[712] The Barnwell annalist’s account of this affair (W. Cov., _l.c._) suggests a possibility that Aumale’s deputy constable at Rockingham may have been more forward than Aumale himself to resist the King, and in fact gone beyond the count’s orders in shutting the gates. Mr. Turner thinks the statement of Roger of Wendover (vol. iv, p. 65) that the two castles were found “penitus omnia victualium genere destituta, ita quidem quod nec etiam tres panes invenirentur in eis,” “suggests that the count had been misrepresented by the letters patent of November, 1219, which recited that he was fortifying the castles and storing them with corn” (Turner, pt. II. p. 242). I cannot follow this argument; to me a statement as to the contents of a place in June, 1220, conveys no suggestion whatever as to the contents of that place in November, 1219. [713] _Pat. Rolls_, vol. i. p. 240, 29th June, 1220. [714] See above, p. 143. The date must be before 29th June, as the Earl speaks of the Count’s lack of obedience to the King “de his quae modo custodit in Anglia.” [715] He may even have had no stake there at all. For all we know, his father may not have possessed a rood of land at Fors or anywhere else. Fors itself is a mere village. [716] _Ann. Dunst._, a. 1220, p. 64. [717] _Ib._ p. 58; cf. W. Cov., vol. ii. p. 246, and _Ann. Wav._, a. 1220. [718] _Hist. Ducs_, p. 209. [719] Cf. W. Cov., vol. ii. p. 245, _Ann. Dunst._, p. 58, and _Hist. Ducs_, pp. 208, 209. The last reckons twenty-five bishops; the first, seventeen bishops and three archbishops, among whom, however, he does not name Reims. [720] _Hist. Ducs_, p. 209; _Ann. Dunst._, _l.c._ [721] _Hist. Ducs_, p. 208. [722] “Praesente ... rege Anglorum Henrico quarto,” says the Barnwell annalist (W. Cov., _l.c._), using the reckoning which counted the “young King,” Henry II’s son, as Henry III. [723] _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 437. [724] Cf. _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 437 b, and _Ann. Dunst._, a. 1220. [725] _Roy. Lett._, vol. i. p. 151.