commons actually brought forward a definite proposal to confiscate the whole property of the bishops and religious corporations, and to employ it to endow fifteen earls, fifteen hundred knights, six thousand esquires, and a hundred hospitals, an arrangement which would still leave £20,000 a year for the relief of the revenue. The plan, however, broke down, not apparently from any regard for the church, but because it was obviously dangerous to add to the number of an already too powerful baronage. Both Henry and his eldest son were against it, and the suggestion was not renewed. Arundel, however, was by no means satisfied with a mere passive resistance. In his office of archbishop, he carried the war vigorously into the enemy's country; and in 1409, by the authority of a church council, published a series of constitutions for the church, by one of which the Bible was forbidden to be translated into English until such a translation had been approved by the bishop of the diocese or a provincial synod; while another forbade all disputes on points determined by the church.

Health.

After the year 1405, a great change took place in the king's health. Opinions differ as to his malady; but it is certain that he became a hopeless invalid, and apparently he suffered some diminution in Failure of his mental as well as his physical capacity. At such times the King's the chief direction of affairs fell into the hands of the Prince of Wales, whose life was divided between active service in the Welsh or Scottish marches, and official business as chairman of the council in London. Next to the Prince, archbishop Arundel was decidedly the most important man in the country, and a steady friend to Henry; but his power was subject to the rivalry of the Beauforts.

John Beaufort, earl of Somerset, son of John of Gaunt, died in 1410, leaving two sons, young John and Edmund, and a daughter Joan. He was not a man of much mark, but his younger The brothers, Henry and Thomas, possessed more ability and Beauforts. ambition. Henry had been made bishop of Lincoln in 1398, and in 1404 he succeeded William of Wykeham as bishop of Winchester. He is said to have been tutor to the Prince of Wales, and he was through life his intimate friend. Thomas distinguished himself both as an admiral and a soldier, especially at Agincourt, and was ultimately created duke of Exeter. By the act of legitimation passed under Richard 11., the right of the Beauforts to count as legitimate children of John of Gaunt was not limited by exclusion from the crown, but when it was confirmed by Henry in 1407, he interpolated the words excepta dignitate regale, which, however, could not be regarded as having the force of law. Owing probably to the circumstances of their birth, the Beauforts always

hung closely together, and, although friendly to the Prince of Wales, it was always possible that they might take a line of their own. Arundel, also, seems to have been less of a constitutional minister and more closely allied to the ideas of the old nobility than were the Beauforts, and to have been, far more than even Henry Beaufort, a representative of the separate interests of the church. We therefore find the chancellorship sometimes in the hands of Arundel, sometimes in that of a Beaufort, according to the policy in favour at the time, and also according as Henry or his son had the greater influence in the council. In 1407 Arundel became chancellor, and held the post till 1409. In that year, however, his promulgation of 'the constitutions,' and a quarrel which followed with

Prince Oxford university, in which the Prince of Wales, himself Henry. an Oxford man, took the opposite side, made him unpopular, and the office was given to Thomas Beaufort. He held the place till 1412, during which time it is probable that the prince really governed in his father's name; but in that year a crisis occurred, brought on, according to one account, by a formal suggestion by the prince and the Beauforts that Henry should definitely resign the crown. What happened, however, is obscure, but Arundel came back to power; the Prince of Wales gave up the presidency of the council, and his place was taken by his second brother, Thomas, duke of Clarence, who appears to have always been against the Beauforts. Moreover, the expedition to France, which was sent to aid the Orleanists, was entrusted to the second brother. The change, however, was only temporary. Henry grew rapidly worse, and in March 1413 he died, leaving a name which ought to stand very high among English sovereigns, but has been much overclouded by pity for the misfortunes of his predecessor, and by the admiration excited by the showy exploits of his brilliant son.

CHAPTER II

HENRY V.: 1413-1422

Born 1388; married 1420, Katharine of France.

The French Wars-Agincourt-Siege of Rouen-Treaty of Troyes.

TRADITION records that at some period of his life Henry the Fifth led a wild and riotous life. If this is true, it probably refers to the last year of his father's reign, when the Prince's enforced idleness Traditions of put him into the way of temptation. At all other times Early Life. authentic records show that he was far too busy with serious work to have time for dissipation. Whether the story, however, is anything more than a myth is immaterial; at most, the riotous living was an interlude of idleness between two periods of hard work, and never after his accession did Henry show the slightest wavering in his determination to be, according to the ideas of his age, a thoroughly good king.

Concilia

Measures.

In accordance with his preference for the Beauforts, the first act of the new king was to give the chancellorship to his uncle, Henry Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, a change which left Arundel free to attend to his archiepiscopal duties. Determined, however, tory not to quarrel with the Arundels, he made his friend, the earl of Arundel, treasurer. In the same spirit of conciliation, he had the remains of Richard 11. honourably re-interred at Westminster. A little later, he restored their lands to the sons of Hotspur and the earl of Huntingdon; made a confidential friend of the young earl of March; and arranged that the loyalty of the duke of York-formerly earl of Rutland -should be formally recognised by parliament. In short, he did all he could to show that, in his eyes, bygones were bygones, and that he meant to act as king of a united nation.

Personal
Character.

For playing this part, Henry had qualifications which had been denied to his father. He was perfectly satisfied of his own right to the crown, was haunted by no doubts as to the propriety of his former actions, and he brought with him no blood-feuds, the relics of ancient entanglements in political intrigue. His personal qualities were excellent tall, strong, stately, and of winning manners, he looked as he felt, every inch a king. His moral character was good; his orthodoxy unimpeachable. He had received an admirable training in the business both of peace and war, and he had the invaluable capacity for taking infinite pains. Such a man would at all times have made his mark as a sovereign; but, fortunately for Henry, the national bent for foreign war gave him exactly the opportunity he needed, and though we, with our later knowledge, are tempted to impute to him the responsibility for the disastrous termination of his French enterprise, there is no doubt that his warlike policy was in perfect accord with the ideas of the time, which regarded him as the mirror of chivalry. War, however, did not break out at once; for mediæval kings, who fought not for mere accessions of territory or for ideas, but for rights, were deliberate in their proceedings, and did not proceed to open hostilities before they had made their demands in a diplomatic shape. The first two years of the reign, therefore, were occupied with preparations and the routine of ordinary business.

The most striking exception to this was the affair of Sir John Oldcastle. Though few martyrs had braved the terrors of the stake, the Lollard Sir John views were by no means extinct; and the first use Arundel Oldcastle. made of his freedom from the cares of the chancellorship was to attempt to make an example by striking at their most noticeable supporter at court. The victim he chose was Sir John Oldcastle, generally known by right of his wife as Lord Cobham, who had sat in the House of Commons as member for Herefordshire in 1404, and had been called to the House of Lords since 1409. Oldcastle was a brave and intelligent man, who had been one of Henry's best lieutenants in the Welsh war; he was also a sincere adherent of Lollardism, and had aided to spread it by giving countenance to Lollard preachers, both in Kent and Herefordshire. Acting under Arundel's direction, convocation presented an indictment against him, and he was summoned to appear before three bishops. Failing to appear, he was then arrested by the king's order, and, after a long examination before the archbishop, was pronounced to be heretical, and ordered to be burnt. Forty days, however, were allowed him to recant, and he used the opportunity to escape. A plot then seems to have been formed to seize the king at Eltham on Henry's removing to London for a meeting in St. Giles' Fields. The king, however, was fully on the

Meeting in
St. Giles'
Fields.

alert, and when the night came he closed the gates of London, scoured the country in person with a body of horse, captured some sixty of the conspirators, and so effectually put a stop to the design that it has been doubted whether there was any reality in the movement. All attempts to arrest Oldcastle failed for the time; and he was not captured till 1417, when, at the request of the commons and by sentence of the lords, he was put to death as an heretical traitor by being drawn, hanged, and burnt. Arundel died in 1414, and was succeeded by Henry Chichele, who, however, did not play so prominent a part as his predecessor. Lollardism still survived; and, forty years later, Bishop Pecocke of Chichester thought it worth while to attack it in a book called The Repressor of over-much Blaming the Clergy, in which he defended pilgrimages, confession, the decoration of churches with pictures, and other practices attacked by the Lollards. This fact shows the tenacity of Wyclif's teaching, and it is one of the problems of history how far the Lollardism of the Lancastrian era is connected with the reforming movement of the Tudors.

Petitions of

mons.

The year 1414 was also notable for the grant of a parliamentary privilege which had long been a great object with the commons. The right of the commons to a share in legislation had been fully recognised since 1322, but the actual text of all laws was a the Commatter for the royal officials; and consequently, although the commons found their petitions granted in name, the actual statute frequently differed most materially from what they had suggested. Accordingly, in granting tonnage and poundage for three years, the commons asked 'that there never be no law made' on their petition, 'and engrossed as statute and law, neither by addition or by diminution, by no manner of term or terms the which should change the meaning and the intent asked.' To which the king replied, that 'henceforth nothing be enacted to the petitions of his commons that be contrary to their asking, whereby they should be bound without their assent.' At the same time the king's right to grant or refuse his consent to a petition was fully confirmed.

In 1415 Henry was ready to declare war against France. His plan was discussed in parliament; received the consent of the three estates; and supplies were voted and paid with a readiness which tends

Causes of

War.

to show with what a wonderful recuperative power such the French an agricultural country as England then was could take advantage of a very few years of peace. The same causes which contributed to the warlike enthusiasm of the early years of Edward III. were doubtless again at work; but in addition to these, the king, probably acting on the advice of his father, was glad to find an outlet for the