Blood Cries Afar, page 43
279 WB, ii,287–9, with the quote at 289. Here parma is almost certainly a mantlet of the type frequently seen in later medieval manuscript depictions of besieging forces.
280 For Louis, see: Sivéry, Louis VIII; Hallam, Capetian France, 132–6; and most useful despite its age, Petit-Dutaillis, Louis VIII. For a snapshot of Louis’s personal and financial life a year earlier in 1213, including details of military expenditure and pre-invasion contacts with disaffected forces in England, see Fawtier, ‘Un Fragment du Compte de l’Hôtel du Prince Louis de France pour le Terme de la Purification, 1213’.
281 WB, ii, 290. William was almost certainly not an eye-witness to events here as he would have been accompanying Philip Augustus to Flanders at this time. His account is therefore most likely to have been constructed from the leading French protagonists involved in the engagement.
282 RW, ii,105. Bradbury calls John’s retreat ‘a panic move’: Bradbury, Philip Augustus, 293–5.
283 Rot. Pat., i, 118.
284 Poole, Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 467; Sivèry, Louis VIII, 134.
285 Turner, King John, 132.
286 Power, ‘King John and the Norman Aristocracy’ and ‘The End of Angevin Normandy’.
287 Mathhew Paris, Historia Minor, ii, 150. William the Breton portrays La Roche as a great victory only in his Philippidos, and not in his earlier Gesta; this may reflect William’s sensitive awareness as to who was on the throne at the time of writing.
288 Anonymous of Béthune, Chroniques des Rois, 198.
289 For the German alliance: A.L. Poole, ‘Richard the First Alliances with the German Princes in 1194’; Bartlett, England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 103–6; Gillingham, Richard I, 311–12; Fryde, ‘King John and the Empire’ and the references in ch. 3.
290 See Sean McGlynn, ‘Philip Augustus’, Medieval Life, 24
291 What follows is taken from the contemporary sources cited in note 274.
292 RW, ii 107. For Henry’s and Richard’s similar comments see WB, ii, 75 (Richard in particular remarks that ‘To those who are well prepared, delay has always been and always will be dangerous’). Hugh’s remark is noted in HWM, 241. See also chapter 4, n. 12.
293 RW, ii, 105.
294 See Powicke, The Thirteenth Century, 187.
295 For 1124, see Suger, Vie de Louis VI le Gros, ed. H. Waquet, Paris 1964, 226: ‘ustar castellorum in corona locarentur’. For the Battle of Alençon see Chroniques des Comtes d’Anjou, 146; the battle is discussed in depth by Jim Bradbury in his Medieval Archer, Woodbridge, 1985, 44–5 and in ANW, 188–9. For 1197 the episode is also briefly discussed in Gillingham, Richard Couer de Lion, 233.
296 The numbers are analysed by Verbruggen, The Art of Warfare 223–9. See also Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 450.
297 John France offers a viable different perspective for the dispositions (see France, Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, pp. xiv-xv and appendix 1, 235–41). As explained in the text, I believe that that a lull in the fighting allowed for Ferrand and Guérin to align themselves practically, if not regimentally, into the overall order of battle.
298 All quotes in what follows are from William the Breton unless otherwised cited.
299 WB, ii, 235–326. I have not attempted to versify William’s poetic form from the Philippidos. Matthew Strickland suggests that infantry casualties were ‘probably high’: War and Chivalry, 165. This was almost certainly the case, given the last stand of Boulogne’s pikemen at the end of the battle. See also n. 32 below.
300 In Wendover’s version, it is, less plausibly but more dramatically for literary effect, Count Renaud of Boulogne who knocks Philip from his horse with a lance and who is on the point of finishing him off with his sword when a bodyguard intercedes and receives the fatal blow (RW, ii, 108).
301 At this time the new style great helms were replacing the older Norman conical ones; perhaps this new dagger was designed for infantry to overcome this greater degree of protection. Alberic of Trois-Fontaines confusingly calls this new knife a falsarium, probably confusing it with a falchion, a curved, cleaver-like sword (akin to a scimitar) which was also appearing at this time (the cover shows an early version of this deadly weapon) (MGSS, xxiii, 901).
302 Even if caught, des Barres was not easily held: at Gisors in 1188 he was seized but freed by his men (HGM, 91). Roger of Howden (Gesta, ii, 46) accuses des Barres of escaping by breaking his parole, a distinctly unchivalrous act by France’s greatest knight.
303 These tactics were witnessed over twenty years before Bouvines and are described by contemporaries: see Ambroise, La Guerre Sainte, ll. 11396–592; Chronicle of the Third Crusade: A Translation of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, ed. H. Nicholson, Aldershot, 1987, 362; and Ralph of Coggeshall (Chronicon, RC, 47) who based his account on information supplied by Hugh of Neville, who was present at this engagement. For the Battle of Jaffa in general, see Gillingham, Richard I, 214–15.
304 Anonymous of Béthune, Chroniques des Rois, 770.
305 Casualty figures for any battle, especially medieval ones, are notoriously difficult to determine. Verbruggen estimates that 169 knights were killed: this may be too high (William the Breton only gives two knights as killed) but is more plausible if it includes sergeants, light cavalry and, possibly, mounted mercenaries (Verbruggen, The Art of Warfare, 236).
306 This catalogue, known as ‘Register C’, is discussed by Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 413–18. For the list of prisoners, also see Baldwin 219, 343, 380; Sivéry discusses the captured enemy in Philippe Auguste, 297–300.
307 RW, ii, 109–110.
308 Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 219.
309 For example, Luchaire, Philippe Auguste, 214 (clearly following William the Breton, WB, i, 298).
310 Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 219.
311 Gillingham, Richard Couer de Lion, 79
312 Ibid, pp. 78–9. Gillingham offers a convincing argument here. See also R. Hasdju, ‘Castles, Castellans, and the Structure of Politics in Poitou, 1152–1271’, Journal of Medieval History, iv, 1978, in support of this thesis.
313 RC, 170. Jones writes that Coggeshall confuses this payment with the one of 60,000 marks made by John to Philip in 1216 (Jones, John, 18).
314 Painter, John, 228.
315 Carpenter, The Struggle for Mastery, 286.
316 Vincent, Peter des Roches, 103–4. Vincent shrewdly suggests that the merchants, ships and goods seized ‘might also serve as a bargaining counters in negotiations for the release of prisoners taken at Bouvines, including the Earl of Salisbury whose ransom the justiciar was instructed to obtain … The merchants were eventually released, having promised not to put into any hostile ports or to carry cargoes to the detriment of King John’ (104). Commerce with Flanders increased following the free trade clause in Magna Carta (41) but Flemish merchants remained distinctly uneasy at political vicissitudes and the possibility of sequestration of goods by the English (see David Nicholson, Medieval Flanders, Harlow, 1992, 154). The nature of Welsh incursions into England is explored by F. Suppe, Military Institutions on the Welsh Marches, Woodbridge, 1994.
317 Flanders had the Treaty of Paris imposed upon it on 24 October 1214. By this many fortresses were not permitted repairs and the key ones – Ypres, Cassel and Oudenarde – were completely destroyed; these three strongholds comprised the Flemish line of defence against French incursions. For the consequences of Bouvines on Flanders, see Nicholson, Medieval Flanders, 153–6.
318 Anonymous of Béthune, RHF, xxiv, 770. Elizabeth Hallam has written of the Capetian’s ascendancy: ‘From kings too powerless and obscure even to find biographers, there had sprung a hero-king, whose grandson was to become a saint’ (Capetian France, 179). For the most detailed discussions of the seminal historic importance of Bouvines and its legendary status in France, see: Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 380–9; Duby, France in the Middle Ages, 222–7; Duby, The Legend of Bouvines, 141–79; Hallam, Capetian France, 178–9; Luchaire, Philippe Auguste, 211–17; Hadenauge, Philippe Auguste, 233–51; Bradbury, 326–8; and the section on ‘L’image du roi et du règne’ in Bautier (ed), Philippe Auguste, 115–213 passim. Of especial note, which includes unlikely moves to have Philip canonised, see John Baldwin, ‘Le Sens du Bouvines’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 30, 1987. One less expected result came in the form of parody: see John Haines, ‘A Parody of Songs in Praise of War’, Speculum, 82 (2), 2007, which focuses on later interpretations of Bouvines.
319 Matthew Bennet has suggested to me that Philip, shaken by his near fatal experience at Bouvines, may have shunned any further military role for fear of the personal dangers involved. This fits in with Philip’s cautious and unheroic character.
320 Unedited chronicle, in MS 553, Bibliothèque Mazarine, folio 373; and Luchaire, Philippe Auguste, 198.
5 Magna Carta, Civil War and the Countdown to Invasion, 1215
321 Michael Clanchy, England and Its Rulers, 1066–1272, 2nd edn., London, 1998, 129. For Peter des Roches see Nicholas Vincent’s magisterial study, Peter des Roches.
322 There is a wealth of material and analysis for these events and Magna Carta. In addition to the general histories already cited, see: J.C. Holt, The Northerners: A Study in King John, 2nd edn. Oxford, 1992; J.C Holt, Magna Carta, Cambridge, especially 183–266, 347–77; J.C.Holt, Magna Cart and Medieval Government; Turner, King John, 201–54; Warren, King John, 217–51; Norgate, John Lackland, p 210–256; Painter, King John, 226–366; Ralph Turner, Magna Carta, London, 2003, 40–79; Hugh Thomas, Vassals, Heiresses, Crusaders and Thugs, Pennsylvania, 1993, 168–92. The recent (2010) collection edited by Loengard, Magna Cart and the England of King John is a valuable collection of papers for this aspect of John’s reign.
323 Carpenter, The Struggle for Mastery, 286.
324 For financial matters, see references in ch. 3 notes and, specifically for discontent, see: Warren, King John, 182–4; Turner, King John, 215–24, 231–2; for a discussion of scutage, see Painter, King John, 125–8. The principle of taxation and consent for the period 1189–1227 has recently been addressed by J.R.Maddicott, The Origins of the English Parliament, 924–1327, Oxford, 2010, 119–26.
325 Pipe Roll 12 John; Warren, King John, 182.
326 Turner, King John, 220.
327 Holt, The Northerners, 34. See Brian Golding, ‘Simon of Kyme: the Making of a Rebel’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 27, 1983, for a case study of one of the rebels.
328 Carpenter, The Struggle for Mastery, 279. For a detailed analysis of the de Braose case, see Painter, King John, 238–50, and, most recently (2010), Crouch, ‘Baronial Paranoia’ and ‘The Complaint of King john against William de Braose’, in Loengard (ed), Magna Carta and the England of King John. For an overall context see the innovative study by J.S. Bothwell, Falling From Grace: Reversal of Fortune and the English Nobility, 1075–1455, Manchester, 2008.
329 Annals of Margam, Annales Monastici, i, 27; Warren, King John, 82–3. The Annals were probably written after de Braose’s fall.
330 RW, ii, 48–9.
331 Warren, King John, 184, 187.
332 Crouch, ‘Baronial Paranoia’, 51; Painter, King John, 249–50.
333 AB, 105.
334 Cited in Painter, King John, 231. Painter suggested that she was probably John’s mistress and was buying her way out of the king’s bed (231).
335 The quotes are from Nicholas Vincent, ‘Introduction’, in Vincent, Records, Administration and Aristocratic Society in the Anglo-Norman Realm, xiv. See also Marie Lovatt, ‘Archbishop Geoffrey of York: A Problem in Anglo-French Maternity’ from the same volume and Vincent, ‘Isabella of Angôuleme’.
336 BC, 207.
337 Crouch, ‘Baronial Paranoia’, 60.
338 RC, 167.
339 Holt, The Northerners, 34.
340 Crouch ‘Baronial Paranoia’, 62.
341 The quote is from Turner, King John, 222. For the composition of the baronial party, see Painter, King John, 284–99. Painter emphasises the youth of the baronial faction. The question of knights is addressed by Holt, The Northeners, 35–60; Kathryn Faulkner, ‘The Knights in the Magna Carta Civil War’, in TCE, 8, 2001; J.R. Maddicott, ‘Magna Carta and the Local Community, 1215–19’, Past and Present, 101, 1984. On the question of loyalty, see also S.D. Church, The Household Knights of King John, Cambridge, 1999, 100–16.
342 Paul Latimer, ‘Rebellion in South-western England and the Welsh Marches, 1215–1217’, Historical Research, 80 (208), 2007.
343 Poole, Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 470; Warren, King John, 230.
344 AB, p 116–18. Fitzwalter’s retinue was only about 50, so the figures here are clearly inflated, but the point is made. It is unlikely that John would have hung an earl for this.
345 Turner, King John, 223.
346 See n. 2 for events leading to Magna Carta.
347 Holt, The Northerners, p 103–4 for figures.
348 Keith Stringer, ‘The War of 1215–17 in its Context’, in Richard Oram (ed), The Reign of Alexander II, 1214–49, Leiden, 2005. My thanks to Prof Stringer for sending me an early draft of this important and detailed study.
349 BC, 218. This was not actually mentioned in the charter.
350 RW, ii, 114; RC, p 171–2.
351 Painter, King John, 303.
352 BC, 220. Generational splits were a feature of rebellions.
353 RW, ii, p 137. For London and its relationship with the rebels, see Tony Moore, ‘“Other Cities Have Citizens, London’s are Called Barons.” Connections between London and Essex During the Magna Carta Civil War (1215–17’), forthcoming. Many thanks to Dr Moore for sending me a draft of his important essay. Also for London, see his ‘Government and Locality in Essex in the Reign of Henry III’, unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Cambridge, 2006, 62–76. Again, I am indebted to Dr Moore for his kindness in forwarding me a copy of his important thesis. Also: Natalie Fryde, Why Magna Carta? Angevin England Revisited, Munster, 2001, 73–81; C.N.L. Brooke and Gillian Keir, London, 800–1216: the Shaping of a City, London, 1975, 49–56.
354 RW, ii, 117–18.
355 RC, 171–2.
356 Baldwin says that Philip Augustus was at best reluctant and at worst hostile to intervention in England after Bouvines (Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 332). This is areal possibility, but he may have indulged the ambitions of his son Louis. Philip would also have been keenly aware from his father Louis VII of the efficacy of sowing internal dissent in England.
357 See AB, 148–9 for events.
358 Painter, King John, 308.
359 Ibid, 309.
360 For the full text of Magna Carta, see Holt, Magna Carta, 441–73; Warren, King John, 265–77; Turner, Magna Carta, 226–36.
361 Warren, King John, 239.
362 Matthew Paris, ii, 611.
363 Holt, Magna Carta, 228.
364 BC, 222.
365 Warren, King John, 108. For John’s relations with Salisbury, see Brock Holden, ‘The Balance of Patronage: King John and the Earl of Salisbury’, Haskins Society Journal, 8, 1996.
366 For Falkes, see Daniel Power, ‘Bréauté, Sir Falkes de’, Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford, accessed online at www.oxforddnb.com.
367 Turner, King John, 251. Turner summarises the positions well (251–3) and I have borrowed from him heavily for the following passage.
368 See Richard Eales, ‘Castles and Politics in England, 1215–1214’, TCE2, 1988.
369 Painter, King John, 352–3.
370 Ibid, 353.
371 Turner, King John, 252.
372 Half a century later, another rebel, Simon de Montfort, and another king, Henry III, viewed Rochester in similar terms: see J.R. Maddicott, Simon de Montfort, Cambridge, 1994, 268. For Rochester, see RW, 145–51; AB, 158–60, 163; BC, 226. I have, as far as I am aware, provided here the most detailed account of the siege.
373 The result of this action is clearly seen at Rochester today; the south-western tower was rebuilt immediately after the siege in the more modern and effective circular form, standing incongruously next to its older partners.
374 R. Allen Brown, Rochester Castle, 2nd edn., English Heritage, 1986, 10–11. I was fortunate to have taken postgraduate studies with Prof Allen Brown at King’s College, London.
375 Ralph Turner, ‘King John’s Military Reputation Reconsidered’, Journal of Medieval History, 19, 1993.
376 For example, a detailed study of Wendover’s chronicle reveals that most woundings and fatalities in this period were from crossbows and bows. See McGlynn, ‘Roger of Wendover and the Wars of Henry III’, 188. Much has been written on these weapons, for example: Kelly de Vries, Medieval Military Technology, Peterborough, 1992, 33–44; David Nicolle, Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era, 1050–1350: Western Europe and the Crusader States, London, 1999, passim; Vernon Foley, George Palmer and Werner Soedel, ‘The Crossbow’, Scientific American, 1985. Matthew Strickland and Robert Hardy, The Great Warbow, Stroud, 2005; Jim Bradbury, The Medieval Archer, Woodbridge, 1985. Readers will discover here elements of the longbow debate, ie: the longbow was a radical new weapon which revolutionised English tactics in the Hundred Years War leading to such great victories as Crécy and Agincourt. For my mind, I think it highly improbable that it was a new weapon: in age of technological wonders such as castles and cathedrals, it seems impossible that medieval man would not have realised a longer bow would have greater power. As armour developed, so the bow would have too to attempt to counter it. Gerald of Wales gives a vivid depiction of the penetrative power of bows in the late twelfth century: Gerald of Wales, The Journey Through Wales/The Description of Wales, London, 1978, 113.
377 RW, ii, 150, confirmed by AB, 163.
378 Froissart, Chronciles, 106. For a discussion of threats, see McGlynn, By Sword and Fire, 189–94.
379 AB, 161–2.
380 Ibid, 160.
381 See Petit-Dutaillis, Louis VIII, 71. Ralph of Coggeshall says that John had passed on forged letters: RC, 176–7.
