchiennes istories de la _Waurin._ Grant Bretaigne, a present nomme Engleterre, par Jehan de Waurin. Ed. by Sir Will. Hardy. Roll Series, No. 39--

Vol. ii. 1399-1422. London, 1868. Vol. iii. 1422-1431. London, 1874. Vol. iv. 1431-1447. London, 1884. Vol. v. 1447-1471. London, 1891.

Waurin copies much from Monstrelet. He was present at Agincourt, and also was an eye-witness of Gloucester's inroad into Flanders in 1436.

Chronique des Ducs de Burgoyne, par Georges _Chastellain._ Chastellain, Ed. Buchon. Paris, 1827. A Burgundy chronicler very hostile to England. He possesses a far more literary style than the other chroniclers of the time who wrote in French. He lived from 1403 to 1475.

Mémoires de Pierre de Fénin. Ed. Buchon. Paris, _Pierre de Fénin._ 1838. A native of Artois who died in 1433.

Chronique du Religieux de Saint Denys. Ed. by _St. Denys._ M. L. Bellaguet. Collection de Documents inédits sur l'Histoire de France. Paris, 1852. A contemporary French chronicler whose work comprises the years 1380-1422.

Chronique de Jean Le Fevre Seigneur de St. Rémy. _St. Rémy._ Ed. Buchon. Paris, 1838. Le Fevre was in the English army at Agincourt. His chronicle has much in common with those of Monstrelet and Waurin, from whom he often seems to quote.

Chroniques de Mathieu de Coussy. Ed. Buchon. _Mathieu de Paris, 1838. Coussy._ An Hainaulter who wrote in the fifteenth century.

La Chronique Normande de P. Cochon. Ed. M. _Cochon._ Vallet de Veriville. Paris, 1859.

Chronique des Pays Bas de France, d'Angleterre _Chronique des et de Tournai, in vol. iii. of Recueil des Pays Bas._ Chroniques de Flandre. Brussels, 1856. A very brief chronicle of events.

Histoire de Charles VI., by Jean Juvenal des _Des Ursins._ Ursins. Paris, 1850. This author lived from 1388 to 1473.

Historiarum de Rebus A. Carlo Septimo Francorum _Basin._ Rege et suo tempore in Gallia gestis, by Thomas Basin. Ed. J. Quicherat. Paris, 1855. Basin was born in 1412. He visited England on an embassy to the Duke of York, where he also came in contact with the chief English nobles such as Suffolk, Somerset, and Talbot.

Chronica Nobilissimorum Ducum Lotharingiae et _Dynter._ Brabantiae ac Regum Francorum, auctore Magistro Edmundo de Dynter. Ed. by P. F. X. de Ram. Brussels, 1854-57. Dynter was private secretary to John of Brabant, and therefore a valuable authority on the history of the Jacqueline marriage.

Das Leben König Sigmunds von Eberhard Windeck. _Windeck._ Uebersetzt von Dr. von Hagen. Leipzig, 1886. Windeck was Sigismund's secretary, and accompanied him to England.

LATER CHRONICLERS

The Customs of London, otherwise called Arnold's _Arnold's Chron._ Chronicle. London, 1811. First published about 1502.

The New Chronicles of England and France, by _Fabyan._ Robert Fabyan. Ed. by Henry Ellis. London, 1811. Fabyan was a Londoner, who died about 1511.

The English History of Polydore Vergil, from an _Polydore Vergil._ early translation. Ed. by Sir Henry Ellis. Camden Society, 1844. Polydore was a native of Urbino, and was born in the latter half of the fifteenth century. He came to England as a subcollector of Peter's Pence in 1502.

The Pastime of People (1529), by John Rastell. _Rastell._ Ed. by T. F. Dibdin. London, 1811.

Hall's Chronicle, from Henry IV. to Henry VIII. _Hall._ London, 1809. Originally published in 1548. Based on documents, and especially useful for the proceedings in the Parliament of 1426. Edward Hall died in 1547.

Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, by _Holinshed._ Raphael Holinshed. London, 1808. Holinshed published his Chronicles in 1557.

The History of Great Britain, by John Speed. _Speed._ London, 1611. Speed lived from 1550 to 1629.

Annales, or A General Chronicle of England, begun _Stow._ by John Stow, and continued down to 1631 by Edmund Howes. London, 1631. Stow died in 1605 before his Chronicle was published.

MISCELLANEOUS AUTHORITIES

The Governance of England, by Sir John Fortescue. _Plummer's Ed. by C. Plummer. Oxford, 1885. Fortescue._

Ægidii Columerae Romani De Regimine Principum _Ægidius, De Libri Tres. Romae, 1607. Regimine Egidius was tutor to Philip le Bel of France Principum._ when he was Dauphin, for whom this treatise was written.

England and France in the Fifteenth Century, 'The _Heralds' Debate._ Debate between the heralds of France and England,' attributed to Charles, Duke of Orleans. Translated by H. Pyne. London, 1870. Supposed to have been written by the Duke of Orleans while a captive in England.

De Viris Illustribus, by Æneas Sylvius _Æneas Sylvius, De Piccolomineus. Strasburg, 1842. Viris Records of certain celebrities of his time by Illustribus._ Pope Pius II.

De Rebus Britannicis Collectanea, by John Leland. _Leland, London, 1774. Collectanea._

Antient Funerall Monuments of Great Britain and _Weever, Ancient Ireland, by John Weever. London, 1767. Funeral Monuments._

History from Marble, by T. Dingley. Camden _History from Society, 1867. Marble._

The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe, Fourth _Foxe._ edition. By the Rev. E. Pratt, N.D. London.

Monasticon Anglicanum, by Sir William Dugdale. _Dugdale, 6 vols. London, 1819. Monasticon._

Britannia, by William Camden. Translation and _Camden's additions by Richard Gough. London, 1789. Britannia._

Anglia Sacra, by Henry Wharton. London, 1691. _Wharton, Anglia A collection of biographies of the Archbishops Sacra._ and Bishops of the English Church.

The State of the Church and Clergy, by William _Wake._ Wake. London, 1703.

Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, by W. F. _Hook._ Hook. London, 1867.

History of the Abbey of St. Albans, by the Rev. _Newcome._ Peter Newcome. London, 1793-95.

Projet d'Assassinat de Philippe le Bon par les _Desplanque, Anglais, par M. H. Desplanque. In Mémoires Projet Couronnés par l'Académie Royale de Belgique. d'Assassinat._ Vol. 32. Brussels, 1867.

Das Bundniss von Canterbury, by Jacob Caro. _Caro, Bundniss Gotha, 1880. von Canterbury._

Lives of Nottinghamshire Worthies, by Cornelius Brown. London, 1882. W. H. Stevenson's article on Ralph, Lord Cromwell.

Statutes of the Order of the Bath, with _Anstis, Order of Introductory Essay by John Anstis. London, 1725. the Bath._

The Register of the Most Noble Order of the _Anstis, Order of Garter. Ed. by John Anstis. London, 1724. the Garter._

Memorials of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, _Beltz._ by George Frederick Beltz. London, 1841.

Historical Tracts, by Joseph Hunter. No. 1. _Hunter's Hist. 'Agincourt.' 1850. Tracts._ Contains a list of the commanders and their escorts taken from an old Muster Roll.

History of the Battle of Agincourt, by Sir H. N. _Nicolas, Nicolas. London, 1832. Agincourt._

Contains Muster Rolls of the English Army in an Appendix.

Chronicles of London Bridge, by an Antiquary. _Chronicles of London, 1827. London Bridge._ Now known to be by Richard Thompson.

The Baronage of England, by William Dugdale. _Dugdale._ London, 1675-76.

The Historic Peerage of England, by Sir H. N. _Nicolas, Nicolas. London, 1887. Peerage._

The Official Baronage of England, by James E. _Doyle._ Doyle. London, 1886.

A Genealogical History of the Kings of England _Sandford, from 1066-1677, by Francis Sandford. In the Genealogical Savoy, 1677. Hist._

BOOKS ILLUSTRATING THE HISTORY OF LITERATURE

The Middle-English Translation of Palladius De Re _Palladius._ Rustica. Ed. by Mark Liddell. Berlin, 1896.

Vite di Uomini Illustri del Sec. XV., scritte da _Vespasiano._ Vespasiano da Bisticci. Florence, 1859. The compilation of the famous fifteenth-century Florentine bookseller.

Scriptorum Illustrium majoris Brytanniae Catalogus _Bale._ Auctore Joanne Baleo. Basle, 1559.

De Rebus Britannicis Collectanea, by John Leland. _Leland, London, 1774. Collectanea._

Commentarii de Scriptoribus Britannicis, by John _Leland, Leland. Oxford, 1709. Commentarii._

Relationum Historicarum de Rebus Anglicis Joannis _Pits._ Pitsei Tomus Primus (all published). Paris, 1619.

Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, by Thomas _Tanner, Bibl. Tanner. London, 1748. Brit._

Die Wiederbelebung des Classischen Alterthums, _Voigt._ von Georg Voigt. Berlin, 1881.

Geschichte der Classichen Litteratur in _Heeren._ Mittelalter, von A. H. L. Heeren. Göttingen, 1822.

Histoire Littéraire du Peuple Anglais, by J. J. Jusserand. Paris, 1894. London, 1895.

History of English Poetry, by Thomas Warton. Ed. _Warton._ by W. Carew Hazlitt. London, 1871.

De Studiis Literariis Medislanensium, Auctore _Sassi, De Joseph Antonio Saxio. Milan, 1729. Studiis Literariis._

Historia Literario-typographica Mediolanensis, _Sassi, Historia Auctore Joseph Antonio Saxio. Milan, 1745. Literario- typographica._

Della Letteratura Veronese al cadere del Secolo _Giuliari._ XV. e Delle sue opere a stampa. Per il Conte Giovanni Battista Carlo Giuliari. Bologna, 1876.

Renaissance in Italy, by John Addington Symonds. London, 1901.

Studji sulle Opere Latine del Boccaccio, by _Hortis._ Attilio Hortis. Trieste, 1879.

Cent Dix Lettres grecques de François Filelfe. _Cent Dix Lettres Translation et notes de Emile Legrand. Paris, grecques._ 1892.

Le Cabinet des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Impériale, par Léopold Delisle. Paris, 1868.

Romania, edited by Paul Meyer and Gaston Paris, _Romania._ vol. XV. Paris, 1886. _Article_ Les Manuscrits Français de Cambridge, by P. Meyer.

The Athenæum Journal, November 17, 1888. _Athenæum._ Article on a manuscript translation of Palladius 'De Re Rustica' in the Library of Earl Fitzwilliam at Wentworth-Woodhouse.

A Catalogue of Editions of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, printed in the fifteenth century. By Henry W. Chandler. Privately printed (twenty-five copies). Oxford, 1868.

Early Dedications to Englishmen by Foreign Authors _Bibliographica._ and Editors in Bibliographica, by W. D. Macray. Vol. i. Part III. London, 1895.

Facsimiles of Manuscripts and Inscriptions. Ed. by E. A. Bond, E. Maunde Thompson, and C. J. Warner. Second Series. London, 1889-94.

The History and Antiquities of the Colleges and _Wood, History of Halls in the University of Oxford, by Anthony the Antiquities Wood. Edited and translated by J. Gutch. Oxford, of the University 1786. of Oxford._ Fasti Oxoniensis. Appendix volume to above. Oxford, 1790.

Annals of the Bodleian, by W. D. Macray. Second _Macray, Annals edition. Oxford, 1890. of Bodleian._

Pietas Oxoniensis, in memory of Sir Thomas Bodley, Knight. October 1902.

A History of the University of Oxford to the year 1530, by H. C. Maxwell-Lyte. London, 1886.

Froissart. Étude Littéraire sur le 14me siècle, par M. Kervyn de Lettenhove. Paris, 1857.

The Italian Renaissance in England, by Lewis _Einstein._ Einstein. New York, 1902.

MODERN HISTORIES AND BIOGRAPHIES

Lancaster and York, by Sir James Ramsay. Oxford, _Ramsay._ 1892.

The Constitutional History of England, by Bishop _Stubbs._ Stubbs. Oxford, 1878.

The History of England, 1377-1485, by C. Oman (vol. iv. of The Political History of England). London, 1906.

Geschichte von England, von Dr. R. Pauli. Gotha, 1858.

The History of England during the Middle Ages, by _Sharon-Turner._ Sharon-Turner. London, 1853.

General History of England (to 1654), by Thomas _Carte, Hist. of Carte. London, 1747-55. Eng._

Biographical History of England, by J. Granger. London, 1775.

Henry V., by C. L. Kingsford. New York, 1894. _Kingsford._

Henry of Monmouth, by the Rev. J. Endell Tyler. _Tyler, Henry of London, 1838. Monmouth._

Jakobäa von Bayern und Ihre Zeit, von France von _Löher, Jakobäa Löher. Nordlingen, 1869. von Bayern._

A Mediæval Princess. Jacqueline, Countess of _Putnam, A Holland. By Ruth Putnam. London, 1904. Mediæval Princess._

Histoire de Charles vii., par Gaston Du Fresne de _De Beaucort._ Beaucourt. Paris, 1881-91.

Le Connétable de Richemont, par E. Cosneau. Paris, 1886.

Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds, von Joseph Aschbach. _Aschbach._ Hamburg, 1838-45.

A History of the Papacy, by Bishop Creighton. _Creighton's London, 1897. Papacy._

MONOGRAPHS ON HUMPHREY, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER

Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. xxviii. An excellent article on the life of Gloucester.

Bilder aus Alt-England, von R. Pauli. Gotha, 1860. Contains a short popular account of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester.

Serapeum, vol. vi. Leipzig, 1845. Article by E. G. Vogel, 'Erinnerungen an einige verdientsvolle Bibliophilen des vierzehnten und funfzehnten Jahrhunderts,' pp. 11-16. A good short sketch of Gloucester, especially with regard to his patronage of literature.

Episodes in the career of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, and his first Duchess, and their connexion with the Abbey of St. Albans, by G. R. Wright. In the Journal of the British Archæological Association. London, 1871. Slight and incorrect.

Transactions of the St. Albans and Hertfordshire Architectural and Archæological Society, 1903-1904. Humphrey of Gloucester, by Mrs. Maude C. Knight.

Memoirs of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (As they relate to the Story of Mr. Phillips's Tragedy of that Name; and proper to be Bound up with it). London: Printed for Thomas Corbett, at Addison's Head, next to the Rose Tavern, without Temple Bar; And sold by T. Payne, near Stationers'-Hall, 1723. Price 6d. A curious little pamphlet of 32 pages, but totally devoid of historical value.

_II. MANUSCRIPT AUTHORITIES_

BRITISH MUSEUM

Stowe MS., 668. Heraldic and some other Collections, including the letters exchanged between the Dukes of Gloucester and Burgundy.

Cotton MS., Claudius, A. viii.

(1) 'A Chronicle of King Henry V.' The last part of a much longer chronicle, probably a continuation of the Brut.

(2) A schedule of the charges of the Monastery of St. Albans for making the tomb of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, and for perpetual masses for his soul.

Cotton MS., Claudius, D. i. Letters written by Wheathampsted, Abbot of St. Albans.

Cotton MS., Nero, D. vii. Register of enrolments in the Fraternity of the Abbey of St. Albans.

Cotton MS., Julius, B. ii. A London Chronicle extending from 1189 to 1432, and probably written about 1435.

Cotton MS., Cleopatra, C. iv. Among other items contains a London Chronicle, written in three different fifteenth-century hands, and covering the years 1414-43.

Cotton MS., Vitellius, A. xvi. A London Chronicle, in three different hands, and written at three different periods, covering the years 1399-1516, though up to 1440 it is almost identical with the two chronicles above.

These three chronicles all bear a strong affinity to Lond. Chron. and Gregory. (See Printed Books. Contemporary Chroniclers who wrote in England.) Since the references have been taken for the present work, all three, with the exception of the earlier part of Vitellius, A. xvi., have been printed in 'Chronicles of London,' ed. by C. L. Kingsford. Oxford, 1905. The references to the folios of the MSS. have been retained, as thereby the various authorities can be distinguished, and their verification does not necessitate recourse to the MSS., as Mr. Kingsford has marked the folios in the margin to the text of his edition. An excellent discussion of the dates of compilation and the relationship between these and other London Chronicles is to be found in Mr. Kingsford's introduction.

Harleian MS., 139. A collection of documents relating to the County of Chester.

Harleian MS., 2251. Collection of poems, including some by Lydgate.

Harleian MS., 2256. The Chronicle known as the Brut, continued down to the capture of Joan of Arc.

Lansdowne MS., 874. Heraldic Notes and Drawings, by H. St. George and Nicholas Charles, Lancaster-Heralds. Dated 1610.

Lansdowne MS., 1. Burghley Papers.

Arundel MS., 34. 'Registrum Abbatiae S. Albani. Register of Lands, Tenements, etc., by John Wethampstede and Thomas Rameyge, Abbots of St. Albans.

Arundel MS., 66. A collection of astrological and prophetical documents.

Additional MS., 34,360. Collection of poems, including Lydgate's 'Epitaphium Ducis Gloucestrie.'

Additional MS., 15,664. Topographical Collections.

Additional MS., 26,784. Various documents.

Additional MS., 29,729. Collection of poems, including some by Lydgate.

Additional MS., 4608. Collection of documents relating to the reign of Henry VI.

Sloane MS., 407. Astronomical tables and calculations of the fifteenth century.

Additional Charters, 44,531. Papal Bull.

BODLEIAN LIBRARY

Bodley MS., 263. 'The Falls of Princes,' by John Lydgate.

Bodley MS., 3618 (M. Museo, 119). Works by Pietro del Monte and Lapo da Castiglionchio, bearing dedicatory epistles to the Duke of Gloucester.

Bodley MS., 2143 (Auct. F., v. 27). Leonardi Bruni's dedication to the Duke of Gloucester, prefixed to his translation of Aristotle's 'Politics.'

Rawlinson MS., Classis, C. 813. Collection of Songs.

Rawlinson MS., Classis, C. 398. Richard Rede's Chronicle.

James MS., 30. Various Collections.

Tanner MS., 196. Monastic Collections.

Ashmole MS., 59. Collection of Poems, including one on Jacqueline of Hainault, by Lydgate.

Ashmole MS., 784. Notes on Churches, by Ashmole.

Ashmole MS., 856. Collection of Tracts and Documents, by Ashmole.

Ashmole MS., 1109. Miscellaneous Collection, by Ashmole.

Ashmole MS., 1121. Heraldic Collections, by Ashmole.

Ashmole MS., 1137. Heraldic Collections, by Ashmole.

Hearne MS., Diary. The diary of the famous antiquary and editor, Thomas Hearne, who became Assistant Librarian of the Bodleian Library in 1712.

Twyne Collectanea. Notes by the antiquary, John Twyne.

RECORD OFFICE

Patent Rolls. Cited as _Rot. Pat._

Duchy of Lancaster Records.

Chancery Inquisitiones Post Mortem, 25 Henry VI., No. 26. Cited as _Inq. P.M._

Inquisitiones Ad Quod Damnum, 20-22 Henry VI. Cited as _Inq. A.Q.D._

Ancient Correspondence, vols. xliii., xliv., lvii.

Ancient Petitions.

Roman Transcripts (Stevenson), vol. v.

Chester Roll, 1-20 Henry VI.

Minister's Accounts, Bundle 893.

Accounts, etc., Exchequer Queen's Remembrancer.

Miscellaneous Rolls.

Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer Foreign Accounts. Cited as _L.T.R. Foreign Accounts._

DURHAM UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

Durham MS., C. iv. 3. A copy of Pier Candido Decembrio's Translation of Plato's 'Republic, containing a letter addressed by the Duke of Gloucester to the Archbishop of Milan.

BIBLIOTECA MEDICEO-LAURENZIANA, FLORENCE

Cod. Laurentiano, Plut., lxiii. 30. Lapo da Castiglionchio's Translation of Plutarch's 'Life of Artaxerxes,' together with a dedicatory epistle addressed to the Duke of Gloucester.

Cod. Riccardiano, 827. A letter-book of Pier Candido Decembrio. Some of these letters have been printed in the _English Historical Review_, vol. xix.

IN A PRIVATE LIBRARY

MS. in a Private Library. A Latin Translation of Boccaccio's 'Corbaccio,' by Antonio di Beccaria, containing a dedicatory epistle to the Duke of Gloucester. The owner of this MS. does not wish his name to be published, but he has kindly allowed a photograph of the dedicatory epistle to be taken, and this is now in the possession of the present author.

HOLKHAM HALL

In a MS. belonging to Lord Leicester there is contained, amongst other entries in a seventeenth-century hand, a life of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, entitled 'The Historie of the high borne Renowned and most illustriously noble Prince Humphrie, commonly called The good Duke of Gloucester, by J. C. Philopatris.' J. C. stands for John Cooper, and the whole compilation is a mere copying of sixteenth-century chroniclers, and has no historical value. It has been referred to in the notes more as an indication of its scope than as an authority. Cited as _Holkham MS._

_N.B._--Various Manuscripts, which originally formed part of the Duke of Gloucester's Library, are alluded to and quoted in the text. These are described in detail in Appendix A., and are therefore not enumerated here.

INDEX

ABBEVILLE, 27, 97, 98.

Abingdon, 222, 223; St. Helen's Church, 448.

---- Henry, 388.

Aboo-l-Hassan, 345, 433.

Ægidius Romanus, 24, 286, 414, 415, 427, 435.

Agincourt, battle of, 20, 26, 28-32, 33, 48, 49, 69, 82, 90, 100, 102, 260, 282, 340, 390.

Albret, Sire de, 20, 29, 30, 32.

Alcuin of York, 386.

Alençon, Duke of, 29, 30, 31, 32.

---- siege of, 50, 51; truce of, 51; conference at, 75.

Alfen, battle of, 169.

Alfonso, Bishop of Burgos, 359.

---- King of Aragon and Naples, 375, 376, 421, 438.

Alnwick, William, Bishop of Norwich, 115, 179, 272, 329, 338.

Amadeus, Duke of Savoy (later, Pope Felix v.), 196, 197.

Amiens, 27, 130, 132, 320.

Anne of Burgundy. _See_ Duchess of Bedford.

Antigone, daughter of Gloucester, 335.

Appuleius, 363, 365, 368.

Aquinas, Thomas, 410.

Arc, Jeanne de, 214, 278.

Aretinus. _See_ Bruni.

Aristotle, 344, 350, 352, 354, 412, 420, 427.

Armagnac, Bernard, Count of, 70.

---- John, Count of, 75, 283, 285.

---- party, 11, 12, 13, 39, 73, 284, 318, 319.

Arras, Archbishop of, 148.

---- Congress of (1435), 245, 258; heavy expenses of, 262, 264; Gloucester's attitude towards, 318.

Arras, Treaty of (1415) between Burgundian and Armagnac party, 12; second Treaty (1435), 245, 246.

Arthur, son of Gloucester, 293, 303, 335.

Artois, county of, 141, 151, 154, 156, 247; raid into, 252; embassy from, 138.

Arundel, Thomas Fitz-Allen, Earl of, 34.

Ashley, George, 393.

Aslak, Walter, 191.

Athanasius, St., 377, 385, 416, 430, 435.

Averrois, 412.

BABTHORP, Sir Robert, 230, 237.

Babwell, monastery of, 294.

Bacon, Roger, 411.

Bailleul, capture of, 252.

Balbo, Scaramuccia, 365.

Bar, Duke of, 29, 32.

Barbaro, Francesco, 370.

Bardney, Abbey of, 8.

Basel, Council of, 328, 329, 351.

Basin, Thomas 45, 413.

Bath, Order of, 3, 4.

---- Bishop of. _See_ Stafford, John, and Beckington, Thomas.

Bavaria, John, Duke of, 93, 134, 142, 150.

Bayeux, 54, 56, 59, 60, 70, 322, 354; siege of, 49, 50.

---- Bishop of. _See_ Castiglione.

Baynarde's Castle, 445, 446.

Beauchamp, William, 44, 57, 75, 76.

Beaufort, Henry, Cardinal Bishop of Winchester, 14, 15, 78, 90, 105, 114, 123, 124, 125, 137, 168, 173, 187, 212, 214, 226, 235-239, 248, 271, 280, 307, 308, 312, 314, 316, 319, 320, 330, 336, 337, 345, 369, 397, 448; character, 105, 168, 185; designated guardian of Henry VI., 103; quarrel with Henry V., 107 and note 419; opposition to Gloucester, 109-115; influence predominant in the Council, 115, 116; constitutional pose, 118, 308; love of political power and money, 118; dislike of Gloucester, 162-164; orders Gloucester to be excluded from Tower, 170 and note 624; attacks London with armed force, 171, 172; misrepresents Gloucester to Bedford, 176, 236-238; defends his actions before Lords of Parliament, 181-186; resigns Chancellorship, 187; accompanies Bedford to France, 192; created Cardinal, 192; returns to England, 212; his bishopric called in question, 213; secures his right to sit in Council, 217; accompanies Henry VI. to France, 219; appointed to treat with France for peace, 221; becomes liable to the penalties of Præmunire, 225, 226; vindicates himself before Parliament, 232-234; favours continuation of war, 246; treats with French envoys, 259; his peace policy, 259; procures release of Duke of Orleans, 260; attacked by Gloucester, 260-264; plans marriage for Henry VI., 282; influence with Martin V., 324; his Church policy, 325-328; legacy to Oxford University, 397.

Beaufort, Lady Joan. _See_ Joan of Scotland.

---- party, 13, 282, 287, 288, 314.

Beaugé, battle of, 91, 97.

Beaugency, capture of, 100, 101.

Beauvais, 98.

---- Vincent of, 411.

Bec Hellouin, Abbey of, capture of, 70.

Beccaria, Antonio di, 395, 431; Gloucester's secretary, 377; translates books for Gloucester, 378; appreciation of Gloucester's literary taste, 378, 379; translation of Boccaccio's _Corbaccio_, 377, 378; translation of discourses of St. Athanasius, 435.

Beckington, Thomas, Bishop of Bath, 283, 284, 376, 388, 389, 418.

Bede, the Venerable, 410, 411.

Bedford, John, Duke of, 10, 14, 15, 16, 45, 80, 81, 85, 90, 116, 119, 193, 198, 221, 237, 259, 300, 312, 322, 327, 334, 338, 345, 346, 347, 376, 384, 397, 402 note 1333, 404, 416, 417, 418, 438; Knight of the Bath, 3; Knight of the Garter, 7; character, 105; favours alliance with Burgundy, 12; Lieutenant of England, 35 note 148; meets Sigismund at Rochester, 37; Regent of England (1417), 44; marriage proposals, 75; escorts Queen Catherine to France, 102; Regent of kingdom of France and of Duchy of Normandy (1422), 103; appointed Protector, 114; his salary, 119; alliance with Gloucester, 117, 118 and 118 note 445; marries Anne of Burgundy, 128; mediates between Gloucester and Burgundy, 132-164; summoned to appease the quarrel of Gloucester and Beaufort, 175-187; swears not to infringe the rights of the Council, 190; interferes to prevent expedition to Hainault, 201, 202; marries Jacquetta of Luxemburg, 235; his difficulties in France, 214; powers demanded if he is to govern England, 240, 241; quarrel with Gloucester, 242-244; results of his death, 245-248.

Bedford, Anne, Duchess of, 128, 130, 192, 235.

---- Jacquetta, Duchess of, 235, 236.

Bedfordshire, disturbances in, 211, 212.

Bellesme surrendered, 51.

Benedict XIII., Antipope, 126.

Benoist, William, 140.

Berri, Duke of, 9, 14.

Bersuyre, Pierre, 438.

Binham, Prior of, 338.

Biondo, Flavio, 388.

Blanche of Navarre, 75, 76.

Boccaccio, Giovanni, 343, 344, 362, 377, 378, 391, 413, 437.

Bolingbroke, Roger, trial and execution, 270-278.

Bonville, Sir William, 314.

Books, given by Gloucester to Oxford, 403 and note 1337, 404, 407 and note 1352, 412, 413.

Bostock, John. _See_ Wheathampsted.

Bouchain, 94, 141, 159.

Bourbon, Duke of, 9.

Bouteiller, Guy le, 72.

Boutillier, Ralph de, 139.

Boyle, Philip, 375.

Brabant, John, Duke of, 138, 142, 144, 145, 146, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153; marriage with Countess of Hainault, 92; character, 92; disposes of his wife's territory, 93; marriage complications, 126, 127, 131-136; recognises Duke of Burgundy as his heir, 133, 135; his indifference, 135, 136, 150; treaty with Burgundy, 165; death, 198.

Bracciolini, Poggio, 350, 370; love of the Classics, 345; visit to England, 345; impressions of England, 356.

Braine-le-Comte, siege of, 151, 152, 156.

Bredenaide, 253.

Bretigny, Treaty of, 77, 78.

Bristol, 394, 421.

Brittany, Duke of, 51, 130 note 482, 192.

Bruni, Leonardo, 'Aretinus,' 351, 368, 419, 421; translation of Aristotle's _Politics_, 352; shiftiness and greed, 355, 356, 388; letters to the Archbishop of Milan, 357, 358.

Buckingham, Humphrey, Duke of, Earl of Stafford, 249; mediates between Beaufort and Gloucester, 176, 179; turbulence of, 230; Captain of Calais, 269; commissioner of sorcery, 272; arrests Gloucester, 293.

Burgundy, John, 'Sans Peur,' Duke of, 29, 35, 40, 50, 77; instigates murder of, Duke of Orleans, 11; driven from Paris, 11; treaty with Henry V., 11, 12; meets Henry V. at Calais, 41, 42; secures Paris, 70; promise to relieve Rouen, 73; sends ambassadors to Henry V., 75; treats with Henry V. at Meulan, 78; murder, 86; his policy with regard to Hainault, 92.

---- Philip, 'Le Bon,' Duke of, 29, 40, 42, 126, 128, 146, 147, 150, 164, 247, 252, 311, 317, 318, 335; entertains Gloucester at St. Omer, 40, 41; joins Henry V. at Montreuil, 98; refusal to receive the Garter, 131; recognised as John of Brabant's heir, 133; truce with Charles VII., 139; supposed plot to murder, 140; his troops invade Hainault, 151-158; correspondence with Gloucester, 154-156; threatens to besiege Mons, 158; treaty with Brabant, 165, 166; prepares for duel with Gloucester, 166; declares himself Regent of Jacqueline's dominions, 198; English dislike of, 200, 201; truce with Gloucester, 202; annoyance at Bedford's second marriage, 235; peace with French King, 246; desires peace with England, 246; besieges Calais, 250.

Burgundian party, 11, 75.

Bury of St. Edmunds, Abbey of, 241, 291, 390, 448.

---- Richard of, 391, 419.

Cade, Jack, 297 and note 1032, 306, 445, 451, 452.

Caen, 49, 50, 51, 52, 56, 70; siege of, 45-48.

Calais, 26, 28, 32, 36, 39, 93, 94, 97, 138, 159, 235, 247, 253, 319; conference at, 40, 41; siege of, 248-250.

Cambridge, Richard, Earl of, his conspiracy, 15; executed, 16. Cambridge, King's College, 303, 435, 442, 446.

Camoys, Lord, 29, 40, 250.

Canterbury, 9, 37, 220, 423; cathedral library of, 345.

---- Archbishop of. _See_ Chichele.

Capgrave, John, 386, 387, 416, 417, 428; his _Chronicle of England_, 385; connection with Gloucester, 385; his _Commentary on Genesis_, 323, 385.

Carbone, Lodovico, 422.

Carentan, surrender of, 58.

Carlisle, Bishop of, 226, 227.

Cassidorus, 411.

Castiglionchio, Lapo da, 374, 375; translation of Plutarch, 372, 373; his _Comparatio Studiorum et Rei Militaris_, 373.

Castiglione, Zano, Bishop of Bayeux, 247, 354, 360, 364, 373, 417, 422, 436; admiration of Gloucester, 338, 374; introduces Gloucester to Italian humanists, 351, 372; represents Henry VI. at Council of Basel and Council of Florence, 351; buys books for Gloucester, 351, 352; correspondence with Decembrio, 355, 356.

Catherine of Burgundy, 12.

---- Queen of Henry V., 12, 75, 78, 86, 166, 215; marriage contract with Henry V., 87; enters London, 89; coronation, 90; pilgrimage to various shrines, 91; goes to France, 102; present at opening of Parliament (1423), 120; married to Owen Tudor, 256; death, 256.

Cato, 384.

Caudebec, capture of, 71, 72.

Caux, Chef de, 20.

Celsus, Cornelius, 363, 380.

Censorius, 365 note 1217.

Chamberlain, Sir Roger, 293.

Chandler, Thomas, 389.

Charles of Anjou, 283.

---- IV., Emperor, 35.

---- V., King of France, library of 345, 428, 432.

---- VI., King of France, 13, 50, 77, 78, 86, 87, 117, 417.

Charles VII., King of France, 70, 85, 97, 98, 99, 100, 117, 201, 260, 264; challenged by Henry V. to single combat, 26, 45; fails to meet Henry V. at Rouen, 75; truce with Burgundy, 139, 151; treats with English at Arras, 244, 245; peace with Burgundy, 246.

---- III., King of Navarre, 75, 76.

Charolais, Count of. _See_ Burgundy, Philip of.

Chartres, 97, 98.

Chastellain, George, 451.

Châtel, Tanneguy du, 70.

Chaucer, Geoffrey, 389, 391, 395, 396, 445.

Cherbourg, 53, 56, 106, 320; siege of, 60-69.

Chichele, Henry, Archbishop of Canterbury, 14, 37, 115, 139, 176, 179, 212, 239, 262, 272, 397; at conference of Meulan, 78; at coronation of Catherine, 90; opening speech in Parliament (1422), 113; mediates between Gloucester and Beaufort, 172; objects to Cardinal Legate in England, 192; crowns Henry VI., 214; one of the Duchess of Gloucester's judges, 271; quarrel with Pope Martin V., 324-327.

Church, attitude towards French war, 12; fear of Lollards, 195; attack on endowments of, 222.

Cicero, 344, 351, 361, 365, 412, 436.

Cinque Ports, 34, 36, 95, 137; Barons of, 89, 96, 220, 297, 336.

Clarence, Thomas, Duke of, 3, 7, 8, 13, 37, 78, 79, 80, 90, 98, 334, 347; favours Armagnac party, 12; summons jury to try Southampton conspirators, 16; at siege of Harfleur, 21-26; Constable of army (1417), 45; at siege of Caen, 46-58; at siege of Falaise, 53; in command of army, 54; opens up way to Rouen, 70; at siege of Rouen, 70-74; accompanies Henry V. to Mantes, 78; defeated and slain at Beaugé, 91.

Clement, Vincent, 323, 376.

Cobham, Eleanor. _See_ Gloucester, Duchess of.

---- Reginald, commonly called Lord Cobham, 64 note 271, 165 and note 604, 248.

Cods, faction of, 91, 92 note 369, 145.

Coimbra, Duke of, 172, 175.

Columella, 365, 368.

Condé-sur-Noireau, capture of, 57 and note 240.

Constance, Council of, 36, 42, 127, 134, 192, 324, 345, 430.

Constitutional development in England, 181, 193, 209.

Conversan, Count of, 146.

Cornwall, Sir John, 27, 71, 176.

Côtentin, 70, 337; expedition in, 55-59.

Coutances, capture of, 59.

Cromwell, Ralph, Lord, 176, 179, 282; member of Regency Council, 115; superseded as Chamberlain, 230; attack on Gloucester, 234; Treasurer, 237; commissioner on sorcery, 272.

DAMASCUS, John of, 412.

Dante Alighieri, 351, 391, 394, 413.

Dauphin, Charles the. _See_ Charles VII.

---- John the, 38, 91, 133, 447.

---- Louis the, 14.

Decembrio, Pier Candido, 323, 372, 380, 387, 388, 409, 412, 421, 426, 430; translation of Greek classics, 353; introduction to Gloucester, 354-356; translation of Plato's _Republic_, 354-357, 365; Gloucester's chief literary agent in Italy, 358; correspondence with Gloucester, 358, 365, 367; buys books for Gloucester, 363, 364, 365.

Deptford, 303, 304.

Devizes, Castle of, 444.

Devon, Thomas Courtenay, Earl of, 249, 314.

Dieppe, capture of, 74.

Disturbances, rising in Wales (1403), 6; rising in Wales (1423), 122; disturbances in London (1425), 170; disturbances in Norfolk (1427), 194; disturbances in the Midlands (1428), 211; Jack Sharpe's insurrection, 222, 223, 226; disturbances in South Wales (1441), 268; Kentish rising (1450), 297; disturbances in the West (1447) between the Earl of Devon and Sir William Bonville, 314; disturbances in York, Wales, Norwich, and Northampton, 314; riots in London, Salisbury, and Derbyshire, 314.

Divette, river, 60.

Dordrecht, 42.

Dorset, Thomas Beaufort, Earl of. _See_ Exeter, Duke of.

---- Edmund Beaufort, Marquis of. _See_ Somerset, Duke of.

Douve, river, 59.

Dover, 32, 34, 36, 37, 89, 95, 97, 102, 138, 229, 235, 247, 297.

EATON TREGOES, 2.

Edingen, Engilbert de, 146.

Edward I., King of England, 444.

---- III., King of England, 3, 12, 19, 89, 100, 245, 347, 444.

---- VI., King of England, 408.

Eltham, 175, 180, 183, 184.

Erpingham, Sir Thomas, 194.

Escallion, Sire de. _See_ Robsart.

Espreleques, 253.

Este, Borso da, 421.

---- Lionello da, 421.

Estouteville, 46.

Eu, 27; capture of, 74.

Eugenius IV., Pope, 329, 353, 369, 372.

Eusebius of Cæsarea, 411.

Everdon, John, 388.

Exeter, Thomas de Beaufort, Duke of, 70, 71, 342, 421, 444; Captain of Harfleur, 26; negotiates for marriage of Henry V., 78; in Paris, 98; governor of Paris, 101; guardian of Henry VI., 103, 115, 163; member of Council, 116; commissioner to settle dispute between Beaufort and Gloucester, 179; death, 189, 210, 212. Eye, Witch of, 205, 272, 273.

Falaise, siege of, 52-54.

Fanhope, Lord, 272.

Fécamp, 27; capture of, 74; Abbot of, 139.

Ferrara, 351, 379, 381, 421; Council of, 329.

Filelfo, Francesco, 367, 372, 377.

Finance, financial distress, 221, 237, 242, 258, 314; Lord Cromwell's report on, 240; commission on revenue, 240.

Flanders, 138, 247, 249; raid of Gloucester in, 251-253.

Fleming, or Flemming, or Flemmyng, Robert, 421.

Flint Castle, 274.

Florence, Council of, 351.

Florus, Lucius, 365.

Fortescue, Sir John, 263.

Franchise, restriction of, 217.

Free, John, 421.

Galen (Claudius Galenus), 345, 380.

Garter, Order of, 3, 7, 38, 42; Chapters of, 85, 102, 120, 131, 213, 222.

Gaucourt, Sire de, 22, 25.

Gaunt, John of. _See_ Lancaster.

Gellius, Aulus, 365, 412.

Ghislain, St., 159.

Gisors, 98; capitulation of, 79.

Giuliano, Andrea, 370.

Gloucester, Humphrey, Duke of, childhood, 1-9; visit to Bardney Abbey, 8; education, 8, 9, 346; created Earl of Pembroke and Duke of Gloucester, 10; his retinue in the 1415 campaign, 18-20; siege of Harfleur, 21-26; wounded at Agincourt, 31; receives Sigismund at Dover, 36, 37; hostage for Burgundy's safety at St. Omer, 40-42; his retinue for 1417 campaign, 44 and note 184; second campaign in France, 45-80; the Côtentin expedition, 55-70; probable numbers of his detachment, 56, 64 note 271; siege of Cherbourg, 60-68; marriage negotiations, 75, 76; Regent of England (1419), 81-89; his middle-class policy, 84, 85; friendship with James of Scotland, 86; organises Queen Catherine's coronation banquet, 90; meets Jacqueline at Dover, 95; his indentures for the 1421 campaign, 96 and note 383; third campaign in France, 97-101; Regent of England (1422), 102-109; first opposition of Beaufort to, 109; limitation of his power by the Council, 110, 111, 111 note 425, 115; appointed Protector of England, 113-117; alliance with Bedford, 117, 118; friction with the Council, 121; his conflicting ambitions, 124; marriage to Jacqueline, 126, 127; legality of his marriage, 126, 127, 127 note 472, 131-136; preparations for Hainault expedition, 136-138; reception in Hainault, 142-150; fails to relieve Braine-le-Comte, 152; correspondence with Burgundy, 154, 155; the significance of his Hainault policy, 310, 311; indifference to Jacqueline, 165, 167; quarrel with Beaufort, 170-180; indicts Beaufort before Parliament, 180-186; settlement of the quarrel, 187; relations with the Council, 189-192; suppresses lawlessness, 194-196; end of his connection with Jacqueline, 196-204; marries Eleanor Cobham, 205; attempt to increase his power, 206-208; attack on Beaufort, 213; Regent of England (1431-1432), 220-228; his good government, 221; suppresses rising of 'Jack Sharpe,' 222, 223; increase of his salary, 226-228; increased influence in Parliament, 231-234; quarrel with Bedford, 242-244; his raid into Flanders, 248-254; retirement from politics, 256-258; indictment of Beaufort's policy, 260-264; protest against the release of Orleans, 264-266; his wife's disgrace, 275; loss of influence with Henry VI., 279, 290; opposes Henry VI.'s marriage with Margaret of Anjou, 282-285; removed from Privy Council, 290; alleged malpractices, 290, 291; death and burial, 291-305, 433, 450-452; rivalry with the Beaufort faction, 306-309; connection with the Duke of York, 288, 307-310; foreign policy, 12, 13, 17, 18, 88, 125, 259, 283, 285, 286, 318, 319; home policy, 311-316; ecclesiastical policy, 321-332; connection with St. Albans Abbey, 129, 130, 268, 294, 329-332, 439-441; his character, 33, 34, 42, 49, 106-108, 160, 161, 322-339; military qualities, 48, 49, 68, 69, 106, 160, 254, 320, 337; lack of statesmanship, 106, 115, 156, 168, 221, 228, 308, 310, 318; patron of the Italian Humanists, 340-382; his reputation in Italy, 381, 382; patron of English scholars and poets, 382-396; connection with the University of Oxford, 397-409; literary tastes, 275, 276, 409-419; literary influence, 419-425; his books, 24, 286, 365, 381, 387, 391, 414, 426-428; offices, 9, 14, 34, 35, 64, 80, 90, 101 note 403, 114, 119, 194, 214, 234, 247, 249, 268; salaries and money grants, 9, 34, 36, 119, 163, 175, 220, 227, 257, 268; lands and possessions, 4, 6, 7, 9, 35, 212, 234, 248, 249, 258, 444-446; portraits, 446-450.

Gloucester, Eleanor, Duchess of, 269, 275, 315, 323, 331, 408, 418, 434, 443, 453; Gloucester's mistress, 165; marries Gloucester, 205; receives robes of the Order of the Garter, 248; accused of witchcraft and treason against Henry VI., 271; cited to appear before special commission, 272; trial and sentence, 272, 273; interest in the Black Art, 275; influence over the King, 278; position in the kingdom, 277-279; evil influence on Gloucester's career, 289; death, 274; portrait, 447; character, 335.

Gloucester, Jacqueline, Duchess of. _See_ Hainault, Countess of.

Gosfield, Church of St. Catherine at, 281.

Gouda, 197.

Gravelines, 40, 42, 251.

Greenwich, 303, 375, 444, 445, 448, 453; Gloucester rebuilds palace at, 234; in residence there, 188, 212, 221, 281.

Gregory I., Pope, 'The Great,' 343, 386.

Gregory of Tours, 386.

Grey, Lord, of Codnor, 56, 68.

---- Sir John, 47.

---- Lord, of Ruthyn, 314.

---- Sir Thomas, 15, 16.

---- William, 389, 421, 423.

Grocyn, William, 423.

Grys, John, 194.

Guarino da Verona, 351, 369, 370, 421, 422.

Guernsey, 62, 248.

Guisnes, 253; castle of, 141.

Gunthorpe, John, 421.

Hadleigh Castle, 7.

Hainault, Jacqueline, Countess of, Duchess of Gloucester, 38, 102, 103, 108, 120, 124, 125, 137, 165, 206, 282, 311, 321, 325, 326, 327, 335, 349, 384, 390, 453; early life, 91; marriage to John of Brabant, 92; flight to England, 93-95; sponsor for Henry VI., 126; marriage to Gloucester, 128; received into the Fraternity of St. Albans, 129, 130; the legality of her marriage to Gloucester, 133-135; return to Hainault, 141, 142; reception at Mons, 144; validity of second marriage recognised, 128, 144; left by Gloucester in Hainault, 159; English sympathy with, 164; letters to Gloucester, 165; appeal to English Council for help, 197; her divorce refused, 202; sympathy of Londoners for, 203; personal appearance and portraits, 126, 434, 447.

Hainault, Margaret, Dowager-Countess of, 92, 142, 143, 159.

---- county of, 96, 118, 121, 151, 158, 201; Burgundian ambitions in, 95; decides to support the claims of Gloucester, 45; Gloucester alienates sympathies, 150; failure of Gloucester's expeditions in, 159-161, 163.

Hambie, capture of, 58.

Harfleur, 39, 45, 48, 77; siege of, 20-26.

Harrington, Lord, 36, 227.

Henry IV., King of England, 1, 9, 11, 13, 21, 86, 312, 322, 342, 347, 397, 444; marriage, 2; claims the throne, 3; establishes the Order of the Bath, 3; conspiracy against, 5; second marriage, 6; battle of Shrewsbury, 6; visits Bardney Abbey, 8; death, 9.

Henry V., King of England, 7, 9, 16, 17, 18, 20, 26, 34, 85, 90, 91, 111, 113, 123, 129, 180, 208, 222, 245, 261, 284, 313, 322, 324, 397, 400, 444; popularity, 6; prepares for war with France, 11-13; receives envoys from the Dauphin, 14-15; the campaign of 1415, 21-32; negotiations with Sigismund, 38, 39; conference with Burgundy at Calais, 39, 40, 42; second campaign, 44-80; siege of Caen, 47; siege of Falaise, 52; siege of Rouen, 70-74; negotiations for peace, 75, 77, 78; Treaty of Troyes, 87; invites Jacqueline to England, 95, 126; third campaign, 97-101; death-bed wishes, 103; warns Gloucester not to quarrel with Burgundy, 104, 107; relations with Beaufort, 107 and note 419; objection to Cardinal Legate in England, 192, 324; his foreign policy, 17, 18; his interest in literature, 343.

Henry VI., King of England, 13, 85, 105, 206, 210, 239, 241, 303, 306, 312, 317, 319, 325, 340, 351, 376, 388, 397, 404, 407, 418, 435, 449; present as a child in Parliament, 120, 163; knighted, 188; coronation in England, 214-215; coronation in France, 220, 224; appeases quarrel of Gloucester and Bedford, 244; assumes the government of the kingdom, 257; manifesto on the release of Orleans, 267; marriage, 285; alienated from Gloucester, 289-290; in the hands of the Beaufort faction, 307.

Higden, Ralph, 411.

Hippocrates, 345, 423.

Hoccleve, Thomas, 343.

Holland, country of, 92, 129, 168, 199; Henry V. procures ships from, 13; Burgundian ambitions in, 91, 95; John of Bavaria's good government of, 142; refuses to recognise Gloucester, 145, 158.

---- Jacqueline, Countess of. _See_ Hainault, Countess of.

---- William, Count of, 38, 144.

Homme, John, Canon of Hereford, Gloucester's secretary, 388.

Honfleur, 46; capture of, 74.

Hook faction, 91, 92 note 369, 145.

Hotspur, Harry. _See_ Percy.

Hundred Years' War, 11, 318.

Hungerford, Sir Walter, afterwards Lord Hungerford, 56, 64 note 271, 115, 188, 226, 227, 230, 272.

Huntingdon, John Holland I., Earl of, 6.

---- John Holland II., Earl of, afterwards Duke of Exeter, 262, 265, 316; defeats the Genoese fleet, 45; at siege of Caen, 47; captures Coutances, 59; at siege of Rouen, 71, 72; quarrel with Duke of Norfolk, 211, 219, 230, 313; accompanies Gloucester to Flanders, 248, 249, 252; commissioner of sorcery, 272.

Hussites, Beaufort's campaign against, 119, 239; funds raised in England and Scotland for war against, 213.

Ireland, 3, 21, 313, 327.

Isabella, Queen of Charles VI. of France, 70, 78, 86, 166.

Isocrates, 372.

Italy. _See_ Renaissance.

Ivry, siege of, 76, 77.

Jacqueline, daughter of Count of Holland. _See_ Hainault Countess of.

James I., King of Scotland, 90, 169, 122, 261; prisoner in England, 85; at siege of Melun, 86; captain in English army, 98, 99; friendship with Gloucester, 122; marriage with Lady Jane Beaufort, 122.

Jeanne d'Arc, 214, 278.

Jersey, 62, 248.

Jeumont, Lord of, 146.

Joachim of Flora, 341.

Joan, Queen of James I. of Scotland, 122, 263.

---- Queen of Henry IV., 6, 137, 183, 257, 276, 278, 329, 338.

John II., King of Arragon, 76.

Josephus, 411.

Kemp, John, Bishop of London, afterwards Archbishop of York, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Cardinal, 203, 239, 271, 282, 290; on Regency Council, 115; Chancellor, 188; his address to Bedford, 189; his picture of the moral state of the country, 209; opposition to Gloucester, 227; Gloucester's distrust of, 262; favours continuance of war, 281 note 975; local war against, 314; appointed to See of York, 327; supposed portrait, 448.

Kempe, Thomas, Bishop of London, 407.

Kendal, Earl of. _See_ Bedford, Duke of.

Kenilworth, 274.

Kilwardby, Robert, Archbishop of Canterbury, 224.

Kirkby, Sir John, 50, 404.

Knollys, Sir Robert, 315.

Könisberg, 1.

Kyllynworth, Richard, 194.

Kymer, Gilbert, Gloucester's physician, 401, 411; report of Gloucester's health, 141 and note 524, 299, 300, 300 note 1042, 381; Chancellor of Oxford, 381 and note 1263; his motto, 410 note 1363.

Lancaster, John of Gaunt, Duke of, 1, 2, 3, 119, 300.

---- Humphrey de. _See_ Gloucester, Duke of.

---- House of, 18, 105, 316, 321, 347; insecure position of, 3, 5, 6, 7, 17, 223, 307-309; conspiracy against, 15, 123, 313; advance of constitutional theory under, 209; administrative qualities of, 210.

Landriani, Gerardo, Bishop of Lodi, 356.

Langham, Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Cardinal, 224.

Langley, 137, 194, 257, 329.

---- Thomas, Bishop of Durham, 110.

Latimer, Thomas, 423.

Launceston, Prior of, 329.

Lazarde, river, 22.

Leeds Castle, 271, 274, 418.

Leland, John, 410, 413, 445.

Lewis, King of Hungary, 35.

---- King of Sicily, 52.

Libraries, of Charles V. of France, 345, 432; of Charles VI. of France, 417, 428; of Canterbury Cathedral, 345; of Bishop Cobham at Oxford, 403; of the Duke of Milan, 364; of Rouen, 345.

Liége, Bishop of. _See_ Bavaria, John Duke of.

Lille, 202, 251, 252.

Linacre, Thomas, 423.

Lincoln, Bishop of, 197, 272.

Lisieux, capture of, 50.

Livius, Titus, of Ferrara, 380, 395, 413; praise of Gloucester, 31 note 137; author of _Vita Henrici Quinti_, 379.

Livy (Titus Livius), 346, 361, 375, 376, 414, 416, 438.

Lodi, Bishop of. _See_ Landriani, Gerardo.

Loire, river, 98, 100.

Lollards, 16; danger to Lancastrian dynasty of, 9; repression of, 10; charges against, 195, 222; government policy towards, 223; executions, 269, 270; Gloucester's attitude towards, 322.

London, 95; welcomes Henry V. after Agincourt, 32; visit of Sigismund to, 36; reception of Queen Catherine, 89; citizens support Gloucester, 84, 116, 170, 186, 319; Beaufort attacks, 172; welcomes Bedford, 176; reception of Henry VI. on his return from France, 229; Duchess of Gloucester's public penance through, 273; Queen Margaret arrives in, 285.

---- Bridge, 171, 174, 18O, 223.

---- Bishop of. _See_ Kemp, John, and Kempe, Thomas.

---- Mayor of, 112, 229; escorts Henry IV. to Westminster, 4; requested to support war with a gift of money, 14; receives Sigismund, 38; defends city against Beaufort, 171, 172; petitions Parliament to help Jacqueline, 203; takes part in Duchess of Gloucester's public penance, 273.

---- Tower of, 5, 122, 170, 180, 270, 319.

Lorfevre, Jan, 144 and note 537.

Lorraine, René, Duke of, 75, 283.

Louviers, capture of, 70.

Lucian of Samosata, 361, 372.

Luxemburg, Jacquetta of. _See_ Bedford, Duchess of.

Lydgate, John, 32 note 144; praise of Gloucester, 31; verses on Jacqueline, 205; translation of the Psalms, 343; quality of his poetry, 343, 390; _The Falls of Princes_, 300; _A Ballade Warning Men to beware of Deceitful Women_, 335 and note 1146; connection with Gloucester, 390-393.

Lynn, 8, 385.

Lyntall, Sir Roland, 52.

Machiavelli, Niccolo, 342.

Magnus, Albertus, 410.

Maine, 51, 52; added to France, 289.

Maisoncelles, 28.

Man, Isle of, 274.

Manny, Sire Olivier de, 53, 54.

Mans, Le, 54.

Mantes, 77, 78, 79, 98.

March, Edmund, Earl of, 16, 63, 122, 163, 309, 313; Southampton conspiracy, 15; claim to throne, 15 note 59; Warden-general of marches of Duchy of Normandy, 64; at coronation of Queen Catherine, 90; accompanies Henry V. to France, 97; member of the Council, 115; Gloucester suspicious of, 125.

Marche, La, 51.

Mardyke, capture of, 251.

Margaret of Anjou, Queen of Henry VI., 282, 284, 290, 297, 300, 305, 307, 390, 393, 418; marriage, 285, 286; sides with Beaufort faction, 288; poisons King's mind against Gloucester, 289; friend of Suffolk, 296; desires Gloucester's death, 301; her share of Gloucester's lands, 302 and note 1050; endows a theological Lectureship at Oxford, 397.

Martin V., Pope, 127 and note 472, 169, 197, 221, 234, 257, 278, 323, 324, 325, 326, 328, 330, 388; urged by Bedford to divorce Jacqueline and John of Brabant, 136; correspondence with Gloucester, 139, 149, 327; declares Bull of divorce a forgery, 139; forbids duel between Gloucester and Burgundy, 167; creates Beaufort a Cardinal, 192; declares Jacqueline's marriage with Brabant legal, 202; induces English and French to hold a Congress at Arras, 244; his contest with Chichele over Præmunire, 324-327.

Maufurney, Gloucester's secretary, 377.

Meaux, siege of, 101, 131.

Medici, Cosimo dei, 372, 376, 427.

Mela, Pomponius, 366.

Meulan, conference of, 77, 78, 87; siege of, 79.

Middle classes, popularity of Gloucester with, 42, 84, 110, 168, 172, 319, 320; popularity of Sigismund with, 42; growth in importance of, 43, 82, 83, 84, 341.

Milan, Archbishop of. _See_ Picolpasso.

Moleyns, Adam, Dean of Salisbury, 281, 290, 349, 388; prosecutor in trial of Duchess of Gloucester, 272; suspected of treachery to Gloucester, 306.

Mons, correspondence with Jacqueline concerning her marriage to Gloucester, 127, 128, 137, 138; begs Duke and Duchess of Gloucester not to enter the city, 142, 143; Gloucester's relations with, 146-148; disloyalty of, 158; refuses to let Jacqueline go to England, 159.

Monte, Piero del, 418, 427; Gloucester's influence on, 338; his connection and friendship with Gloucester, 369, 370-372, 388, 395, 421.

Montereau, bridge of, 86, 140.

Montfort, Lewis de, 197.

Montjoye, surrender of castle, 79.

Montreuil, 98.

Mortain, Edmund Beaufort, Earl of, 254, 256.

Mortimer, Sir Edmund, 6.

---- Sir John, 122, 123.

---- house of, 222.

Mussilwyk, William, 399.

Naghel, Fredericus, de Trajecto, 428.

Nantes, capture of, 74.

Nesle, ford of, 27.

Norfolk, John de Mowbray I., Duke of, 179; at Harfleur, 22; at Caen, 47; at Rouen, 71; at Ivry, 76; at Queen Catherine's coronation feast, 90; on the Regency Council, 115; in command of army in Hainault, 140, 141, 150, 153; dispute with Earl of Warwick, 163.

Norfolk, John de Mowbray II., Duke of, 211, 219, 230, 249, 311, 313.

---- county of, disturbances in, 194.

Normandy, Duchy of, 55, 59, 61, 64, 70, 74, 77, 80, 97, 99, 247, 265, 268, 269.

Northampton, 176, 178; riots at, 314.

Northumberland, Henry Percy, Earl of, 230, 314.

Norton, Thomas, chaplain to Gloucester, 393-394.

Norwich, Bishop of. _See_ Alnwick.

---- disturbances at, 194, 314.

Obizis, John de, papal nuncio, 325.

Occam, William of, 410, 429.

Odon, river, 46, 48.

Oldcastle, Sir John, 82, 88, 195, 222, 322.

Orleans, 101.

---- Charles, Duke of, 103, 248, 283, 307, 318; prisoner in England, 82; Beaufort wishes release of, 260-262; Gloucester opposes release of, 260 and note 913, 264-266; release, 264-268; literary retirement, 266; proposes that Henry VI. should marry Margaret of Anjou, 282.

---- Maid of. _See_ Jeanne d'Arc.

Orne, river, 46, 57.

Ovid, 412.

Oxford, University of, All Souls College, 377, 404; Balliol College, 9, 346, 387; Gloucester College, 384, 399; New College, 388; Divinity Schools, 397, 406, 407; Duke Humphrey's Library, 409; St. Mary's Church Library, 405, 426; gift of books from Gloucester to, 24, 257, 286, 381, 387, 391, 395, 403, 404, 407, 409, 410, 423, 426, 428, 432, 436; Gloucester educated at, 9; gift of book from Henry IV., 342; Henry V. student at, 347; Gloucester's protection of, 398, 400; Gloucester settles disputes at, 398-401; education of University unpopular, 402; appeals to Gloucester for books, 403; revival of learning, 406; gratitude of University to Gloucester, 408.

Papacy, the, 36; attitude to Gloucester's marriage, 134, 323; England's fear of encroachment of, 225; relations with Gloucester and Beaufort, 324-329.

Paris, 11, 31, 73, 79, 97, 98, 118, 138, 139, 151, 155, 202, 214, 224, 345, 369; refuses help to Harfleur, 24, 25; Sigismund visits, 36; Armagnac party driven out of, 70; Exeter, governor of, 101; Gloucester, governor of, 101 note 403; asks for help from England, 117.

---- Matthew, 432.

Parliament, 199, 216, 246, 282; measures against Lollards, 10; grants money for war (1415), 43; defines Regent's powers, 81; petitions Henry V. to return to England, 89; settles the Protectorate, 114; attainder of Sir John Mortimer, 122, 123; naturalisation of the Duchesses of Bedford and Gloucester, 128; loan to Gloucester for relief of Jacqueline, 163; at Leicester ('Parliament of Bats') (1426), 176, 178-187; refuses to grant more power to Gloucester, 207; restriction of Franchise, 217; Bedford vindicates himself before, 236, 237; petitions Bedford to remain in England, 240; at Bury St. Edmunds (1447), 291-293; at Westminster (1455), vindication of Gloucester's character by, 310, 443.

Pasini, Antonio, of Todi, 374, 375.

Paston, William, 194.

Patay, battle of, 214.

Pavia, Council of, 129.

Peacock, Reginald, Bishop of St. Asaph, 389.

Pembroke Castle, 444.

---- Earl of. _See_ Gloucester, Duke of.

---- Priory of, 281, 331, 439.

Penshurst, manor of, 258, 444.

Percy, Henry, 'Harry Hotspur,' 67.

Periegetes, Dionysius, 377.

Perkins, William, alias William Maundyvyll. _See_ Jack Sharpe of Wygmoreland.

Petrarch, Francesco, pioneer of new learning, 340, 343, 344, 348; desire for fame, 362; friend of Richard of Bury, inspirer of Chaucer, 391; library bequeathed to Venice, 407; Gloucester and the works of, 413.

Philip, Sir William, 230.

Picardy, 97, 151, 247, 317.

Picolpasso, Francesco, Archbishop of Milan, 323, 351, 356-359.

Piquet, Jean, captain of Cherbourg, 67.

Pius II., Pope, 333, 334.

Plato, 361, 365, 367, 387, 412, 418, 428; read in translations, 350; Decembrio's translation of the _Republic_, 354, 356, 360; Gloucester's appreciation of, 414, 420.

Pliny, the elder, 363.

---- the younger, 363, 426, 436.

Plutarch's _Lives_, 372-373, 374, 412, 428, 435.

Poggio. _See_ Bracciolini.

Poissy, capture of, 79.

Pont de l'Arche, 70; conference at, 75.

Pontefract, 444; Hospital of St. John at, 315.

Pontoise, capture of, 79.

Poperinghes, 252.

Præmunire, Statute of, used against Bishop of Lincoln, 197, 376; used against Beaufort, 226, 233, 234, 326, 327; Martin V. objects to, 324, 325.

Protectorate of Henry VI., limitation of power of, 208, 306, 307; end of (1429), 216.

Provisors, Statute of, 234, 261.

Puncherdon, Katharine, Gloucester's nurse, 8.

Radcliffe, Sir John, 250.

Randolph, Friar, 181, 183, 276 and note 955, 278.

Renaissance, the, 258, 341, 349, 419, 425; Gloucester's influence on progress of thought in England, 339; slow progress of learning, 345; progress due to Gloucester, 348, 420; introduction of the Renaissance into England, 258, 381, 383; spirit of, 386, 387; the movement in Italy, 341-344.

Richard II., King of England, 2, 3, 5, 15, 322.

Richemont, Constable de, 140.

Rimesture, 252.

Robsart, Sir John, 57, 64 note 271, 93 note 373, 137.

---- Sir Lewis, 66, 93 note 373.

---- Lord of Escallion, 93 note 373, 94.

Roos, Sir Robert, 283, 417, 418.

Roses, Wars of the, prelude to, 169, 175; Gloucester's influence on, 316.

Rouen, 54, 59, 68, 70, 77, 111; siege of, 70-74; library of, 345.

Russell, John, Gloucester's servant, 393.

St. Albans Monastery, 129, 137, 188, 194, 204, 207, 211, 278, 281, 294, 323, 329, 332, 336, 357, 384, 393, 395, 399, 439.

---- Albans, battle of, 310.

---- Croix, Cardinal of, 234.

---- Germains, 79.

---- Ghislain, 148, 159.

---- Lo, capitulation of, 58.

---- Omer, 41, 156, 166, 252, 253, 318.

---- Pol, Count of, 86, 143, 151, 252, 325.

Salisbury, riots in, 314.

Salisbury, Thomas Montacute, Earl of, meets Sigismund, 36; at Falaise, 52; at Rouen, 74, 97; supposed plot to murder Burgundy, 140; his military reputation, 200.

---- Richard Neville, Earl of, 230, 231, 293, 311.

Sallust, 412.

Savoy, Duke of. _See_ Amadeus.

Scotland, intrigues with Duke of Orleans, 82; promises help to England, 99; treaties between England and (1423), 121-123, 195; Beaufort's visit to, 213; Gloucester guardian of Truce with, 257.

Scotus, Duns, 410.

Scrope, Henry, Lord, involved in Southampton conspiracy, 15, 16.

---- John, Lord, 226; negotiates with Scotland, 221; proposes an increase in Gloucester's salary, as Regent, 227; Treasurer, 230; resigns, 237.

Seine, river, 20, 45, 71, 79.

Sele, Lord Say de, supports Queen Margaret and Suffolk, 298, 306; suspected of murder of Gloucester, 302; murdered, 288.

Selling, William, 423.

Seneca, 412.

Sharpe, Jack, of Wygmoreland, 222-226, 313.

Shrewsbury, battle of, 6, 7.

Sigismund, of Luxemburg, Emperor, 75, 91, 95, 134, 155, 259, 376; his policy, 35; desire to reconcile France and England, 36; reception at Dover, 36, 37; journey to London, 37; receives Order of the Garter, 38; refuses to recognise Jacqueline's claims to her father's inheritance, 38; Treaty of Canterbury, 39; results of his visit to England, 39; returns to Dordrecht, 42; his character, 42, 43.

Signorelli, Giovanni dei, Gloucester's physician, 381.

Soignies, 146, 147, 153, 155.

Somerset, John Beaufort I., Earl of, 122.

---- John Beaufort II., Earl of (created Duke, 1443), 282, 287, 288, 307.

---- Edmund Beaufort, Duke of, 307.

Somme, river, 27, 28, 97.

Sopwell, cell of St. Albans Abbey, 194.

Southampton, 15, 20, 44, 261.

Southampton conspiracy, 15-18, 223.

Southwell, Thomas, 270, 272, 273.

Stafford, Edmund, Earl of, 7.

---- Humphrey, Earl of. _See_ Buckingham, Duke of.

---- John, Bishop of Bath, 179, 180, 187, 188, 230.

Stanley, Sir John, 271 note 935, 273 note 939, 417, 418, 437.

Stiward, Sir John, 271, 273.

Stoke, John, Abbot of St. Albans, 75 and note 314, 330, 331, 354.

Suetonius, 411.

Suffolk, Michael de la Pole II., Earl of, 21, 25.

---- Michael de la Pole III., Earl of, 32.

---- William de la Pole, Earl of, 63, 85, 100, 230, 248, 287, 290, 303, 304, 307; supposed plot to murder Burgundy, 140; commissioner on sorcery, 272; ordered to France, 248; supports Beaufort faction, 282; charged with murder of Gloucester, 296-297, 302, 303, 304; supporter of Queen Margaret, 288, 302, 325; murdered, 297, 306; his share of Gloucester's possessions, 302 and note 1050.

Talbot, Lord, 47, 71, 176.

Talenti, Rolando, 354, 355, 356.

Tankerville, Henry Grey, Earl of, knighted, 188; marries Antigone, Gloucester's daughter, 335.

Taramo, Simon de, 139, 327, 337.

Terence, 412.

Thomas, of England, 419.

Thorigny, surrender of, 58.

Tiptoft, John, Lord, afterwards Earl of Worcester, 230; on Regency Council, 115; his humanistic leanings, 342, 353 note 1187, 421.

Touques, 46, 47, 48, 54, 77; siege of, 45, 48.

Trade, influence on French war, 12, 319; industrial activity, 82-84; increase in export of manufactured articles, 83; power of Merchant Adventurers, 83; commercial interest in foreign and home politics, 84; the importance of Calais, 247, 248; armourers and victuallers forbidden to raise prices, 248, 249; growing importance of merchants and traders, 341.

Troyes, Treaty of, 82, 87, 88, 245.

Tudor, Owen, 256.

Upton, Nicholas, 388, 452.

Valenciennes, 93, 142, 146, 148, 158, 159.

Valognes, capture of, 59.

Valon-Chapelle, 252.

Vancouvilliers, surrender of, 79.

Varro, Marcus, 363, 412.

Vegetius, Flavius Renatus, 415, 435.

Vergil, Polydore, 380.

Verneuil, battle of, 133, 200.

Vernon, capture of, 74.

Vespasiano da Bistici, 353, 358.

Vignai, Jean de, 435.

Vinci, Leonardo da, 371.

Vire, capitulation of, 57.

---- river, 57, 58, 59.

Visconti, Filippo Maria, Grand Duke of Milan, 353, 364, 365, 367, 368, 369.

Vitruvius, 365, 369.

Vittorino da Feltre, 377.

Wales, 6, 34, 122, 194, 215, 303, 313; revolt in, 314.

Walsingham, Thomas, 15, 270, 343.

Warigny, Mme. de, 158 and note 588.

Warwick, Richard de Beauchamp, Earl of, character of, 105; guardian and tutor to Henry VI., 103, 211; accompanies Henry VI. to France, 219; dispute for precedence with the Earl Marshal, 163; returns to France, 210; expedition to Calais, 249.

---- Henry de Beauchamp, Earl of, 290.

Waterton, Sir Hugh, Gloucester's guardian, 2.

---- Sir Robert, 40.

Wawe, William, 195, 395.

Westminster, 4, 9, 38, 81, 90, 176, 271; Abbey of, 111; St. Stephen's Chapel, 271.

Wheathampsted (John Bostock), Abbot of St. Albans, 129, 295, 328 note 1114, 329, 393, 395, 417, 427, 432, 454; quarrel with Abbot Stoke, 330; devotion to Gloucester, 338; Gloucester's literary adviser, 383; interested in occult sciences, 384; builds a Library for St. Albans, 384; gift of books to Oxford, 404; his _Granarium_, 411.

Wight, Isle of, 35, 39.

Willoughby, Lord, 47, 71.

Winchester, 6, 249, 261; negotiations at, 14, 15.

Windsor, 5, 7, 39, 110, 120, 131, 163, 222, 248.

Witchcraft, 269, 270, 271, 275, 276, 278, 322.

Withorne, John, 314, 315.

Worcester, Philip, Morgan, Bishop of, 115, 179, 225.

Wyche, Richard, 270.

Wydeville, Richard, 170, 180, 181, 182.

Wyot, Richard, 388.

York, Treaty signed at, 122; weavers of, 320; riots at, 314.

---- Edward, Duke of, 15; favours Armagnac alliance, 12,13; deputation to Mayor and Aldermen, 41; takes part in trial of Earl of Cambridge, 16; at Harfleur, 22; at battle of Agincourt, 27, 29; death, 32.

York, Richard, Duke of, 123, 163, 254, 262; knighted, 188; in command of army in France, 247; Lieutenant-general of France and Normandy, 269; supports Gloucester, 288; his manifesto from Calais, 298; influences Parliament to clear Gloucester's good name, 310.

---- Cardinal Archbishop of. _See_ Kemp, John

Yorkist party, 308; supports Gloucester, 13, 310; conspiracy of, 17; believes in the murder of Gloucester, 298, 299; Gloucester's death increases power of, 316.

Zano di Castiglione, Bishop of Bayeux, presents letters of Cicero to the Duke of Gloucester, 351; represents Henry VI. at Council of Basel (1434), 351; goes to Florence, 352; buys books for Gloucester, 422.

Zealand, 13, 91, 92, 95, 142, 145, 149, 158, 170, 199, 307.

Zenophon, 372.

Zierikzee, battle of, 170.

Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty at the Edinburgh University Press

Transcriber's Notes

The Errata provided by the author in the printed text have been applied to this text.

Minor inconsistencies of punctuation have been resolved. The spelling of proper names varies, and variants have been retained.

The Index refers to footnotes which are renumbered here, and the Index entries have been changed accordingly. The original entry for Stanley referring to "271 note 3" seems incorrect. The second note on that page does seem to be the correct one, and is now note 935. The entry for John Stoke, Abbot of St. Albans, refers to note 7 on p. 72. The note appears on p. 75. This has been corrected.

Minor inconsistencies of punctuation have been resolved. The spelling of proper names varies, and variants have been retained. The changes listed here were made where obvious errors were made by the printer.

p. 60 n. 254 Parlimentary _sic_ p. 178 'to be esed as towards his griefs,['] Probable close of quote. p. 202 she [she] Removed redundant word. p. 225 futherance/furtherance Corrected. p. 270 'crafte of egremauncey['] Closing quote added. p. 323 orthodoxy/o[r]thodoxy Added. p. 328 Arcdeaconry/Arc[h]deaconry Added. p. 329 Archeologia/Archæologia Corrected for consistency. p. 353 the latter'[s] friend Added. p. 431 Epist. Acad., 767[)] Added. p. 433 [']Cest livre est,' Added. p. 439 'day of anniversary['] Added. p. 454 respect he bore to Learning['] Added closing quote. p. 468 Historia Literario-typographi[c]a Added.

End of Project Gutenberg's Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, by K.H. Vickers