Great Britain -- History -- Henry III, 1216-1272; Henry III, King of England, 1207-1272
[115] _Hist. G. le Mar._, l. 15884.
[116] When they had a joint letter of safe conduct to go to the court
for six days; _Pat. Rolls_, vol. i. p. 10, 8th December, 1216.
[117] _Hist. G. le Mar._, ll. 15872–86.
[118] A dateless letter from the Earl Marshal, Walter de Lacy, William
de Cantelupe, and Falkes, to the Earl of Salisbury and the younger
Marshal, sets forth that the writers have sworn “quod conventionem
prolocutam inter dominum nostrum Henricum regem Angliæ illustrem et
nos” [_sic_, but surely it should be _vos_?] “pro posse nostro firmiter
et absque malo ingenio teneri faciemus,” wherefore the two persons
addressed are to come without delay to the writers, who will have
them absolved by the Bishop of Chichester, he being empowered by the
Pope and the Legate to absolve persons returning to allegiance. _Pat.
Rolls_, vol. i. p. 109.
[119] _Hist. G. le Mar._, ll. 15884–96.
[120] Cf. _ib._ ll. 15901–2, and _Close Rolls_, vol. i., p. 299.
[121] _Pat. Rolls_, vol. i. p. 37.
[122] _Hist. G. le Mar._, ll. 15943–4.
[123] _Ib._ l. 15972.
[124] _Ib._ ll. 15960–84. Reinforcements were on 7th April summoned to
be at Winchester on Wednesday after the close of Easter, _i.e._, 10th
April; _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 335 b.
[125] “S’en alerent _Baucone_,” _Hist. G. le Mar._, 15986. The name is
hopelessly corrupt; M. Meyer suggests in a note “à Suzhantone?” It is
probably either Southampton or Odiham; cf. _Hist. Ducs_, pp. 187, 189.
[126] _Hist. G. le Mar._, ll. 16003–10. The place is there called
_Rovcestre_, but there can be no doubt Porchester is meant; we know
from the _Close Roll_, vol. i. p. 301 b, that the siege of Porchester
was begun before 20th March.
[127] _Hist. G. le Mar._, ll. 16011–33.
[128] _Hist. Ducs_, pp. 187, 189.
[129] _Pat. Rolls_, vol. i. pp. 57, 62.
[130] _Hist. Ducs_, p. 188.
[131] See the orders “de conversis” in _Close Rolls_, vol. i. pp. 300 b
_et seq._
[132] R. Wend., vol. iv. p. 14. Cf. _Hist. Ducs_, p. 189, and _Hist.
G. le Mar._, ll. 16092–6. Roger gives the date, “post Paschalem
solemnitatem,” _i.e._, after 26th March.
[133] _Hist. Ducs_, p. 188.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account