A document now held at the library of the Society of Antiquaries of London yields fascinating insights into King Edward II and his life shortly before the revolution of 1326–27, led by his disaffected queen Isabella of France and her paramour Roger Mortimer, swept him from his throne. Society of Antiquaries of London (SAL) MS 122 records payments made out of the king's chamber from 5 June 1325 until the end of October 1326, when most of Edward's remaining household staff abandoned him shortly before his capture in South Wales and subsequent imprisonment at Kenilworth Castle in Warwickshire. J. C. Davies pointed out a century ago that ‘the Chamber was the most personal organization of the king. It was the direct expression of his will.’ The chamber provided Edward II's personal service, and many of the payments recorded in SAL MS 122 relate to the king's private gifts and entertainment as well as wages paid regularly to the king's chamber staff and his sailors, carpenters and blacksmiths. On days where no payments were made, this was also carefully recorded (‘ce iour rien en issue’). Kept in French by Edward's controller Robert Holden and receiver William of Langley, and ninety-three pages long, SAL MS 122 is the only account of Edward II's chamber still extant in its entirety. Using entries from the document, this article will provide a portrait of the ill-fated king during the last few months of his reign.

Edward's relations with Eleanor and Hugh Despenser

Edward II spent Christmas 1325 and New Year 1326 at Bury St Edmunds and Haughley in Suffolk. He received a New Year's gift of a palfrey horse with saddle and equipment from his eldest niece, Eleanor Despenser, wife of his chamberlain and ‘favourite’ Hugh Despenser the Younger, lord of Glamorgan. From the evidence of SAL MS 122, it would appear that Eleanor, rather than her husband, was the person closest to and most favoured by the king in the last year or so of his reign and perhaps earlier. Between 1323 and 1325 Edward owned a ship named after her, La Alianore la Despensere, and in 1323 he gave her a gift of 100 marks when she was ill after childbirth and paid her and her daughter Isabella's expenses.

Mr. Solicitor.

Out of the confused Statuts belonging to the Universitie of Oxford, such as were suteable to the present Government (with addition of some new) being compiled into a bodie consisting of 21 Titles, besides an Appendix thereunto: His Maiestie is gratiously pleased to confirme the same, and to establish and authorize them to be observed and obeyed in the said Universitie for ever. Which Confirmation you are forthwith to prepare for His Maiesties royall Signature. And this shalbe your warrant for so doing.

W: Cant:

Lambeth house 26 May 1636

Appendix

My very Honourable good Lorde

I understand your Lordship hath made stay of a Grante to Mr Rowlande Woodward of the place of Assistante to the Master of the Ceremonies, and that your Lordship doubte's my Lord Treasurer hath not bene made acquainted with it. Wherfore I have thought good having particular knowledge of the cariage of this busines to desire your Lordship to understand, that the poore gentleman having long served his Majesty in foraine partes and now lately in the Signet office by deputation from Sir Humfrey May, which employment together with all meanes of subsisting he hath lost by his deceasse, my Lord of Dorchester not only with consent but furtherance of my Lord Treasurer, moved his Majesty to bestow this place upon him, which his Majesty was pleased to do, untill he may be provided for in som other way. This being the trueth, I doubt not but your Lordship will take into your Honourable consideration the condition of the poore gentleman, and vouch safe him as faire a passage with your Lordship as he hath had with his Majesty, and the other Lordes. I desire your Lordships pardon for this trouble, and shall ever rest

your Lordships very loving frende and servant

Guil: London:

Fulham: 2: August 1630:

To the Right Honourable my very good Lorde Thomas Lord Coventrey Lord Keeper of the Greate Seale of England these

BRITAIN's EU membership referendum of June 2016, discussed in the Preface, measured something decisively, and while the interpretation of the figures is open to question, the result was not, and it will have changed Britain for ever. Other things about the west country could be or have been similarly measured: its GDP, for example, for purposes of comparison with those of other regions and the ensuing balance of trade. (The GDP per capita of the West of England, which ranks fourth of the nine official regions, is less than a 9 per cent share of the English total: London has nearly 26 per cent.) But has anyone ever tried to measure music?

The sum total of all musical production and consumption in a region could in theory be calculated in similar ways to GDP, and for similar purposes. This would include net export and import balances in relation to the metropolis, other regions, and other countries. It would, however, soon lead to the desire to put a figure on qualities not habitually turned into quantities, such as the value of personal skills produced within the region but consumed outside it, or vice versa. (Fanny Moody would be an example of the former, the current Glastonbury Festival of the latter.) It would also quickly lead to an attempt at calculating value in terms somewhat akin to the measurement of half-life in radioactive substances: how great has been the resonance over time of a particular musical product, centre of production, type of activity, or person? Given that this question of resonance or, to return to Bourdieu, distinction, is precisely what universities’ Research Evaluation Framework submissions are now having to wrestle with under the name of ‘impact’, does anyone have the stomach for this?

Perhaps not. Yet it is difficult to conclude a comprehensive study of musicking within a region over six or seven centuries without wanting to know what it has all amounted to. Has activity ebbed and flowed? Was there a golden age? Or is there some kind of a formula for the amount of music a community or a network of communities needs that does not vary much with time?

It was a beautiful day, 5 September 1979, hot and sunny after an early mist, when I first discovered in the old Public Record Office in Chancery Lane, on a tightly rolled vellum strip, the depositions in the case of Forth v. Forth and Jerningham. The unrolled document was just over five metres long. I found the testimony given by several witnesses concerning the failure of an Elizabethan marriage poignantly sad but thoroughly absorbing. I returned to the roll the following day, and spent most of the morning preparing an abstract of the testimony. Diarmaid MacCulloch happened to be there. I mentioned my find to him. Of course he knew that case already. For him, the religious tension he saw at its heart was its most interesting aspect. A reference to it appears on p. 245 of his Suffolk and the Tudors: Politics and Religion in an English County 1500–1600 (Oxford, 1986), where a footnote directs the reader to a very brief account in his thesis. Like so many other researchers into the history of sixteenth-century East Anglia, I have been heavily indebted to the detailed yet panoramic view of Suffolk's history presented in his monograph.

For all its intrinsic fascination, the case proved awkward to fit into the project I was working on at the time. I resolved to return to it in retirement. Since 1986 it has not been entirely neglected. Professor Tim Stretton came across it in the course of his research on the Court of Requests, and mentioned it briefly in his Women Waging Law in Elizabethan England (Cambridge, 1998). In his edition of records of Marital Litigation in the Court of Requests 1542–1642 (Camden 5th series, 32, 2008), Professor Stretton included in an appendix a long, though not complete, list of entries in the books of the court, as well as of documents from the court's archive concerned with what were clearly two cases arising out of the same dispute rather than one. He did not however include any of this material in his edited collection. My intermittent epistolary acquaintance with Tim Stretton goes back to the 1990s, though I met him for the first time only in 2016. It was hugely kind of him to send me his own notes on the case when my work was already well advanced.

This chapter describes three centuries, from the start of the reign of the first count-king, Alfonso, in 1162 until the death of Crown Prince Charles, the son of John II, in 1461. Our description weaves together various threads of the cultural history of the Crown: the literacy of the royal family and the nobility, and their familiarity with Occitan, French, and Latin; the impact of this on literary output (poetry, historiography, oratory) and the promotion of translations; and the emergence of authors, almost always connected with the royal court, who wrote original works in Catalan that display their knowledge of the classical tradition. We turn our attention to the works of five such authors, works undertaken between 1399 and 1464, in more detail in Chapter 3. The reigns of John II (1458–79) and Ferdinand II (1479–1516) are covered in a separate chapter, Chapter 4, as that is when we see the emergence of Latin humanism and vernacular texts that derive directly from it, and when the advent of the printing press provided greater access to culture.

Royal Literature and the First Translations (1162–c. 1360)

The establishment of the Crown in the second half of the twelfth century coincides with the first clear signs of royal literacy and of a wide-reaching cultural initiative. Scholars talk of an ‘Alfonsine period’ in troubadour poetry because King Alfonso I (r. 1162–96) welcomed many troubadours in his Catalan– Occitan domains, and used their poetry as a political tool in his fight with the Count of Toulouse. His enthusiam for this literary form thus created a cultural bridge between the two sides of his kingdom (M. Cabré 2013: 227–34). He wrote poetry himself, and must have acquired a certain prestige from his debate with one of the poets he supported, Giraut de Bornelh, a scholar poet dubbed the ‘master of the troubadours’ in his thirteenth-century biography or vida. From the time of Alfonso I the promotion and practice of troubadour poetry became a distinctive feature of the royal house and by extension of the nobility and the court: many members of the royal family wrote poetry and composed music until the end of the fourteenth century (Cluzel 1957–8; Espadaler 2001).

Salutem in Christo.

My very good Lord

I sealed this enclosed Letter in the morning Wednesday the 7th of October that it might be ready for Mr Henry Richmond, whome I appointed to call for it one Thursday morning betimes; and within few houres after came twooe of Sir Ralph Ashtons Agents (as they call themselves) and brought me this Petition which your Lordship shall heere receive together with my Letters. It seemes faire, but I doubt he that sent it meanes not soe. All the answere I gave them was this. I gave them leave to attend Mr Sollicitor my Counsell if they pleased, to whome I sent the Petition sealed up, but with this resolution both to him, and them, that till Mr Griffith came, by whome I might truly informe myselfe howe my busynesses stand in Lancashyre, I would give no answer. And that I thought I should not hearken to any end without his surrender of his Lease of 3 Lives, and submission of a change of it into 21 yeares. Notwithstanding this Petition, and his Agents seeming humility, I know to whome they said, they were sure noe flaw could be found in the Lease. This is all, and soe in great hast, I leave you to the Grace of God, and rest

Your Lordships very loveinge Freinde and Brother.

W: Cant:

Croyden. October. 8th. 1635

To the Right Reverend Father in God my very good Lord and Brother the Lord Bishop of Chester these.

All the main actors in our story besides the unfortunate Charles Forth lived on after the end of the proceedings in Requests in 1597. This chapter sets out what has so far been discovered about their subse¬quent fortunes, following first the Butley Forths, especially Charles's father Robert, mother Frances, and brother William; then Elizabeth's mother Katherine, sisters Catherine and Frances, and brother-in-law Henry Jerningham; and finally Elizabeth herself and her children Katherine and Francis.

The Butley Forths

Robert Forth survived the final failure of his suit in Requests by four years. He died at Butley on 17 February 1601. His will, dated 2 February 1601, was proved a month later. Robert designated his son William the successor to the great bulk of his lands. Frances's substantial ‘dower and jointure’, including the site of Butley Priory and his mansion house, would however pass to William only after his mother's death. She was also to hold for fourteen years after Robert's death a further consid¬erable amount of property, using the income for the payment of his debts and the fulfilment of his will. Robert bequeathed to his younger son, also named Robert, an outlying cluster of relatively small proper¬ties near the border between Essex and Suffolk which Frances was to hold until the younger Robert reached his majority, together with an annuity of £20. These provisions gave Frances a substantial degree of control. William Forth was almost certainly close to his age of majority at the time of his father's death. He nevertheless faced the prospect of a long wait for full control of the lands left to him.

Robert was concerned for his children's upbringing as well as their future livelihood. He expected Frances to take diligent care of them during their minority and provide for their education, including ‘godlie, good and decent exercises’. He also hoped that Thomas Retheriche or Reddridge, minister and pastor of the parish church of Butley, would take pains to instruct both William and the parishioners in the Word of God by preaching and catechising, and from time to time give William counsel to live according to God's will. Robert appointed Frances and William his executors, and asked his brother-in-law John Osborne to give them advice and assistance as the supervisor of his will.

Sir:

I am gladd to heare of your health, and that God hath bless’d you with a Sonne to inheritt your name first and your fortunes after. Nor is that which your selfe observe the least degree in this blessinge: The securinge of them whom your often and daungerous sickness had made fearfull. Yett notwithstandinge I hope the Totteringe Wall which you mention shall stand longe and safe: as it well may if you laye not too much weight upon it. And I hope you will remember, for your Frends sakes as well as your owne, that a Wall that totters is not stronge enough to bee made a studdy Wall. To Gods grace and your owne best moderation I leave you, beinge desirous that you should knowe I am leavinge London and goinge to my Benefice not to returne till about Michaellmas. And about that tyme we beginn to hope againe to see the Princes Heighness well in England. God grant it: and then I shall the more contentedly rest Your very lovinge Frend

Guil: Meneve:

Durham Howse August. 2. 1623.

To the right worshipfull my very worthy Frend Sir John Scudamore Knight Baronett att Holme Lacy in Hereford-Sheire these delivered.

Sir:

I Cannot recall whearin the answearinge of your Leters denyed secretlye, or otherwise, the purport. Thiss I am sure, I shall ever be glad to heare of you; and most when your Leters maye bringe good newes; since it is onlye good which I must desyer ever maye befale you. I find the next passage of your Leter all in physicke: and I care not howe deepe that wear in, soe you wear out. What hath forced your bodye to thiss observance of it in your youth, bye thiss tyme you have lerned to knowe that you maye the better observe: or els, if yett unknowne, it is probablye worss, et aliquid quod Natura sinistra perperit. But upon your liver you cast the fault, and thear I thinke it is. I shall be glad when I come into those parts to finde both it, and you stronge. Nowe for your selfe: nothinge cann better please me, then to keepe that which you call your ill wont. For next to your selfe, your Leters ar best welcome; and you cannot bestowe your love whear it is like to finde more that is like it selfe. All mye feare is, that the great chardges which these tymes have putt me to in mye beginnings, will keepe me soe lowe that I shall have noe libertye from good husbandrye to attend mye selfe, or my frends: but such as I have is yours. I praye remember mye love and service to your Grandfather, and your Ladye, allmost all the acquaintaunce I have in those parts. Soe I leave you and them to the grace of God, and shall ever rest

your assured lovinge frend

Guil: Meneve:

Durham House. February. 12. 1621.

I have hearin sent you a Bill of the preachers as they ar designed for thiss Lent

before the Kinge.

Salutem in Christo.

My very good Lord.

I am not able to give your Grace any farther account as yet as any Church buysiness concerning Ireland, but Mr Hamiltons last Letters informed you of as much as is yet done.

That which makes me trouble you now is breifly this. You shall fynde here inclosed a Petition referrd by his Majesty to the Lords of the Committee for Ireland. The Contents are fully therin conteynd, and I shall not need to repeat. I make bold to send it for two Causes. First that your Lordship may consider and weigh it well, that if you lyke it, you may with as much convenyent speed as you can send me a Letter of your approbation: and if you dislyke it, you would with the same speed send me your dislyke, fortifyed with as good Reasons as you can give for it. And till your Answere come I presume the Committee will not pass it, For for my self unless I were upon the place, and acquainted with the Customes of the Country, and saw the neglects of the People to reedify theyr Churches, and soe upon the whole matter had well consyderd what might be the best remedy for those demolished Places, I can say little to purpose.

Secondly that you may know what motyve those Gentlemen had to make theyr Petition. Sir John Wishart I have little acquaintance with, but Mr Elphinstone hath ever shewed himself a very good Freind to the Church, to the utmost of his power, and I verily beleive he would not be in an Action that might tend to any disadvantage of the Church if he knew it. Therfore from him I am to certify your Grace thus much, that Mr Highgate (now Bishop of Kilfanora) when he was last year in England, put them upon this way by his perswasion, and told them to this or the lyke effect; That such a Graunt as this Petition import's would be very beneficiall to the Church of Ireland, very wellcome to the Churchmen, and without any burden or discontent to the People. Nevertheless I think it very fitt your Grace should well consyder of it, and then I will governe my self accordingly, first for that Churches Good, and then for the Content of those Gentlemen.

Mr Attorney:

Whereas his Majestie by vertue of an assignment made unto him by John White Esquire and others in obedience to a decree heretofore made in the Exchecquer Chamber is possessed of the Tythes of Garbes blade graine and hay yearely and from time to time comeing growing renewing or arising within the Towne Hamlett feilds or parish of Cotton in the County of Salop and of a barne there called the Tything barne of Cotton for the terme of three score years if Thomas Lloyd Clerke Vicar of the Church of St Almonds alias St Alkmonds in the towne of Shrewsbury should soe long continue Vicar of the said Church. And whereas the revenues of the Vicaridge of the said Church are soe small that they are not competent for the maintenance of the said Vicar. His Majestie is graciously pleased out of his pious zeale and care for the Church and to the intent the said Thomas Lloyd during his incumbency in the Vicaridge of the church aforesaid may have a competent and certeine livelyhood do graunt unto him the said Barne and Tythes dureing the terme aforesaid soe that the said Thomas Lloyd doe pay yearely dureing the Terme of five yeares if hee continue Vicar of the said Church soe long unto the handes of the right reverend father in God William Lord Bishopp of London Lord high Treasurer of England the somme of xli per annum at the feasts of St Michaell the Archangell and the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin Mary by even portions which his Majestie hath appointed among other thinges to good and pious uses. And it is his Majesties express pleasure that you prepare a bill for his royall signature accordingly for which this shalbe your warrante.

W: Cant:

To Sir John Bankes Knight his Majesties Attorney generall.

Salutem in Christo

My very good Lord

Though in this end of Terme a great heape of busynes is fallen upon me, yet I could not refuse my Kinsman Mr. Cottesford to write these few lynes to your Lordship in his behalfe. My Lord Hastings your Sonne was honourably pleased to give him the Parsonage of Inglefield in Berks, where he hath lyved ever since, but being marryed, and having formally spent som what freely while he had the honour to be trusted with your Sonnes, I fynde he hath gone backward in the world. To keepe him from sinkinge, and withall to give him incouragement, I have lately given him a Benefice in Suffolke, and if by the favour of your Lordship, and of the Lord Hastinges, he might have leave and power to exchange Inglefield, for some Benefice in those Partes, to joyne to that which I intend him, he may be made able to lyve, and have great cause to thanke your Lordship. I know your Lordship is soe noble, that this humble desyre of his, would not be stucke at, but that there is an Advouson of Inglefield granted to your Chaplaine, which yet I presume you will not suffer to be a Barr in soe honest and necessary a motion as this is, the Party with whom he intendes to exchange being as old, or elder then himself, and as likely to make that Parsonage voyde as he. For I hope there was never that Intentment, that if I did him a good turne as a deserving Kinsman, to give him any Addition to his Means, that should be used as an Argument to take of that which you have given, and I hope he did in some measure deserve. I hartily pray your Lordship therefore to over-rule your Chaplaine in this Particular, and I shall take it as a lovinge respect from your Lordship to my Kinsman and to me. If it should fall out otherwise (as I hope not) I may be dryven to leave Mr. Cottesford at Inglefield, till I can provide thereaboutes for him, and to bestowe my now vacant Benefice upon another. Your Lordship will give me leave to express my desyres earnestly to you in this Particular, because I am willing to be beholding to you for it.

Salutem in Christo

Sir.

I have acquaynted the Deane and Chapter of Canterbury, according to the Information I receav’d from you, with the Schollars place now voyde in your College given by my worthy Predecessour Archbishop Parker. And they commend unto mee one Richard Kennett for a studious towardly young man, as fitt for that place. Hee is now a Student of your owne College (as they tell mee) and was sometyme a Schollar of the Schoole at Canterburye. I pray therefore, if upon triall hee shall acquitt himselfe to you, Admitt him into the Vacant place according to the Rule of your Benefactour. Soe to Gods blessed protection I leave you, and rest

Your Loving friend

W: Cant:

Lambeth. July 7th. 1640.

To my Loving friend Dr Love Master of Corpus Christi College in Cambridge these