[264] Stubbs, pref. to W. Coventry, vol. ii. pp. xxvi., xxvii. [265] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 90. [266] R. Coggeshall, pp. 99, 100. [267] R. Howden, vol. iv. pp. 89, 90. [268] R. Wendover (ed. Coxe), vol. iii. pp. 139, 140. Cf. _Gesta Ric._ pp. 81, 82. [269] That the famous speech put into the mouth of Archbishop Hubert by Matthew Paris (_Chron. Maj._ vol. ii. pp. 454, 455) is _not_ noted by contemporary writers does not indeed prove that it was never delivered, but does indicate that, if delivered, it had for contemporary ears no such significance as has been given to it by some modern writers, or as Matthew himself appears to have attached to it. Some such address may have been made to the assembly by the archbishop before the coronation; but if so, it was evidently regarded at the time as a part of the formalities usual on the occasion, not remarkable enough to be worth recording. In Matthew’s own MS. the passage is a marginal addition; and in the form in which he gives it, I can only regard it as the first of the many unauthenticated interpolations into the plain text of Roger of Wendover with which Matthew has confused for later students the history of the reign of John. [270] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 90; R. Wendover, vol. iii. p. 139. [271] _Mag. Vita S. Hugon._ p. 293. [272] R. Wendover, vol. iii. p. 140. [273] R. Howden, vol. iv. pp. 88, 89. [274] _Ib._ p. 91. [275] R. Wendover, vol. iii. p. 140. [276] R. Diceto, vol. ii. p. 166. [277] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 91, says “Nottingham,” but R. Diceto, vol. ii. p. 166, says “Northampton,” and Hardy’s _Itinerary of K. John_, a. 1, shows the king at Northampton on Whit Monday, June 7. [278] R. Howden, _l.c._ [279] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 91. R. Diceto, vol. ii. p. 166, gives the date as June 19, but the _Itin._ a. 1 shows John at Shoreham on the 20th, which is R. Howden’s date for the crossing. [280] R. Coggeshall, p. 100. [281] Gerv. Cant. vol. ii. p. 92. The place called by Gervase “Ballum” and “Wallum” can only be Gaillon, which Roger of Howden calls “Gwallum” in vol. iv. p. 106. [282] R. Howden, vol. iv. pp. 92, 93. [283] _Itin._ a. 1. [284] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 93. See the treaty with Flanders--dateless, but probably executed on this occasion--in _Rot. Chart._ p. 31. [285] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 95. [286] _Rot. Chart._ pp. 30, 31 (a. r. 1). “Et,” adds John, “non tantum de praedictis terris nostris volumus quod sit domina, sed etiam de nobis et omnibus terris et rebus nostris.” [287] Rigord, c. 129. [288] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 95. [289] _Rot. Chart._ p. 30. [290] R. Howden, vol. iv. p. 96. [291] _Itin._ a. 1. [292] R. Howden, _l.c._ [293] The writer of the _Hist. de G. le Mar._ v. 12472, calls it “Borc la _Reïne_,” but seemingly for no other reason than that he had ended his previous line with the word “_fine_” and wanted a rime to it. [294] _Hist. de G. le Mar._ vv. 12471–86. [295] _Rot. Chart._ _l.c._