5). Richard II (1377-99)

Pre-reading task: What were the causes of the Peasants’ Revolt?

Born in Bordeaux, in 1367, Richard was only nine years old when his father died and he became the heir to the throne. The Black Prince had been a magnificent soldier and a man of great promise, but though Richard resembled him physically, he grew up to be a very different character. At the age of ten, Richard succeeded to the throne, and a regency council was appointed to govern on his behalf. Boy-kings were vulnerable figures, and there was no lack of contenders for King Richard's crown. But the popular suspicions of his uncle John of Gaunt's intentions proved unfounded. Despite all opportunities and temptations, John remained a loyal and valuable servant of his king, and the first major threat to Richard II's security came from quite ano­ther quarter.

in 1381 the English peasants revolted. The poll-tax, a 'head-count' tax on every male over 16, sanctioned by Parliament in that year, was the last straw for a people already over-burdened with the costs of the war in France. The peasants rose, and groups from Kent and Essex marched on London.

Their target was not the 14-year-old king, whom they claimed to support, but the advisers who made laws in his name; in London they vented their anger in rampag­ing through the city, looting and burning, and among the buildings destroyed was the Palace of the Savoy, John of Gaunt's royal residence. From the Tower of London, where he had been taken for safety, Richard II was said to have watched the flames as his capital burned. It was Richard himself who eventually took charge and saved a dangerous situation for the crown. At a first meeting with the peasants' leader, Wat Tyler, the rebels' demands were agreed to, from the abolition of serfdom to a pardon for those who had taken part in the insurrection. But at a second meeting between the King and the rebels, at Smithfield, Wat Tyler was struck down and killed in cold blood by one of the King's party. It was a critical moment - but as the horrified rebels made ready to fight, the young King rode forward. In a ringing voice, he declared that he was their King and he would be their new captain and leader. It was a master-stroke. The rebels flocked to follow Richard; and though his word proved false, his personal reputation soared. So, to his cost, did his opinion of himself.

As the King grew towards maturity factions began to develop at court, which Richard himself fostered. Like his predecessor Edward II, whom he increasingly resembled he became unpopular with some of his most powerful subjects; they complained of his lavish generosity to unworthy favourites, and they resented his inability to make war effectively. Richard's attempt at leading an army into Scotland, in 1385, was a failure, and he abandoned it in a matter of days. In the following year, while his loyal, powerful uncle John of Gaunt was out of the kingdom, Richard's critics acted. Led by another of his uncles, Thomas of Gloucester, and the Earl of Arundel, they forced the king to impeach one of his friends, the Chancellor de la Pole, and to submit to government by a 13-strong commission. It was the first step in a long struggle.

Richard's resistance to his opponents' demands led to open war. In 1387, after failing to bring a group of his favourites to trial as agreed, he was subjected to force. At Radcot Bridge, in Oxfordshire, his sup­porters' army was defeated by the army of Gloucester and the other barons, who had been joined by John of Gaunt's son, young Henry of Bolingbroke. Their triumph gave the Lords Appellant, as the opposition leaders were called, virtual control of the kingdom, and at what became known as the 'Merciless Parliament' of 1388 they condemned to death some of the King’s principal friends and supporters.

For a while it seemed as if the young king had learned by adversity. At 22, he declared intention of ruling in his own right, yet he appeared to remain on cordial terms with the Lords Appellant. He demonstrated, once again, that he had considerable political skills, notably in bringing a settlement to Ireland - always a troubled area - and in concluding a long truce with France in 1396. Richard also showed himself to be interested in the arts; he encouraged building-works and painting, and he was a friend of the poet Geoffrey Chaucer. His court was run in a magnificent style, and it had a cosmopolitan atmosphere, fostered by the king’s foreign marriages, first to Anne of Bohemia and later, as a widower, to Isabella of France. It was an elegant facade which Richard II presented to the world during this period.

In fact, he was secretly preparing a campaign of vengeance, and in 1397, with ruthless suddenness, he acted. His old opponents were arrested and Gloucester, his uncle, was murdered. John of Gaunt's son Henry of Bolingbroke appeared to have redeemed himself by service of the crown; but in 1398 Richard took advantage of a quarrel between Henry and another eminent noble to exile them both. It seemed that the King triumphed over his adversaries.

By now, Richard II was clearly becoming deranged. He turned into a harsh, extravagant tyrant, bending laws and extorting taxes to suit his own wishes, supported by a private army whose badge, the white hart, was his emblem. Even his political sense appeared to desert him. When the faithful and valiant John of Gaunt died in 1399, Richard made a fatal mistake; instead of becoming reconciled with his uncle's potentially powerful heir, Henry, he made a committed enemy of him by making his inheritance forfeit and extending his period to banishment for life. Then, to compound his folly, he sailed for Ireland, where renewed dissension had erupted, taking some of his strongest supporters with him.

Henry of Bolingbroke wasted no time. He swiftly raised an army and crossed to England to claim his rights. Landing at Ravenspur, in Yorkshire, he gathered eager supporters as he went, and when Richard returned he was soon overpowered and taken prisoner. It was the crown that Henry now sought; and in August, 1399, Richard II was forced to abdicate. Early in 1400, as the new century opened, King Richard was secretly murdered, in Pontefract Castle.

(from “The Kings and Queens of Great Britain” by Josephine Ross, L. 1982)

_{Richard III} came to the throne in 1377. He was just ten years old, and the eleventh King of England since William the Conqueror, almost 300 years earlier. Richard wasn't supposed to be King at all. The Black Prince, Edward III's eldest son, should have been King, but he died before his father and Richard was the Black Prince's eldest son. And so it was the ten-year-old Richard who swore, with childlike firmness, that he would solemnly preserve the laws and customs conceded by ancient and devout kings before him. It was John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, and the King's uncle, who carried the sword, Curtana, at the coronation. As a symbol. Curtana was, and has remained, all-important in the coronation procession. It is a blunted sword, the sword of mercy. Therefore the bearer of Curtana also carried the authority of the King's highest prerogative, mercy. The importance was not lost on those gathered at the coronation. It was John of Gaunt who became Steward of England and ran the Regency for the boy-King. But John of Gaunt was unpopular with the businessmen of the City of London, the hierarchy of the clergy, and the Commoners of Parliament.

John of Gaunt led the anti-clerical party in England. Fundamentally, he was trying to re-establish the authority of the crown and the Royal Family. In 1371, six уears before Edward III's death, John of Gaunt managed the removal of both the chancellor and the treasurer: the charge was maladministration. Their replacements were less efficient and even more corrupt.

Five years later, Parliament - since called the Good Parliament of 1376 -attacked the government and, in particular, Gaunt's cronies. But Gaunt had another Parliament called, fixed it by packing it with his supporters, and reversed all the decisions of the Good Parliament. John of Gaunt was able to use Parliament for his own purposes because, in the fourteenth century, parliaments were councils, meetings that were called only by the monarch, usually to get money. So the England of the late 1370s and early 1380s was leaderless, overtaxed and at war, and not very successfully so.

C+Throughout the summer of 1381 there was a general ferment. In May the violence broke out in Essex. It was started by an attempt to make a second and more stringent collection of the poll-tax which had been levied in the previous year.

The poll tax had been levied 150 years earlier. It comes from the mediaeval word 'polle’ or head. The fourteenth-century poll tax had traumatic effects. People avoided paying for every member of the family and when the returns showed that less had been collected than anticipated, household assessments were made: a sort of fourteenth-century means test. Furthermore, since 1351, the Statute of Labourers had frozen wages to рrе-Black Death rates. This Statute and the new poll tax were the root causes of what is now called the Peasants' Revolt which occurred in 1381.

C+In Kent the peasants marched through Rochester and Maidstone, burning manorial and taxation records on their way. At Maidstone they released the agitator, John Ball, from the episcopal prison, and were joined by a military adventurer with gifts and experience of leadership, Wat Tyler. The royal Council was bewildered and inactive. Early in June the main body of rebels from Essex and Kent moved on London. Here they found support... the alderman in charge of London Bridge did nothing to defend it, and Aldgate was opened treacherously to a band of Essex rioters. For three days the city was in confusion. Foreigners were murdered; two members of the council, Simon Sudbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor, and Sir Robert Hales, the Treasurer, were dragged from the Tower beheaded on Tower Hill; the Savoy palace of John of Gaunt was burnt; Lambeth and Southward were sacked. But the loyal citizen body rallied round the mayor and at Smithfield the young King faced the rebel leaders. Among the insurgents there seems to have been general loyalty to the sovereign. Their demands were reasonable but disconcerting. They asked for the repeal of oppressive statutes, for the abolition of villeinage, and for the division of Church property. In particular, they asserted that no man ought to be a serf or do labour services to a seigneur, but pay four pence an acre a year for his land and not have to serve any Man against his will, but only by agreement. King Richard, who was just fourteen, called everyone together at Smithfield, or Smooth-field, as it was. And by St Bartholomew's, a house of church canons, he stopped. In front of him on the east side were the people, the Commoners, the Commons. A chronicler of the time reports what happened.

*And when he was called by the mayor of London, William Walworth, Wat Tyler of Maidstone came to the King in haughty fashion, mounted on a little horse so that he could be seen by the Commons. And when he had dismounted, he halfbent his knee and took the King by the hand, and shook his arm forcibly and roughly saying to him, 'Brother, be of good comfort and joyful, for you shall have within the next fortnight 40,000 more of the Commons than you have now and we shall be good companions.' And the King said to Wat, 'Why will you not go back to your country?' Wat Tyler (whose name was also spelled Tyghler) listed their demands and the King appears to have said that, within reason, everything they wanted would be granted. He then told Tyler to go home to Kent and to lead his revolutionaries out of London.

*At this time, a yeoman of Kent, who was among the King's retinue, asked to see Wat, the leader of the Commons; and when Wat was pointed out, he said openly that he was the greatest thief and robber in all Kent. Wat heard diese words and commanded him to come out to him, shaking his head at him in a sign of malice. Wat would have run him through with his dagger and killed him in the King's presence.

Because of this, the mayor of London, William Walworth by name, reasoned with the said Wat for his violent behaviour and contempt done in the King's presence, and arrested him. And the said Wat struck the mayor with his dagger in the stomach with great anger, but as God would have it, the mayor was wearing armour. The said mayor drew his cutlass and struck back at the said Wat and gave him a deep cut on the neck and then a great cut on the head. A yeoman of the King's household drew his sword and ran Wat two or three times through, mortally wounding him. And the said Wat spurred his horse, crying to the Commons to avenge him, and the horse carried him four score paces, and there he fell to the ground half dead. The Commons did not come to Wat's help and meanwhile the mayor took to his horse and to the City. The City of London was, even then, split into twenty-four wards. Each had a watch commander, and each commander was instructed to tell everyone to arm themselves and rush to the King's side at Smithfield.

*And when the lord mayor came to Smithfield, he could not find the said Wat Tyler. He was told that Tyler had been carried to the hospital of the poorfolks near St Bartholomew's and was put to bed in the chamber of the master of the hospital. And the mayor went thither and found him and had him carried to Smithfield in the presence of his fellows, and there he was beheaded. And the mayor caused his head to be set upon a pole and carried before him to the King. And when the Commons saw their leader, Wat Tyler, was dead in such a manner, they fell like men discomforted, crying to the King for mercy.

Tyler received such support in London only partly because of his own cause. The jealousies between trade guilds within the City meant that many London­ers supported him. But the King cancelled the promised reforms, by proclama­tion, so the Peasants' Revolt failed to achieve its objectives, although it did kill the poll tax. But the uprisings of 1381 showed just how much the people had lost confidence in those who governed them, and in John of Gaunt in particular. At the same time the influence of a new aristocracy - one that had been developing for at least a generation - was growing. A handful of families, all connected by blood with the throne: the Lancasters, the Yorks, the Gloucesters, Cornwall and Clarence, were beginning to make their mark. Yet it was still the King's Court and royal judges who restored order when the feudal classes lost their nerve and, by 1389, the King was in his early twenties and, at last, had begun to rule for himself.

John of Gaunt left England to pursue his claim to the kingdom of Castile, a claim he thought himself entitled to through his second wife, Constance of Castile, the heiress daughter of Pedro the Cruel. He left his son, Henry Bolingbroke, in charge of his English estates, estates inherited when his first wife, Blanche of Lancaster, died.

C+It was not till he was twenty that Richard determined to be complete master of his Council, and in particular to escape the control of his uncles. His Household and Court around it were deeply interested in his assumption of power. Its chiefs were the Chancellor, Michael de la Hole, Chief Justice Tresilian, and Alexander Neville, Archbishop of York. Behind them Simon Hurley, Richard's tutor and close intimate, was probably the guide. A group of younger nobles threw in their fortunes with the Court. Of diese the head was Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, who now played a part resembling that of Gaveston under Edward II. The King spread his favours among his adherents and de Vere was soon created Duke of Ireland. This was plainly a political challenge to the magnates of the Council. Ireland was a reservoir of men and supplies, beyond the control of Parliament and the nobility, which could be used for the mastery of England.

The accumulation of Household and Government offices by the clique around the King and his effeminate favourite affronted the feudal party, and to some extent the national spirit. A purge of the Civil Service, supposed to be the source alike of the King's errors and of his strength, was instituted; and we may note that Geoffrey Chaucer, his equerry, but famous for other reasons, lost his two posts in the Customs.

When the commissioners presently compelled the King to dismiss his personal friends, Richard, in deep distress, withdrew from London. He sought to marshal his forces for civil war. And so it was that Thomas of Woodscock, Duke of Gloucester, the youngest and most ambitious brother of the absent John of Gaunt, joined forces with the young Henry Bolingbroke and with Mowbray of Nottingham and the Earls of Arundel and Warwick, and marched on London. They called themselves the Lords Appellant and accused Richard's closest advisers otreason. One of those accused, de Vere, the King's favourite, raised an army in Cheshire and marched to the King's rescue. They didn't get very far. Just before Christmas Day, 1387, troops led by Gloucester and Bolingbroke scattered them at Radcot Bridge in Oxfordshire. The Lords Appellant were in command and, in February 1388, they summoned what became known as the Merciless Parliament. It was a good name. The King's friends, Tresilian, Burley and Brembler, were executed, hanged, drawn and quartered.

C+ Only the person of the Кing was respected, and that by the narrowest of margins. We must suppose that this treatment produced a marked impression upon his [Richard's | mind. He brooded upon his wrongs, and also upon his past mistakes. He laid his plans for revenge and for his own rights with far more craft than before. For a year there was a sinister lull. The lull was, according to Thomas Walsingham's Historia Anglicana, broken in the month of May 1389.

*The King, led by the advice of certain whisperers, convoked the magnates and many worthy men of the realm together, and suddenly entered the council house, where his magnates were awaitng him. Seating himself, he asked them how old he was. They replied that he was now twenty-two years old. ‘Then,’ e said, 'I am full age to govern my house and household and also my kingdom. It seems to me unjust that my state should be worse than that of the last person in the kingdom Surely any heir of my kingdom, when he has reached the age of twenty-one years and his parent is dead, is permitted to conduct his own affairs freely. Why therefore should this be denied to me when it is conceded by law to anyone of lower rank?'

The astonished barons replied that nothing ought to be subtracted from his rights, and that he ought to have the rule of his kingdom, which was due to him as his right. At this the King exclaimed: "Well! Know that I have for long ruled by tutors and it was not possible for me to act at all, or, almost at all, without them Now henceforth, I will remove those from my council, and, as heir of lawful age, I will appoint whom I will to my council and conduct my own affairs. And I order that in the first place, the chancellor should resign to me his seal. For the next eight years, England was well and quietly governed. John of Gaunt returned from Castile and perhaps his still-great presence reduced the influence of the Lords Appellant. In 1394, John of Gaunt went to Ireland. The English domain, known as the Pale, was yet again under threat. The 1366 Statute of Kilkenny forbade English settlers to intermarry, or adopt Irish customs or language. But the English authority ran only around Dublin, including Meath Louth and Kilkenny. Certainly by the sixteenth century, this area was commonly known as the Pale, as was the English area around Calais. Hence anything outside the domain was 'beyond the Pale'.

For all his weaknesses, Richard saw that the difficulties of Ireland had as much to do with the English administration as with the eccentric and sometimes barbarous behaviour of the Irish themselves. He also saw Ireland as a source of support.

In the same year, 1394, Richard's wife, Anne of Bohemia, died. Two years later he married Isabella, the seven-year-old daughter of the French King, Charles VI. This political marriage sealed a thirty-year truce with France, and a secret clause meant that, should Richard be opposed at home, France would come to his aid.

C+ Irish expedition had been the first stage towards the establishment of a despotism; the alliance with France was the second. In January 1397, Richard decided at last to strike. Arundel and Gloucester saw the King advancing upon them in cold hatred . . . Arundel and some others of his associates were declared traitors and accorded only the courtesy of decapitation. Warwick was exiled to the Isle of Man. Gloucester, arrested and taken to Calais, was there murdered by Richard's agents .

Parliament was called only to legalize diese events. It was found to be so packed and so minded that there was nothing it would not do for the King ... it suspended almost every constitutional right and privilege gained in the preceding century. . .

The relations between Gaunt's son, Henry, the King's cousin and contemporary, passed through drama into tragedy. A quarrel arose between Henry and Thomas Mowbray, now Duke of Norfolk. Henry accused Mowbray of treasonable language. Each, when challenged, gave lie to the other. Trial by battle appeared the correct solution but the King, exasperating the spectators of all classes who had gathered in high expectation to see the sport, forbade the combat, and exiled Mowbray for life and Henry for a decade. Mowbray soon died; but Henry, astounded by what he deemed ingratitude and injustice, lived arid schemed in France.

And then, it seems, Richard lost his reason. John of Gaunt died in February 1399 and instead of allowing Henry Bolingbroke to inherit his father's vast estates by proxy, Richard took them over. And then, totally oblivious to the probable consequences, Richard set off on an expedition to Ireland, leaving his kingdom unguarded.

C+In July Henry of Lancaster, as he had now become, landed in Yorkshire, declar-ing that he had only come to claim his lawful rights as heir to his venerated father. He was immediately surrounded by adherents, particu­larly from the Lancaster estates, and the all-powerful Northern lords, led by the Earl of Northumberland. It took some time for the news to reach Richard in the depths of Ireland. Having landed in England on 27 July he made a rapid three weeks' march through north Wales in an attempt to gather forces. What he saw convinced him that all was over. The whole Structure of his power, so patiently and subtly built up, had vanished as if by enchantment. The Welsh, who would have stood by him, could not faсе the advancing power of what was now all England. At Flint Castle he [Richard] submitted to Henry. He rode through London as a captive. His abdication was extorted; his death had become inevitable.

Many still mourn Richard II as a romantic figure, but it was the job of the King to stand between oppression and the people. Between 1389 and 1397 Richard protected his people well, but later he hounded them for revenge and corrupred the role of Parliament. He usurped the judiciary and he acted in the belief that the very lives of his people were subject to his every whim. That was not kingship. That was tyranny.

(from “This Sceptrd Isle” by Cristopher Lee, L. 1990)