Humphrey Duke of Gloucester Part 17

[469] _Ordinances_, iii, 10.

[470] Polydore Vergil, 5.

[471] This story is told by Wagenaar, see Beitrage, 48, 49.

[472] _Chron. Henry VI._, 6. Allusion to advice given by Italian clerics justifying the marriage is made in Jacqueline's claim that Gloucester should be recognised as Regent of Hainault.

_Particularites Curieuses_, 77. Martin v. also in a letter to his representatives in England alluded to the existence of an opinion, signed by many persons under seal, to the effect that in the question of divorce justice was on the side of Gloucester. _Papal Letters_, vii. 27.

[473] A Latin chronicler in the Low Countries certainly says 'Quibus nupciis regaliter in Anglia celebratis' (Beitrage, 16). But this cannot stand against the unanimous silence of all other contemporary writers.

[474] _Cartulaire_, iv. 599.

[475] _Ibid._, iv. 318. Also _Particularites Curieuses_, 58.

[476] _Cartulaire_, iv. 328.

[477] Beitrage, 51.

[478] Hall, 116. Stow also, wise after the event, alludes to the marriage as 'a thing thought unreasonable'; _Annales_ 366.

[479] Rymer, IV. iv. 90.

[480] Dec. 20, 1423. _Rot. Parl._, iv. 242; _Lords' Reports_, v.

197, 198; Rymer, IV. iv. 103. Loher says that before the marriage of Bedford and Anne of Burgundy Humphrey had been a candidate for this lady's hand (Loher, _Jakobaa von Bayern_, ii. 141). He is followed in this statement by Miss Putnam (_A Mediaeval Princess_, 87), but I can find no authority for it.

Probably it is a mistake arising from the fact of Bedford's early candidature for the hand of Jacqueline.

[481] _St. Albans Chron._, i. 4, 5.

[482] _Ibid._, i. 66. The date given is 1423, but this is old style; cf. Cotton MS., Nero, D. vii. f. 154.

[483] Waurin, iii. 24-27. The Duke of Brittany was included in this alliance.

[484] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 387. This letter is here attributed to Beaufort, but merely on presumptive evidence.

It is given in fuller form in the _Journal des Savants_, 1899, pp. 192-194. It was sent to the Council through some English prelate, probably Beaufort.

[485] Beltz, p. lxii.

[486] The University of Paris saw the danger too, and besides the warning letter to the English Council, referred to above, had written both to Burgundy and Gloucester, urging them to keep the peace. _Journal des Savants_, 1899, pp. 189 and 191, 192.

[487] _Cartulaire_, iv. 354, 355, October 8, 1423.

[488] _Ibid._, iv. 341, June 16, 1423.

[489] _Cartulaire_, iv. 340, 341, 355, 356.

[490] Monstrelet, 551; Waurin, iii. 84.

[491] _Cartulaire_, iv. 368.

[492] Monstrelet, 581; Waurin, iii. 89.

[493] _Cartulaire_, iv. 380, 381. Jacqueline agreed to this on May 8, and Gloucester on May 28.

[494] _Ibid._, iv. 373, 374.

[495] _Cartulaire_, iv. 386-388.

[496] _Ibid._, iv. 109.

[497] _Cartulaire_, iv. 388, 389.

[498] _Ibid._, iv. 384-386.

[499] _Ibid._, iv. 391. This judgment was given on June 19, 1424.

[500] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 388, 389,

[501] _Cartulaire_, iv. 350.

[502] There is no evidence that he asked for it, but he certainly was not given it, else some record of it would survive.

[503] The Prior of Ely refused to lend 200; MSS. of Dean and Chapter of Ely. _Hist. MSS. Rep._, xii. App. IX. 395.

[504] _Hist. MSS. Rep._, v. 546; MSS. of Corporation of New Romney.

[505] _St. Albans Chron._, i. 8. This comes under 1426, but Jacqueline was not in England then. The editor changes it to 1425, and suggests that Jacqueline was over in England at that time. There is no ground for this suggestion.

[506] _Cartulaire_, iv. 408 find 410; _Particularites Curieuses_, 71.

[507] _Ordinances_, iii. 165; Devon, _Issue Roll_, 395.

[508] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 397; _Beckington Correspondence_, i. 281.

[509] _Cartulaire_, iv. 413; _Particularites Curieuses_, 73.

[510] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 398. Letter of one of Gloucester's followers to Beaufort. There were other copies of this letter addressed to other English lords.

[511] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 398.

[512] Monstrelet, 563; Waurin, iii. 126-128. The terms were despatched from Paris on October 28; Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, ii. 273, 274. Stevenson attributed this doc.u.ment to 1434 for no good reason. Owing to delays it did not reach Gloucester till November 18; _Ibid._, ii. 400.

[513] Dynter, iii. 854, 855; _Preuves de l'histoire de Bourgogne_, iv. No. XLVI. p. 53; St. Remy, 471.

[514] Monstrelet, 563; Waurin, iii. 129-131.

[515] Waurin, iii. 133.

[516] Stevenson, _Letters and Papers_, i. 279-285.