Henry IV of England
gigatos | February 11, 2022
Summary
Henry IV of Bolingbroke (English. Henry IV of Bolingbroke, spring 1367, Bolingbroke Castle, Lincolnshire – March 20, 1413, Westminster) – 3rd Earl of Derby 1377-1399, 3rd Earl of Northampton and 8th of Hereford 1384-1399, 1st Duke of Hereford 1397-1399, 2nd Duke of Lancaster, 6th Earl of Lancaster and 6th Earl of Leicester in 1399, King of England from 1399, son of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, and Blanca of Lancaster, founder of the Lancaster dynasty.
As a young man, Henry participated in the noble opposition that sought to limit the power of King Richard II of Bordeaux, but then, in 1388, entered into an alliance with the king. From 1390 to 1392 he led a life of itinerant knight in continental Europe and Palestine, taking part in the civil war in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In 1397 he received the title Duke of Hereford, but the king soon took advantage of Henry”s quarrel with Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, to expel both from England.
In 1399, after John of Gaunt”s death, Richard II confiscated his estates. Henry returned to England against the king”s will and rebelled. He was supported by many noblemen of noble birth. Richard was deposed, and on his death Henry Bolingbroke, named Henry IV, took the vacant throne. During his reign he had to quell several revolts of the English nobility, as well as a rebellion in Wales, and to defend himself against attacks by the Scots. In 1401 he passed a statute against the Lollard movement.
Henry IV belonged by birth to the youngest branch of the Plantagenet dynasty. His father John of Gaunt was the fourth of the sons (and third survivor) of King Edward III of England – after Edward, Prince of Wales, and Lionel Antwerp, Duke of Clarence. Gaunt”s first wife was Blanche of Lancaster, daughter and heiress of Henry Grosmont, descended in direct male line from the youngest son of King Henry III. Thanks to paternal grants and a successful marriage, John was already, by the time his first son was born, the largest landowner in England after the king: he owned many estates and thirty castles in Wales, in the central and northern parts of the country, and in case of war could field a thousand knights and three thousand archers. Gont held the titles of Duke of Lancaster, Earl of Richmond, Lincoln, Leicester and Derby; he tried to win the crown of Castile, but without success.
Henry IV was the sixth child of the family. He was preceded by Philippa (1360-1415), later wife of King João I of Portugal, and Elizabeth (1364-1426), whose husbands were successively John Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, John Holland, 1st Duke of Exeter, and John Cornwall, 1st Baron of Fanhope, as well as three sons who lived only briefly. A year after Henry”s birth another full sister was born, who soon died (1368). Blanc of Lancaster died in the same year. Later John of Gaunt married again – to Constance of Castile, who gave birth to his daughter Catherine (1371-1418), mother of King Juan II of Castile.
Henry had three half-brothers – bastards of John of Gaunt, born Catherine (Henry (Thomas (1377-1427), Duke of Exeter. He also had a half-sister, Joanna Beaufort (1379-1440), wife of Robert Ferrers, 2nd Baron Ferrers of Wem, and Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmoreland. In 1396, John of Gaunt, with the king”s permission, married Catherine Swinford, and the children born to her were legitimized by papal bull, but later, when Henry IV became king, he excluded the Beauforts from the line of succession by means of a small amendment to the act of legitimization.
Henry”s date of birth is not given in the chronicles. He is the only monarch of the Plantagenet dynasty whose date of birth is doubtful. The only chronicler who mentions the birth of the future king is Jean Froissart, who indicates that he was born seven years after the end of 1361. Another chronicler, John Capgrave, who was not a contemporary, does not mention the date of birth, but gives the place of birth as John of Gaunt”s Bolingbroke Castle in Lincolnshire. This birthplace is confirmed by a number of other sources. The nickname by which Henry was known, “Bolingbroke” (Henry Bolingbroke), is associated with it.
J. L. Kirby, author of the only monograph on Henry IV, did not specify a date of birth. E. Goodman, in a study of John of Gaunt, believes Henry was born in early 1367. C. B. McFerlane, author of the best study of Henry IV”s younger years, Lancastrian Kings and Lollard Knights, indicates a range between April 4, 1366 and April 3, 1367. The Complete Peerage indicates a birth date of April 4-7, 1366. The authors of an article about Henry in the printed version of the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography thought he was “almost certainly in 1366 and possibly April 7.” The dates of April 7, 1366, May 30, 1366, and April 3, 1367 are also found in various sources. A detailed study of Henry IV”s date of birth was undertaken by researcher Ian Mortimer in his article “Henry IV”s date of birth and the royal maundy”, concluding that the future king was born between the end of March and the middle of May 1367 and probably on Holy Thursday of that year (April 15). This version has also been adopted in the online version of the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
Henry is first mentioned in sources on June 1, when King Edward III, who received the news of his grandson”s birth, paid a courier £5. His mother, Blanche, died of the plague on 12 September 1368, but by this time he and his older sisters Philip and Elizabeth had been in the care of Blanche, Lady Wake, their maternal grandfather”s sister, for two years. She was in charge of raising John of Gaunt”s children until 1372, after which they were raised first by Constance of Castile, his father”s 2nd wife, and then by Catherine Swinford, Gaunt”s mistress, whom he later married. In December 1374, Thomas Burton, John Gaunt”s squire, became the “steward” of seven-year-old Henry. He was also assigned a chaplain, Hugh Hurl, who taught Henry to read and write French and English and gave him at least a working knowledge of Latin, and a closet keeper. To live the young prince was sent to the house of Lady Wake, his mother”s cousin. In 1376 young Henry”s military upbringing was taken over by the Gascon Sir William Montandre.
On 21 June 1377, just before Edward III died, John of Gaunt summoned his son and nephew, the future King Richard II, slightly older than Henry, to be knighted on St George”s Day (23 June), after which both became knights of the Order of the Garter. At Richard II”s coronation ceremony on July 16, Henry, who had recently received the title of Earl of Derby, once held by his maternal grandfather, carried the Curtana, one of the ceremonial swords.
A report has survived, dated 1381-1382, in which it is reported that at this time Henry was traveling and hunting with his father, participating in a jousting tournament, and beginning to observe the affairs of state. During the peasant rebellion of Wat Tyler in June 1381, his father, who had been one of the main targets of the rebels, took refuge in Scotland, and Henry himself may have been forced to flee from his father”s castle in Hertfordshire and was later besieged in the Tower of London with the king. On June 14, Richard II met with the rebel leaders at Mile End Heath, trying to negotiate with them, but during his absence this royal residence was seized by a mob. The garrison of the castle, for some unknown reason, offered no resistance. Once inside the castle, the rioters seized several royal ministers – the Archbishop of Canterbury Sudbury as Chancellor, the Treasurer Sir Robert Hales and the Parliamentary Bailiff John Legg, who was responsible for collecting taxes in Kent, as well as the physician John Gaunt – and beheaded them on Tower Hill. Henry”s life, however, was saved “miraculously” by one John Ferrer of Southark. Nearly 20 years later, in gratitude, Henry pardoned Ferrer, who had participated in the rebellion against him in January 1400.
In July 1380, John of Gaunt paid the king 5,000 marks for the marriage of his son to the wealthy heiress Mary de Bogun, the youngest daughter of Humphrey de Bogun, 7th Earl of Hereford, who died in 1373. The marriage itself was probably consummated on February 5, 1381, at the Bohuns” estate of Rochford Hall in Essex. Mary”s older sister, Eleanor, was married to Thomas Woodstock, Henry”s uncle. Froissart reports that Woodstock, who wanted the entire legacy of the Boguns, persuaded Mary to join the Clarissean order. It is not known how reliable this is, but it is certain that the married sisters” uncle and nephew argued among themselves over the division of the Bohuns” estates. Henry”s marriage was probably consummated in late 1384, when Mary was 14 years old, and on December 22 of that year Henry received the titles of Earl of Hereford and Northampton, previously held by his wife”s father. The marriage was a successful one, with a sincere affection for one another (records show that Henry often sent gifts to his wife), reinforced by a shared interest in music and books. This marriage produced at least six children, including the future King Henry V. She died in 1394 after the birth of her daughter Philippa.
At the time of Richard II”s accession to the throne, Richard II was only 10 years old, so the kingdom was officially ruled by a board of regents of 12 men. Although it did not include any of Edward III”s sons, real power in England belonged to one of them, including John of Gaunt, Henry”s father. Gaunt”s personal estates occupied a third of the kingdom, his retinue consisted of 125 knights and 132 squires, and the Savoy Palace on the Thames was more magnificent than the palace in which Richard lived. Unlike his father, he did not have a great deal of experience in government or military talent. John of Gaunt, as the king”s uncle, had no less right to the throne and could have challenged his son Richard even after the coronation of Richard II, if he so wished, but he did nothing to change the situation. Before and after the king”s majority, he continued to be his faithful servant.
Henry Bolingbroke was John of Gaunt”s sole heir and was close to his powerful father. In 1382 he took part in a jousting tournament organized on the occasion of the King”s wedding to Anne of Bohemia, and later became one of the most indefatigable and experienced knights of the English kingdom. Yet when his father was in England, Henry took remarkably little part in public affairs. In November 1383 he accompanied Gaunt to a meeting with French envoys at Calais. It is possible that in 1384 he took part in his father”s raid on the Scots, and in 1385 he took part in Richard II”s Scottish campaign as part of a detachment led by John Gaunt. In October 1385 Henry participated for the first time in the English Parliament, but his main concern at this time was to win military honor.
In 1386 John of Gaunt went on an expedition to Castile. Henry was present at Plymouth in July 1386, from where his father sailed for Spain and the campaign lasted until November 1389. During this time Henry incurred the king”s hatred.
Richard II was not much older than Henry, but they had little in common. Unlike Henry, the English king showed no enthusiasm for jousting. Moreover, Richard II was suspicious of his cousin, for in 1376 Edward III had recognized John of Gaunt and his offspring as heirs to the kingdom. In addition, Richard”s marriage was childless and Henry was becoming his potential successor. As a result, in the second half of the 1380s, the Earl of Derby had little contact with the royal court and enjoyed no royal patronage. The king, anxious to avoid Henry”s succession to the throne, recognized as his heir Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March, maternal grandson of Lionel Antwerp, Duke of Clarence, the early dead elder brother of John of Gaunt. This move helps explain the political stance Henry took in the late 1380s.
Richard II gradually became less and less popular. This was because of his blind attachment to the favourites he had surrounded himself with, under their influence he became very self-confident, capricious and egotistical. At the same time he did not tolerate any objections, they drove him mad, he began to behave very offensively, losing his sense of royal and human dignity, not shrinking from swearing and insults. The favourites themselves, who had distinguished themselves by greed and frivolity, were more concerned with personal welfare. England also continued to be at war with France, which required additional expenditure.
On September 1, 1386, at a meeting of Parliament at Westminster, Lord Chancellor Michael de la Paul requested an impressive sum for the defense of England. In order to raise it, however, taxes had to be raised, which could have led to a new rebellion. As a result, Parliament formed a delegation that went to the king to complain against the chancellor, demanding his dismissal as well as that of the treasurer, John Fordham, bishop of Durham. Initially the king refused to comply with the demand, stating that he would “not kick even the cook out of the kitchen” at Parliament”s request, but he eventually agreed to receive a delegation of 40 knights.
Later, Richard II did another act that angered the nobility by giving his favorite Robert de Vere, 9th Earl of Oxford, the title Duke of Ireland. The king and Henry”s uncle, Thomas Woodstock, who had recently received the title Duke of Gloucester, saw the granting of such a title to an aristocrat from outside the royal family as an affront to his status. As a result, instead of forty knights, only Thomas Woodstock and his friend Thomas Fitzalan, brother of one of King Richard Fitzalan”s former guardians, the 11th Earl of Arundel, whom he could not stand, appeared before the king. The Duke of Gloucester reminded the king of the exclusivity of the title of duke and that the law required the king to convene and attend parliament once a year. Richard accused his uncle of inciting rebellion, who in turn reminded him that war was on and warned him that Parliament might depose the king if he did not throw out his advisers.
On 1 October 1386, Parliament, known in history as the Wonderful Parliament, began to meet, and Henry was present. Threatened with deposition, the king acceded to Parliament”s demand, dismissing Suffolk and Fordham. The bishops of Ilya and Hereford were appointed to take their places. Michael de la Paul was put on trial, but soon most of the charges were dropped. On November 20 of the same year, a “Great Permanent Council” was appointed, with a term of 12 months. Its purpose was declared to be the reform of the system of government, as well as the desire to do away with the favorites and to take all measures to effectively oppose the enemies. Fourteen commissioners were appointed to the commission, of whom only three were opponents of the king: the Duke of Gloucester, the Bishop of Illy and the Earl of Arundel. But the commission had such broad powers (it was given control of finances, and had to administer the Great Seal and the Small Seal) that the king refused to recognize it. Moreover, he went to open conflict by appointing his friend John Beauchamp as steward of the royal court.
In February 1387 Richard II was on a tour of the north of England. During it he received legal assistance from the chief judges of the kingdom: Sir Robert Tresilian, supreme judge of the royal bench; Sir Robert Belknap, supreme judge of general litigation; and Sir William Berg, Sir John Hoult, and Sir Roger Foulthorpe. According to the right given by them, any intrusion into the prerogatives of the monarch was unlawful, and those who did so could be equated with traitors. All the judges signed the royal declaration at Nottingham, though they later claimed that they did so under pressure from Richard.
The king returned to London on 10 November 1387 and was greeted enthusiastically by the people of the capital. Although all the judges had sworn to keep their verdict secret, the Duke of Gloucester and the Earl of Arundel learned of it and refused to appear before Richard on his summons.
Gloucester and Arundel, joined by Thomas de Beauchamp, 12th Earl of Warwick, took refuge at Haringey near London. From there they went to Waltham Cross (Hertfordshire), where supporters began to flock to them. Their number alarmed the king. But although some of his favourites, notably Archbishop Alexander Neville of York, insisted that the rebels be dealt with, many members of the Grand Standing Council did not support them. As a result, eight members of the council traveled to Waltham on November 14, where they urged the rebel leaders to end the confrontation. Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick brought an appeal (lat. accusatio) against the actions of the king”s favorites – the earls of Suffolk and Oxford, the archbishop of York, the high judge Tresilian and the former mayor of London, Sir Nicholas Brembre, from whom the king had borrowed a large sum of money. The envoys responded by inviting the lords to Westminster to meet the king.
On November 17, the lords-appellants met with the king at the Palace of Westminster. But they did not disband their army and acted from a position of strength, demanding that the king arrest the favourites with their subsequent trial in Parliament. The king agreed, setting a hearing for February 3, 1388. But he was in no hurry to accede to the appellants” demands, not wishing to have a trial of his cronies, who had escaped. The Archbishop of York took refuge in the north of England, the Earl of Suffolk went to Calais, and the Earl of Oxford left for Chester. Judge Tresilian took refuge in London. Only Brembre met with the judges.
Soon, however, the lords-appellants learned that the king had deceived them. The judicial orders that were issued in his name to Parliament urged everyone to forget the strife. Eventually hostilities resumed. The appellants were joined by two other noble lords: Henry Bolingbroke and Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Earl of Nottingham and the Earl of Marshall (former favourite of Richard II, now son-in-law to the Earl of Arundel).
Henry”s reason for joining the Lords of Appeal is unknown. Perhaps he was trying to vindicate the interests of his absent father in England and his own interests in the succession to the throne. He may also have been outraged at the way in which de Vere, who had been a judge of Chester, used his power in Northwest England to enrich himself at the expense of the revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster. In addition, he was probably unhappy with the hostility with which the king and his minions had often treated his father John of Gaunt in the early 1380s. In any case, the decision to join the appellants was a fateful one, for from that moment on Richard II”s distrust of Gont was directed with increasing force at Henry himself.
On December 19, an army of appellants ambushed the Earl of Oxford returning from Northampton near Redcote Bridge. Henry defended the bridge by breaking the top of its arches. Oxford”s escorts were captured, but he himself escaped and then made his way to France, where he lived out the rest of his life. Henry was the hero of this campaign, though his home accounts describe the event as a raid.
After this battle, reconciliation between the appellants and the king was out of the question. After Christmas at the end of December, the rebel army approached London. The frightened king took refuge in the Tower, attempting to negotiate with the appellants through the Archbishop of Canterbury. But the appellants were unwilling to make concessions and proclaimed the possible deposition of the king. Wishing by any means to retain his crown, Richard surrendered. He issued new judicial orders to parliament and also ordered the sheriffs to detain the five fugitives, bringing them to trial.
The members of the council, although their term of office expired in November, conducted a search of the royal court, the king did not prevent it. In addition, warrants were issued for the arrest of Sir Simon Burleigh, who lost his posts as vice-chamberlain and keeper of the Five Ports, the royal steward John Beauchamp, and six judges who had signed the royal declaration at Nottingham, who lost their posts. Many other royal employees were also dismissed.
On February 3, 1388, Parliament met in the hall of the Palace of Westminster. The king was seated in the center, with the secular lords to his left and the ecclesiastical lords to his right. On a sack of wool was seated the Bishop of Iliya. This tumultuous parliamentary session went down in history as the Merciless Parliament.
Five lords-appellants dressed in robes of gold held hands to bring charges against the king”s minions. As a result, four of the king”s minions were sentenced to execution. Two, Oxford and Suffolk managed to escape, but Brembre and Tresilian were executed under the pressure of the appellants. The Archbishop of York, as a clergyman, was spared his life, but all his estates and possessions were confiscated. Several of the king”s lesser associates were also executed. At the same time, Henry and the Earl of Nottingham argued for the life of Sir Simon Burleigh, the king”s confidant and former tutor. Queen Anne also pleaded for mercy for Simon Burleigh, but to no avail. A total of eight men were executed. In addition, a number of the king”s cronies were banished from England.
The outcome of this trial was, among other things, to set a series of precedents that would cost England much turmoil in the fifteenth century and lead to the War of the Scarlet and White Rose.
Although Henry attended the council meetings and witnessed a number of royal charters, only three of the appellants – the Earls of Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick – were in charge of the government of the kingdom until May 1389, when Richard II succeeded in regaining power.
By 1389 the domestic situation in the state had improved markedly. On May 3, Richard, who was by then 22 years old, told the council that he was an adult, would not repeat the mistakes made in his youth, so was ready to rule the country himself. The appellants, believing that the king had learned his lesson, allowed him some independence, since they had no desire to rule for him for life. Needing support, Richard sought help from his uncle John of Gaunt, who had never been able to obtain the Castilian crown and had lived in Gascony since 1387. Although his son had been one of the lords-appellants, Gaunt chose to stay away during the crisis. Now, after receiving a letter from his nephew, he decided to return. He arrived in England in November 1389, becoming the king”s right-hand man, which brought stability to the kingdom. The lords-appellants ended up taking care of other matters.
The return of his father allowed Henry to move away from politics. In March-April 1390, he and other English knights took part in the great international tournament of knighthood at St. Inglevert near Calais and were thought to have gained great fame. He next planned to go on a crusade to Tunisia, leading a force of 120 men, but the French (probably at the request of the English king) denied him a letter of protection. As a result, he decided to go to Prussia and join the Knights of the Teutonic Order in a campaign against Lithuania. He hired 2 ships and sailed from Boston in July 1390, accompanied by 32 knights and squires. On August 10 he reached Danzig, where he joined the knights of the order and soldiers on a march up the Neman River. By September 4 they reached Vilnius, where they captured a fort, but the siege of the main castle was unsuccessful, so by September 22 all the knights returned to Königsberg, the capital of the Teutonic Order”s holdings. It was too late to return home by sea, so Heinrich decided to winter here. On March 31, 1391, he sailed for England, reaching Hull on April 30. This expedition cost 4,360 pounds, most of the sum provided to him by his father. In the end he obtained only gratitude from the Knights of the Order, but gained military experience. As early as 1407 the Knights of the Order spoke very warmly of him.
On July 24, 1392, he set out again for Prussia, reaching Danzig on August 10, but arriving in Königsberg he found that there would be no campaign this year, so he decided to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. On September 22 he left Danzig accompanied by 50 men, deciding to make his way through Eastern Europe. To announce his rank, he sent heralds ahead. His route took him through Frankfurt an der Oder to Prague, where he was entertained by King Wenzel, brother of Queen Anne. Next he arrived in Vienna, where he met with Duke Albrecht III of Austria and King Sigismund of Hungary and the future emperor. He then moved through Leoben, Fillach, and Treviso, arriving in Venice on December 1 or 2. There the senate, warned of his arrival, allocated him ships for his further voyage. He sailed from Venice on December 23.
Henry celebrated Christmas in Zara, then sailed past Corfu, Rhodes and Cyprus and landed in Jaffa in the second half of January 1393. He spent more than a week in the Holy Land, visiting various shrines and making various offerings. At the end of January he sailed back. After making a long stop in Rhodes, he returned to Venice on March 21, where 2,000 marks sent by his father were waiting for him. On March 28 he sailed onward. Henry”s further journey lay through Padua and Verona, then he arrived in Milan, whose governor, Gian Galeazzo Visconti, entertained him for several days. After crossing the Mont-Senis Pass, he proceeded through West Burgundy to Paris, then reached Calais and on June 30 arrived in Dover, reaching London on July 5. This expedition cost him 4,915 pounds, most of it, as in the previous case, allocated to him by his father.
Both expeditions brought Henry international fame, but they were no less important for English politics, for the household men who accompanied him formed a core of loyal vassals who later supported him in all his trials for the rest of his life.
During Henry”s absence from England, Richard II regained his power and confidence. In 1391 he received assurances from Parliament that he was “allowed to enjoy all the royal regalia, liberties and rights equally with his forebears … and notwithstanding any former statutes or ordinances establishing otherwise, especially in the time of King Edward II, resting in Gloucester … and any statute passed in the time of the said King Edward which offended the dignity and privileges of the crown, was to be repealed.” Since his return, Henry had been periodically at court, attending meetings of parliament and councils. His signature appears on 14 of the 42 royal charters issued between 1393 and 1398. However, he continued to be excluded from the circle of the king”s associates.
In 1394 Mary de Bogun, Henry”s wife, died, after which he remained in mourning for a year. In October 1396 he accompanied Richard II”s new wife, Isabella of France, from Ardres to Calais with his father and some other members of the nobility.
In early 1394, John Gaunt suggested that Richard II recognize Henry as heir to the English throne; this was opposed by the Earl of March, whom the king had previously recognized as his heir. Richard II reacted in no way to this, leaving the question of the heir open. But the king”s suspicions of Henry grew. John of Gaunt”s influence with the king waned, and he became wary of the Duchy of Lancaster following Richard II”s attempts to persuade the Pope to canonize his great-grandfather, Edward II. The holdings of Thomas of Lancaster, executed by Edward II in 1322, were confiscated by him, but after the king was deposed in 1327, the decree was annulled. Now Thomas”s heirs suspected that Richard II might revoke the decree restoring the Lancaster estates.
Concern also grew after Richard II”s reprisal of the three lords-appellants in 1397. On September 17, 1397, Parliament convened at Westminster – the last during Richard”s reign. It was a kind of mirror image of the Merciless Parliament, but now the accused were former prosecutors Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick. The order of the trial was the same as nine years earlier. Eight lords acted as appellants, including the king”s half-brother, John Holland, Earl of Huntingdon, nephew, Thomas Holland, Earl of Kent, and cousins, Edward of Norwich, Earl of Rutland, and Earl of Somerset (John Gaunt”s legitimate son by Catherine Swinford). As a result, the Earl of Arundel was executed and the Earl of Warwick was sentenced to exile for life. The Duke of Gloucester was declared to have died in confinement at Calais, though no one doubted that he had been murdered on the king”s orders. All their estates were confiscated. Proclamations announced that John of Gaunt and Henry Bolingbroke had endorsed these decisions: Gaunt had presided at the trials in Parliament, and Henry had spoken in favor of the execution of Arundel.
After the massacre of the appellant lords, the king rewarded his supporters. On September 29, Henry Bolingbroke, received the title Duke of Hereford as well as a pardon for his part in the appellants” rebellion ten years earlier. Another former appellant, Thomas Mowbray, received the title Duke of Norfolk, John Holland the title Duke of Exeter, Thomas Holland the title Duke of Surrey, and Edward of Norwich the title Duke of Albemail (Omerl). The earldom of Cheshire and several other Arundel possessions in Wales were annexed to the crown. On September 30, Parliament approved all decisions and went into recess.
Despite the reward, Henry feared to displease the king and tried in every way to please him. He appeared at court more often, gave Richard II a great feast and entertained him during parliament.
In mid-December, Henry left London for Windsor. On the way he was overtaken by his former fellow rebel, Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk. The conversation between them is known from the report Henry gave to Richard II in January 1398. It said that Norfolk had informed Henry of the king”s plans to capture or kill John of Gaunt and Henry at Windsor in September 1397 in retaliation for his attack on the Earl of Suffolk near Redcote Bridge in 1387, and to disinherit Henry and Norfolk. Although Henry himself, he said, spoke little, he was frightened. He made a little pilgrimage north to the shrines of Beverly and Bridlington, and then told of the conversation to his father, who conveyed it to the king. At the end of January, Henry himself appeared to Richard II, took the opportunity to receive two more pardons from the king for his past actions, granted on 25 and 31 January. Amid rumors of a plot against him in the king”s inner circle, John of Gaunt and his heir received assurances from the king that he would not use the confiscation judgment against Thomas of Lancaster to claim any Lancastrian estates. The Duke of Norfolk was removed from his offices and imprisoned.
To investigate the Duke of Norfolk”s alleged plot, the king appointed a special commission of 18 men, which met at Windsor Castle on April 29. The Dukes of Norfolk and Hereford appeared before it. Norfolk refused to admit that he had plotted anything against the king. According to him, if he had, it was long ago, and he had received a royal pardon for it. But Henry insisted, accusing Norfolk of giving bad advice to the king, of being responsible for many of the kingdom”s ills, including the murder of the Duke of Gloucester, and offered to prove his case by a court duel.
The duel was set for September 17 in Coventry. It was attended by peers, knights, and ladies from all over England. Only John of Gaunt was absent, who, after a session of parliament at Shrewsbury, had retired – according to Froissard – because of an illness that eventually led to his death. Henry trained earnestly for the duel and also hired gunsmiths from Milan. The audience greeted both dukes with cheers, with Bolingbroke greeted more loudly. But then Richard II unexpectedly intervened. He disliked his cousin and feared that the Duke of Hereford”s likely victory would make him the most popular man in the country. Throwing down his rod, he stopped the duel. It was announced that neither duke would receive the divine blessing and both were banished from England no later than October 20: Bolingbroke for ten years and Mowbray for life.
Henry”s son and heir, Henry Monmouth (the future King Henry V), was forbidden to accompany his father, effectively remaining a hostage. Although the king outwardly showed goodwill toward him by providing a thousand marks for expenses and a letter guaranteeing that he would receive an omission for any possession during the exile, after John of Gaunt died on February 3, 1399, the letter was withdrawn on March 18 on the grounds that it had been provided “by inattention.
Gaunt”s death proved fatal for the king, for only the old duke helped to maintain the prestige of the crown. The king refused to recognize the duke”s will. If Richard II had any plans for Henry”s future and his inheritance, they were never clear. Although the Duke of Lancaster”s estates were not officially confiscated, he placed them in the care of his favorites, the Dukes of Exeter, Albermyle and Surrey. Richard II made no clear statement as to the fate of the exiled Henry, although one of his advisers told parliament that in March 1399 the king had sworn that “while he lives, the present Duke of Lancaster will never return to England”. It is possible that the king intended to leave an inheritance to Henry Monmouth bypassing his father. If there was still hope for a peaceful resolution to the conflict up to this point, Richard had demonstrated by his rash actions that the law of succession was no longer in force in England.
Henry left England around 1398 and went to Paris, where he was received by King Charles VI and his dukes. The exile was provided with the Hôtel de Clisson for lodging. He had no trouble with money, for he retained his late wife”s estates. Moreover, even after the loss of his father”s estates, he continued to receive money from them sent by Italian merchants. He also began to plan a new marriage. As brides he considered first Lucia Visconti, niece of Duke Gian-Galeazzo of Milan, and then Maria, Countess d”Ais, niece of the French king. The prospect of the latter marriage so alarmed the English king that he sent the Earl of Salisbury to Paris with instructions to thwart Henry”s marriage plans. He also planned to go on a crusade, but his father advised against it, recommending that he go to Castile and Portugal, where Catherine and Philippa, Henry”s sisters, were queens. But these plans were thwarted by John of Gaunt”s death and Henry”s de facto disinheritance.
The actual power in France was in the hands of his uncle, Philip II the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, a supporter of peace with England. Since Richard II was now married to a French princess, it was likely that the duke should have watched Henry and thwarted his actions that were contrary to the interests of the English king. After the plague epidemic of May 1399, however, he found himself outside Paris and power in the kingdom passed to his rival, the king”s brother Duke Louis of Orleans. He was the leader of the French war party, so on June 17 he entered into a formal alliance with Henry, by which each pledged to be “the friend of the other”s friends and the enemy of the other”s enemies.” In fact, he cynically gave carte blanche to return to England. Though he hardly expected the exile to succeed against a fairly firmly entrenched Richard II. He probably hoped that Henry could only create problems for the English king by weakening his influence in Aquitaine, where the Duke of Orleans” own ambitions extended. And he hardly wanted the peace-loving Richard II to be replaced on the throne by the hardened fighter Henry.
For Henry, however, the treaty was vital, for it gave him hope of revenge, although there was a certain risk. He decided to take full advantage of Richard II”s absence from England to march on Ireland, where, following the assassination of the king”s viceroy, Earl March in 1398, the situation had been complicated by the rebellion of two Irish kings. Although the king”s advisers tried to dissuade Richard II from the campaign, fearing that the exiled Henry might take advantage of his absence, the king listened to no one. Richard II landed in Ireland on June 1, 1399. Henry soon enough learned of Richard”s expedition and left Paris in secret at the end of June, accompanied by his loyal vassals and two other exiles – Thomas Fitzalan, heir of the executed Earl of Arundel, and the exiled Archbishop of Arundel, brother of the executed Earl. After outfitting three ships, they set sail from Boulogne. It is not known whether he was already planning to overthrow Richard II at that time or only wished to regain his inheritance. But knowing the king”s suspicion and vindictiveness, he knew that he would never be safe in England without wielding the full extent of his power. The treaty with the Duke of Orleans may indicate that he regarded himself not only as the future Duke of Lancaster, but also as the probable heir of Richard II.
Adam of Usk reports that Henry was accompanied by no more than 300 companions. It has been suggested that Henry originally landed at Sussex, where his men captured Pevensey Castle, but it was probably a diversionary tactic designed to sow confusion among the king”s supporters. His ships then sailed as far as Ravenspur in North Yorkshire. At the end of September, a cross was placed at the site of his landing. On June 1 he was at Bridlington. These lands were Lancaster possessions, and here Henry could count on support. Visiting his own castles of Pickering, Nersborough, and Pontefract, he passed through areas inhabited by his vassals. Here Henry declared himself Duke of Lancaster and on July 13 was already at Dorncaster, where he was joined by two powerful northern barons – Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, with his eldest son Henry Hotsper, and Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmoreland, as well as several other northern lords. The commoners also flocked to Henry”s banners – he had a charm that Richard lacked. Although the chronicles exaggerate the size of his army, it was a considerable force. And there were so many men that Bolingbroke had to send some of them home. Although Henry publicly announced that he had come to receive his inheritance, the Servian nobles were probably aware that he was a claimant to the English throne.
The protector of the kingdom in Richard II”s absence was his uncle, Edmund Langley, Duke of York, assisted by Chancellor Edmund Stafford, Bishop of Exeter, Treasurer William le Skrup, Earl of Wiltshire, and Keeper of the Great Seal Richard Clifford, Bishop of Worcester. Also remaining in England were Sir John Bushy, Sir William Bagot, and Sir Henry Green. At the end of June, the Duke of York received news of men about to cross the Channel. Not trusting the Londoners, he moved to St. Albans, where he began to recruit an army, while simultaneously making requests to Richard to return. He gathered over 3,000 men at Weir in Herefordshire. On 11-12 July, however, the Duke of York learned that Henry had landed in Yorkshire, then traveled west with a council to meet the king, but on the way he ran into rebels. The Duke of York eventually took refuge at Berkeley, while the Earl of Wiltshire, Bushey and Green went to Bristol, where they tried to organize a resistance. William Bagot fled to Cheshire.
On July 27, Henry, meeting little or no resistance, approached Berkeley with his army. The Duke of York did not even try to resist and surrendered. From there Bolingbroke marched to Bristol, where he forced York to order the surrender of the castle, after which he ordered the execution of the captured Wiltshire, Bushy and Green; their heads were displayed on the gates of London, York and Bristol.
Upon learning of Bolingbroke”s landing in England, Richard sailed from Ireland on July 27. The Duke of Albermaille recommended that the king divide the army. According to historians, he knew immediately that Richard could not win and decided to side with Lancaster. On hearing his advice, Richard sent an advance party under the Earl of Salisbury to North Wales to gather reinforcements, while he landed at Haverfordwest. He then tried unsuccessfully for several days to find additional troops in Glamorgan, before moving on to Chester, apparently wishing to gain support in his own county. Henry, however, had figured out his plan and quickly led his growing army back north through Hereford and Shrewsbury to Chester, reaching there on 9 August. There he seized the treasury of Richard II. The king eventually reached only Conway Castle, where Salisbury awaited him, informing him that Chester had been captured by Henry.
Salisbury”s army had scattered by then because word had spread that the king was dead. The Earl of Worcester and the Duke of Albermayle sided with Bolingbroke. Richard II had an opportunity to retreat – he had ships left in which he could either return to Ireland or flee to France. But the king remained in the castle, trusting no one. Richard II sent the Duke of Exeter and the Earl of Surrey to meet Henry, but they were immediately arrested. In turn, Henry sent the Duke of Northumberland and Archbishop Arundel to the king, whom Richard II ordered to be let in.
The exact demands conveyed to the king are not known. But it is evident that they were not too onerous. According to them, the king was to return to Henry all his father”s inheritance and restore him to his rights. In so doing, Henry”s right as steward of England was to be reviewed by Parliament without interference from the king, and the king”s five counsellors were to be put on trial. Northumberland swore that if the demands were met, Richard would retain his crown and power, and the Duke of Lancaster would fulfill all the terms of the agreement. Richard agreed to all the demands and left the castle, accompanied by a small retinue, to meet his cousin. On the way, however, the king was ambushed by Northumberland (but the latter later denied it) and taken to Flint Castle, where he became Henry”s prisoner.
Henry was well aware that once free, Richard would take revenge. There was no trust in the king. In addition, in Bolingbroke”s opinion, England needed another king. Since Richard had no children, in 1385 Parliament approved as heir Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March, who was the maternal grandson of Lionel, Duke of Clarence, second son of Edward III. But Roger died in 1398, his heir Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March, was only 8 years old. Henry Bolingbroke was older and more experienced, and the enthusiastic welcome he received from the population convinced him that the English would accept him as king. Although his father was the younger brother of the Duke of Clarence, he could only justify his rights by descent in the male line, not in the female line.
But Bolingbroke needed to persuade parliament to depose Richard by proclaiming the Duke of Lancaster as the new king. There was a precedent for overthrowing a king – Edward II was deposed in 1327, but he was succeeded then by his eldest son Edward III. Something else was needed to justify his rights, since the Earl of March, whose father had been confirmed as heir by Parliament, had a preferable claim to the throne. Henry could not find the precedents he needed. He even tried to use the old legend that his mother”s ancestor, Edmund the Hunchback, had been born before his brother Edward I, but because of physical defects he was removed from the throne, but of course Bolingbroke could not prove the veracity of this story either. His next idea was to justify the seizure of the crown by the right of the conqueror, but it was immediately pointed out to him that such a thing was against the law. This left only one option: Bolingbroke could be proclaimed king by parliament. But here too there was a pitfall: Parliament had too much power and could overturn its ruling if it so wished. But Bolingbroke managed to find a way out.
From Flint Castle Richard was taken to Chester, from there to Westminster, and in September he was transported to London, housed in the Tower. On September 29 he signed the act of abdication in the presence of many witnesses, after which he placed the crown on the ground, thus surrendering it to God. On September 30 a “parliament” convened at Westminster, convened by an order signed by Richard on Bolingbroke”s instructions. Henry”s idea was that it was not a full parliament, but only an assembly (an assembly of the elected) – unlike parliament, the king”s personal presence was not required at the assembly. The throne remained empty. Archbishop Richard le Scroupe of York read the king”s abdication as well as a document listing all his crimes. Although Richard wished to defend himself personally, he was not given this opportunity. An attempt by Bishop Thomas Merck of Carlisle and a number of other supporters of the king to speak in his defense was also ignored. Richard”s abdication was eventually recognized by the assembly. Henry Bolingbroke spoke next, presenting his claim to the throne, after which he was proclaimed king. On October 13, he was crowned Henry IV.
Henry IV is a character in three of Shakespeare”s plays in the historical chronicle genre: Richard II, Henry IV (Part 1), and Henry IV (Part 2).
In The King (2019), the role of Henry IV was played by Ben Mendelsohn.
In the television series “The Empty Crown” the role of the young Henry Bolinbroke in the series “Richard II” played Rory Keener, in the two subsequent parts – Jeremy Irons.
1st wife: from c. 5 February 1381 (Rochford Hall, Essex) Mary de Bogun (c. 1369 – 4 July 1394), daughter of Humphrey de Bogun, 7th Earl of Hereford, and Joan Fitzalan. Children:
Allison Weir also believes that Henry and Mary had another son, Edward, who was born in April 1382 and lived four days.
2nd wife: Jeanne d”Evreux (c. 1370 – 9 July 1437), Infanta of Navarre, daughter of Charles II the Evil, King of Navarre, and Jeanne of France, widow of Jean V de Montfort, Duke of Brittany. There were no children from this marriage.
Sources
