Katherine Swynford

Chapter 4

Prev List Next

The love and friendship between John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford was to endure for more than a quarter of a century. For great lords, marriage was normally a political affair, and love a private one.1 The Church and the public at large might frown on extramarital liaisons, but they were an accepted part of aristocratic life, given that love rarely followed marriage. Because John"s liaison with Katherine was to last for so long, many people in court circles must have come to regard it as unremarkable. In the meantime, John would treat his young wife with respect and courtesy, for she was his d.u.c.h.ess and a queen in her own right; but clearly his heart was Katherine"s, and would probably remain so until death.

It was quite permissible, in a world in which courtly love held sway over relationships between the s.e.xes, for a man like John of Gaunt to pay open court to a lady who was not his wife; but Katherine was a widow, who for the first year of her widowhood was expected to be unattainable; she was of far lower degree than he, for all that she might have been distantly related, and had nothing more than herself to offer him; and John was a newly married man. Yet where Katherine was concerned, he seems to have been unable to restrain his pa.s.sion: "he was blinded by desire, fearing neither G.o.d nor shame amongst men".2 Was Chaucer thinking of his sister-in-law and John of Gaunt when, in the 1380s, he wrote, "You wise ones, proud ones, worthy ones and all, never scorn love . . . For love can lay his hands on every creature . . . The strongest men are overcome, and those most notable and highest in degree."3 John"s younger brother, Thomas of Woodstock, would later put it more succinctly, calling him (says Froissart) a "doting fool" for loving Katherine Swynford so utterly and so enduringly.

Yet, sadly for those romantics who would prefer to believe that the Duke stayed true to Katherine within the limits of their adulterous relationship, there is some evidence that he had fleeting s.e.xual encounters with other women during the course of it. In 1381, he was publicly to confess that he had committed the sin of lechery with Katherine herself "and many others in his wife"s household".4 Certainly this reputation for lechery endured. Francis Thynne, Lancaster Herald under Elizabeth I, and a commentator on Thomas Speght"s edition of Chaucer,5 a.s.serted that John of Gaunt "had many paramours in his youth, and was not very continent in his age". In The Boke of the d.u.c.h.esse, on which Thynne must have based his a.s.sertion, Chaucer has John recalling that from his youth he had "paid tribute as a devotee to love, most unrestrainedly, and joyfully become his thrall, with willing body, heart and all". When contemporary chroniclers spoke of the Duke as a lecher and "great fornicator", they may not have been commenting solely on his liaison with Katherine Swynford, as is often claimed. Then there is some fifteenth-century evidence that John died of a venereal disease, which if true he is unlikely to have contracted as a result of long years of fidelity to the same mistress.6 Even if this evidence is unsound, the fact that the allegation was made at all is proof that, forty years after his death, the charges of promiscuity were remembered and believable.

In his confession of 1381, John"s reference to "his wife" can only be to Constance; there is no evidence that he was unfaithful to Blanche, although it is of course possible. Thynne and Chaucer were obviously referring to John"s early amorous encounters: today, we know only of his affair with Marie de St Hilaire, but there were seemingly others; possibly the occasional grants to various ladies in the Register are rewards for favours bestowed. Thynne"s comment about John not being continent in his age probably refers to his notorious relationship with Katherine Swynford. But the Duke"s own confession, and Chaucer"s portrayal of him as a man who unrestrainedly pursued s.e.xual pleasure, suggest that he found it hard to remain physically faithful. During the years of his affair with Katherine, they were often apart, and he would have had many opportunities for straying. His taking many women of his wife"s household to bed supports the theory that he and Constance did not enjoy a satisfying conjugal relationship they had just two, possibly three children in twenty-three years and suggests that on his visits to her, he often abstained from her bed and a.s.suaged his needs elsewhere. For great lords, such casual dalliance was easy, and many regarded it as their privilege; in aristocratic society, these things were accepted. Fidelity, and the pursuit of the courtly ideal, were conceits that masked the indulgence of l.u.s.t. And probably John"s amours were fleeting and purely physical and made no impact on his obviously deep feelings for Katherine Swynford.

Katherine may only have found out about these casual affairs in 1381, after John made his public confession. Throughout their years together, he appears to have treated her with dignity, discretion and generosity, and perhaps never admitted to what he considered to be insignificant lapses.

The mediaeval Church, however, essentially regarded all s.e.xual acts as potentially sinful, following St Augustine, who wrote: "There is nothing that degrades the manly spirit more than the attractiveness of females and contact with their bodies." St Paul"s dictum, "It is better to marry than to burn", implied that celibacy was the ideal state. Even within marriage, s.e.x was meant to be only for the purpose of procreation: according to the ascetic St Jerome, a man and wife who indulged in carnal l.u.s.t for pleasure were no better than adulterers, for "in truth, all love is disgraceful, and with regard to one"s own wife, excessive love is. The wise man must love his wife with judgement, not with pa.s.sion. Let him curb his transports of voluptuousness, and not let himself be urged precipitately to indulge in coition. Nothing is more vile than to love a wife like a mistress." Certain s.e.xual positions were forbidden, as were masturbation and coitus interruptus, and those found guilty of indulging in oral s.e.x might incur a penance lasting three years. You could not make love on Sundays, holy days or saints" days, or during Lent, pregnancy or menstruation. For the devout, married life must have been a continual battle with temptation.

There was therefore no hope that the Church would ever officially look upon the adulterous relationship of John and Katherine with anything other than disapproval; each would have been regarded as equally guilty, and irrevocably d.a.m.ned.

In practice, however, att.i.tudes were more lax. By the fourteenth century, the promiscuity of the clergy had become a byword, and many in holy orders took a relaxed and worldly view of immorality. Whereas in the thirteenth century adulterers had been publicly whipped, they were now more likely to be forced to do public penance, going in procession to church wearing just a sheet and carrying a candle. But no one ever called for the mighty Duke of Lancaster and his mistress to be punished in such a humiliating way.

The laity were generally tolerant of s.e.xual licence, albeit in men, blaming it on the frailty and insatiability of women. Chaucer"s Canterbury Tales and Boccaccio"s Decameron reveal just how licentious fourteenth-century society was, and how relaxed with regard to fornication. The aristocracy were sophisticated to a degree in their att.i.tudes to s.e.x outside marriage: it was accepted that t.i.tled men took mistresses or had casual s.e.xual encounters. The royal court, as we have seen, was a hotbed of promiscuity, due to the financial inability of many young knights or gentlemen to marry. But where the wives and daughters of the n.o.bility were concerned, chast.i.ty was the order of the day, for dynastic bloodlines and inheritances had to be protected, and soiled goods were of little value in the marriage market. Thus the purity of n.o.blewomen was jealously guarded. Females of lower rank were considered fair game, and more responsive than their betters, and any gently born woman who so far forgot herself as to have an affair outside wedlock usually lost her reputation irrevocably. It is easy to see, therefore, why Katherine Swynford was so bitterly disparaged in the monastic chronicles.

When it came to b.a.s.t.a.r.dy, the world could be a cruel place. A b.a.s.t.a.r.d could not officially inherit lands or t.i.tles, nor obtain preferment in the Church. Yet these barriers could be circ.u.mvented by bequeathing property or by dispensations, and when it came to the aristocracy, much could be gained from a sympathetic monarch. Moreover, being the b.a.s.t.a.r.d child of a great lord conferred n.o.bility, inspired deference, and ent.i.tled one to bear the paternal arms differenced with a bend sinister denoting illegitimacy. The infant John Beaufort"s arms were the leopards and lilies of England on a bend, mounted on a shield of blue and white, the Lancastrian colours. Fathers were seen as having a duty to provide equally for their legitimate and illegitimate children.7 Katherine must have embarked upon her affair with John of Gaunt knowing exactly what she was doing, and being aware of the risks she was taking and the penalties that society could impose. That she chose to be his mistress in the light of this knowledge suggests that she loved him enough for the consequences not to matter, and that this, and the protection, security and benefits that such a relationship could afford her, were not only welcome to her, but of more importance than the stigma attached to being a partner in adultery and losing her reputation.

Much of what we know of Katherine Swynford"s years as John of Gaunt"s mistress is recorded in John of Gaunt"s Register, which survives for the periods 13726 and 137983. This covers much of the period in question, although three vital years are missing, as are the years following their parting. These missing records would surely have contained more clues as to the truth of the relationship between Katherine and John, so their loss is only to be lamented. Nevertheless, as will shortly become clear, there is much that can be inferred from the information that has come down to us.

John of Gaunt spent the Christmas of 1372 at Hertford Castle with Constance. Game from Ashdown Forest in Suss.e.x and five dozen rabbits from Aldbourne were delivered there for the Christmas feasts, while the Duke"s valet brought him cloth of gold, furs, silk and linen from his wardrobe at the Savoy.8 On Christmas Eve, Alyne Gerberge was dispatched to the Savoy to collect some jewels and precious stones that the Duke intended to give as New Year"s gifts, as well as jewels given by Edward III and the Black Prince to the d.u.c.h.ess Constance, who doubtless wanted to wear them during the festive season. It is tempting to speculate that some of the other jewels were intended as presents for Katherine Swynford, whose New Year gifts from her royal lover were almost never recorded in his Register. Her presents were probably paid for out of the large sums of money that the Duke frequently arranged to be "given into my own hands for my own secret business".9 Philippa Chaucer"s gifts were recorded, however, and at this New Year of 1373, she received six silver-gilt b.u.t.tons attached to an embroidered strip of fabric called a "b.u.t.toner",10 which indicates that, after less than a year in Constance"s service, she had become highly regarded by both the Duke and d.u.c.h.ess. Her life would now have been centred mainly upon the Lancastrian household, which was as well, because royal duties were keeping her and her husband increasingly apart: Chaucer was in Italy at this time on official business, and would not return until the following May.

John was still at Hertford on 10 January 1373, but soon afterwards he moved to the Savoy, where he remained until June, apart from a brief visit to Hertford in early February to celebrate the Feast of the Purification of the Virgin Mary with his wife.11 Katherine Swynford, meanwhile, had given birth to John"s child, but was probably back at the Savoy by 31 March, for it was on that date that Edward III rewarded her for bringing news of Catalina of Lancaster"s birth to him the previous year.

Writing after 1378, the chronicler Knighton describes Katherine as being in the d.u.c.h.ess Constance"s household. Certainly she would have been there from time to time, but probably not as a lady-in-waiting, for none of the many grants to her by the Duke would be in made in consideration of her good service to his second wife, although several were awarded in regard to her devotion to his first. Instead, John had found another post for Katherine that would facilitate her being near him as often as possible, and which would be eminently suited to her character and talents. He appointed her magistra which means mistress, directress, leader or, more loosely, governess to his daughters, Philippa, now thirteen, and Elizabeth, ten, and perhaps to his six-year-old heir Henry, too, until a governor was appointed for the boy in 1374. Effectively, Blanche"s children would now have two stepmothers the d.u.c.h.ess Constance, and Katherine Swynford, who was mistress in different senses to them and their father.

We do not know the exact date on which Katherine was appointed governess, and it has been suggested that she had fulfilled this role whilst she was in Blanche of Lancaster"s household. But she would have been quite young at that time, and frequently pregnant; moreover, continuity would have been an important factor, and there is no evidence to show that she was employed by the Duke between 1368 and 1372, when it appears that others were caring for the ducal daughters. An undated letter of c.1376 from a woman called Maud to John of Gaunt identifies Maud as a former nurse to young Philippa,12 and in 1370, Alyne Gerberge was rewarded with a lifetime annuity for caring for Philippa in the aftermath of Blanche"s death. In November 1371, we find that Lady Wake was serving as governess to all three of the Duke"s children.13 But she would not have been able to remain in the post of governess for long because she was preoccupied with bearing her husband a dozen children throughout the 1370s and 1380s.So by 1373, there was definitely a vacancy to be filled.

Katherine had the requisite skills and experience, and she had certainly helped to look after Blanche"s children during their mother"s lifetime, which would have been a factor that John must have taken into account when choosing her as his daughters" governess, because in everything that mattered, she was going to be a mother to them. John"s children were still sharing a joint household in 1372,14 so the likeliest date for Katherine"s preferment was after the birth of John Beaufort, around the spring of 1373. It may be that the children had been looked after in the interim by the damoiselle Amy de Melbourne, who was rewarded in 1375 by John of Gaunt for her care of them, or that Amy was an a.s.sistant to both Lady Wake and Katherine Swynford. From 1372, Amy and Alyne Gerberge were entrusted to look after the jewel coffers of the Duke"s womenfolk, and Alyne was then not only caring for Philippa but also dressing the d.u.c.h.ess Constance"s hair and setting in place her coronet. We know that the Duke thought highly of Amy because he sent her a pipe of wine each Christmas from 1372 onwards.15 Katherine"s appointment as governess was timely, because John was travelling abroad and expected to be away for some time. The war was going catastrophically, and England needed to intervene quickly, otherwise Aquitaine, that precious jewel in the Plantagenet crown, would be irrevocably lost. On 1 March 1373, John had begun to gather an army, having sealed an indenture to go campaigning in France for a year. Katherine must by now have faced up to the painful fact that the demands of his position, and the likely necessity for her to spend long periods in the country discreetly bearing his children, might mean that they would often be apart.

On 23 April, the Duke gave orders for Tutbury Castle, which had been damaged in a storm, to be put in good repair, so that his wife and children could reside there during his absence in France.16 Tutbury, where Blanche had died, was a mighty fortress perched high above the banks of the River Dove, and lay eleven miles south-west of Derby. John of Gaunt, who often stayed there for the excellent hunting in the vicinity, had built the red sandstone gatehouse in 1362, and carried out many works there over the years, so as to make the castle a fitting residence for his Queen. Below the castle stood St Mary"s Priory, a Benedictine house under the Duke"s patronage.17 By now, Katherine had perhaps taken up her duties as governess. In the fourteenth century, a "mistress"s" role was to supervise the upbringing of the girls committed to her charge until the day they married, and to set a good and virtuous example for them to follow.18 The emphasis was more on character training than the acquisition of skills, although learning the conduct expected of high-born females was important too. Formal education was not normally part of the governess"s remit: the teaching of the Scriptures and devotional works, reading, writing, English, French and perhaps a little Latin would have been undertaken by household chaplains. Katherine, however, was unusual in that she had grown up in one of the most cultivated courts in Christendom, and was part of an aristocratic circle in which learning in women was encouraged, so she herself may have imparted some of her own knowledge to the two princesses.

Above all, n.o.ble girls were to be protected from the snares of the flesh and the wiles of men, which was why so many were brought up in convents. In this respect, Katherine was perhaps not the wisest choice as governess, and her appointment may have led to a few knowledgeable eyebrows being lifted, but in all others she was eminently fitted for the office, otherwise John of Gaunt would surely not have appointed her; in thrall as he was to Katherine"s charms, he could never have compromised the education of his daughters, nor their moral welfare, for both were princesses of the blood and expected to make good political marriages. This argues that Katherine was discreet and did not flaunt her position in any way, and also that her intimate connection with John of Gaunt was not widely known at this time, nor her reputation compromised. Had it been, her appointment would have been cause for open scandal, which it was not. Chaucer may be referring obliquely to Katherine in "The Physician"s Tale" where he wryly observes that governesses with a past were well suited to be poachers turned gamekeepers,19 but this was written years later, and does not reflect contemporary opinion in the early 1370s. Above all, with the crown of Castile beckoning, John would not have wished to offend his wife by his indiscriminate promotion of his mistress.

Katherine would have been responsible for teaching Philippa and Elizabeth the accomplishments that would befit them to adorn courts and rule their own establishments: courtesy, conversation, good carriage, dancing, singing, embroidery, courtly games and household management. These were probably all skills in which Katherine herself was more than proficient. Although she was only about twenty-three, she was already the mother of at least four children, and experienced not only in the ways of courts, but also in running her own establishment at Kettlethorpe. Lady Wake, who was the same age, had been even younger when she looked after the Lancastrian siblings. Katherine was pious too, and this would have had some bearing on her influence over her charges. She was also responsible for their diet, their clothing and the accoutrements of their chamber.

Although Katherine was indeed in many ways qualified for her post, it seems to have been something of a sinecure, for clearly she was not always resident with her charges, and it would appear that the demands of the Duke and her own family came first. Thus we must conclude that being appointed governess was in part a ploy to lend Katherine respectability while ensuring that she could remain within the Duke"s...o...b..t and be available when he needed her, not only in bed but also at board, because she probably acted as hostess and graced his table in the absence of the d.u.c.h.ess. Yet there is evidence to show that she did spend a lot of time with Philippa and Elizabeth, that she indeed fulfilled her official role as their governess, and that even if she did so only on a part-time basis, she certainly had overall control of her charges. During her absences, she seems to have delegated their care to others such as Amy de Melbourne, while John of Gaunt"s Register also records occasional payments to ladies with whom the two princesses were sometimes sent to stay.

Occupying an official position gave Katherine a legitimate reason for residing in one or other of the ducal households. Such evidence as we have indicates that her duties and commitments, official or otherwise, sometimes necessitated her lodging with the d.u.c.h.ess Constance"s household, something that could not have happened unless Katherine was the soul of discretion and tact, given that John desired not to offend his wife, in whom he had invested all his political ambitions. Yet it appears that the d.u.c.h.ess"s Castilian ladies were already aware in 1373 that Katherine was John"s mistress. Their gossiping so annoyed the Duke that he packed them all off to Nuneaton Abbey, hoping that the Abbess would teach them discretion. By the end of 1374, they were chafing at the conventual regime at Nuneaton, and begging to be allowed to leave, but it was not until 1375 that John relented and sent them to live in Leicester with some of his trusted retainers; later, he arranged marriages for a number of them.20 If her ladies knew what was going on between the Duke and Katherine, the chances are that Constance did too. It has been suggested that her Spanish pride was affronted by Katherine, but it may be that the young d.u.c.h.ess took a more realistic view of such matters. She herself, after all, was the daughter of a royal mistress, and she came from a royal house famed for its high rate of b.a.s.t.a.r.dy. Preoccupied as she was with regaining her throne, and preferring to remain secluded with her Castilian entourage, she was perhaps relieved to know that her husband"s s.e.xual needs were being met by another woman. Her later acknowledgement that she herself was at fault with regard to the failure of their marriage suggests she was aware that she had made little effort to be a loving wife, or had defaulted in some other way. If she never loved her husband, she could hardly blame him for seeking love elsewhere, and perhaps she was not unduly troubled by the fact that it was John"s pa.s.sion for Katherine that was preventing him from making a success of their marriage. Furthermore, in the years to come, Katherine"s baseborn children by John would pose no threat to Constance"s own legitimate issue. Nor, it appears, did Katherine ever seek to interfere with John"s plans to conquer Castile, which was the most important thing in view in Constance"s life, and which, during the first two years of her marriage, seemed a realistically attainable goal. Hence Constance would have regarded her sojourn in England as purely temporary, and might well have reasoned that, once Castile was regained, she and John would live there, King and Queen in their own realm, and that her position would be una.s.sailable. Thus Katherine could hardly have posed any real threat to Constance.

In May 1373, the Duke"s ships began a.s.sembling at Dover and Sandwich. John was very busy with his preparations, but on the 12th, at the Savoy, he gave orders to John de Stafford, his receiver in Lincoln, that Katherine"s allowance be paid promptly during his absence: "We want and we command that you pay immediately to our very dear and well-beloved Dame Katherine de Swynford her annuity given by us to her, taken from the issues you will receive and in the manner that our letters of guarantee had specified; and see to it that there is no delay at the term of the payment, and no default. These my letters are a guarantee."21 Katherine seems to have either visited, or stayed briefly with John at his headquarters at the manor of Northbourne, a grange of St Augustine"s Abbey, Canterbury, that he had commandeered, which lay four miles west of Deal in Kent. Here he sojourned from 27 June to 16 July. Katherine"s presence at Northbourne underlines how important a person she now was in John"s life, and shows that he wanted to spend as much time as possible with her before the long parting that lay ahead. Presumably he hoped she would join him in Castile once he was established as its ruler: given the irregular domestic arrangements of previous Castilian kings, one mistress discreetly kept could hardly have offended public opinion.

It would appear that while Katherine was at Northbourne with John, she complained that his orders for the prompt payment of her allowance had not been obeyed, for on 27 June, clearly angered, he wrote to John de Stafford commanding him to pay "our very dear and beloved Dame Katherine de Swynford the annuity that we have granted her; this must be paid to her in the manner ordered in the letter of guarantee. See to it that this is done without delay, and without any kind of excuse."22 Either John de Stafford had just been dilatory in carrying out his orders, or as Silva-Vigier suggests he was being deliberately obstructive towards a woman of whom he did not approve.

Katherine must have said her farewells and departed on or soon after 27 June, as it was before then that John promised to send gifts of venison and wood to her at Kettlethorpe. On that day, he informed the warden of his park at Gringley, Nottinghamshire: "We have granted to our dear and well-beloved Dame Katherine de Swynford, as our gift, two deer from one of our parks, and a third from another of our parks, as you will judge to be the best."

John de Stafford, perhaps still simmering with disapproval, was also commanded to dispatch to Katherine "six chariots of wood for fuel and three oaks suitable for building, which we have given to the said Dame Katherine; these are to be taken from one of our parks, which you will judge to be most suitable".23 Preoccupied as he was with military matters, John had yet found time to send some comforts to cheer his love during his absence. The oaks, of course, were to be used for the improvements she was making at Kettlethorpe,24 which suggests she did not immediately go to her charges at Tutbury. On 6 July, John gave orders for the supply of coal and wood to Tutbury Castle for "the Queen of Castile" and his four legitimate children.25 The Duke"s womenfolk were to remain at Tutbury for a year; as governess, Katherine must have spent some time there during that period with Philippa and Elizabeth, while Philippa Chaucer seems to have been a constant presence in the household.26 The Duke, who had been appointed Captain-General in France and Aquitaine on 12 June, sailed to France late in July with an army of perhaps six thousand men, and there undertook one of the most astonishing and controversial actions of the Hundred Years War. On 4 August, he began his famous or notorious grande chevauchee (great cavalry ravage) through France, marching his army unopposed from Calais to Bordeaux, his aim to relieve Aquitaine then cross the Pyrenees and force Enrique of Trastamara to surrender his ill-gotten crown.27 This was a daring show of strength designed to intimidate the French, divert them from mounting a naval offensive against England, and bait them into giving battle, but they held aloof, and during five months of terrible but futile marching, plundering and looting, the Duke took not a single fortress or town.28 Unwilling to compromise his honour by turning back, he and his army pressed on further and further south, only to find themselves increasingly short of funds, food and morale. As winter encroached, the way became hard, and led them through the barren mountains of the Ma.s.sif Central, where they encountered ambushes and bitter weather, and the flood-ravaged lands of Aquitaine. Many men and nearly all the horses fell sick and died, armour and booty had to be abandoned, and even the knights were reduced to begging for bread.

At Christmas, having long since abandoned all thoughts of pressing on into Castile, and suffering from "great bodily fatigue" and the loss of his customary good spirits,29 John limped into Bordeaux with an army tragically halved by death or desertion. All that now remained of the once-mighty Plantagenet empire in France was Calais and the coastal strip between Bordeaux and Bayonne. Nevertheless, John had held off the enemy and probably saved Bordeaux; far from his military reputation being in the dust, as historians used to conclude, his great march was regarded by the French as "most honourable to the English".30 In England, however, it came in for scathing criticism, and he was compared very unfavourably with his brother, the Black Prince.31 In January 1374, John concluded a truce with the French, then immediately began planning another campaign, but in March, when the Pope intervened and demanded a new truce, hostilities were suspended.32 After an absence of nine months, John surrendered his lieutenancy of Aquitaine, and returned to England on 26 April 1374; he was back at the Savoy on 1 May, and stayed there until the middle of July.33 Chastened and humiliated by the failure of his great chevauchee, and castigated for it by both his father the King34 and the public at large, he would spend the next year in the political wilderness, taking little part in public affairs,35 and doubtless making up for lost time with Katherine Swynford: it says much for the strength of their feelings for each other that their love had survived the long months of separation.

In private, however, John was preparing to take part in the new peace negotiations called for by the Pope. Increasingly, he was becoming convinced that there was no point in continuing with this ruinous war, and that peace was essential for the future prosperity of England. The following year, he would emerge as the major advocate of a peace policy,36 and would remain so for the rest of his life, but his views were to be at variance with those of the majority of his countrymen, who wanted victories and military glory, and regarded any overtures for peace as craven and shameful. Hence John"s unpopular stance would be yet another score to be notched up against him.

Geoffrey Chaucer had returned to England from Italy on 23 May 1373. On 23 April 1374, the King rewarded him for his good service with an annual gift of a pitcher of wine for life. But it was after John of Gaunt"s return to the Savoy in May that Chaucer"s fortunes were markedly advanced, lending support to the theory that, although John was never his overt patron, he used his influence behind the scenes to bring Geoffrey advancement and wealth. We might credibly conjecture also that Katherine Swynford had hastened or been summoned to be reunited with her lover at the Savoy, and that in the heady flush of those lengthening summer days, John heeded her when she pointed out to him that, despite years of loyal and dedicated service to the Crown, during which he had performed important diplomatic missions, her brother-in-law had received little in the way of reward. Katherine might well have heard this complaint repeated many times by her sister Philippa.

John acted immediately. On 10 May, Chaucer was given a lifetime rent-free lease on a desirable property that straddled Aldgate in London, with rooms above the gate and a cellar below. Then, on 8 June, he was appointed to the lucrative and prestigious post of Controller of Customs and Subsidies on Wool in the nearby Port of London, an extremely responsible position, given that taxes on wool exports provided England"s highest peacetime revenue. Four days later, he was also appointed Controller of Petty Customs on Wines. On 13 June, John granted "our well-loved Geoffrey Chaucer" a standard esquire"s life pension of 10 (3,414) a year, partly in recognition of the good service that his wife had rendered both to "our very honoured lady and mother the Queen, whom G.o.d pardon, and for our very beloved companion the Queen of Castile".37 And on 6 July, both Geoffrey and Philippa Chaucer received overdue back payments of their annuities.38 It would be incredible if these grants owed nothing to the influence of Katherine Swynford. In fact, the links she and her sister forged between the ill.u.s.trious House of Lancaster and the relatively humble Chaucer family were to ensure lasting benefits for the latter and rapidly propel its members up the social ladder.

Thus began what were, for Chaucer, the years of prosperity, years in which he would be busily occupied with his duties, yet would find time to write more of the great works that would bring him lasting fame, notably the dream poems, The House of Fame and The Parliament of Fowls.

Another man who was rewarded for his services by John of Gaunt at this time was John Wycliffe, who received the living of Lutterworth in Leicestershire. Wycliffe was a brilliant Oxford doctor, theologian and philosopher, who had served as a chaplain to Edward III; he was a highly intelligent and sophisticated man whose radical and controversial views on the abuses and corruption within the Church would make him notorious. He disapproved of career bishops, ecclesiastics who grew wealthy on the spoils of their office and exerted too much power, and he opposed the high taxes levied on behalf of an increasingly secularised Papacy. He believed pa.s.sionately that Christians should live by the rules of Christ as set down in the Gospels, and not by regulations laid down by the Church. He denied that the Pope was the true head of the Church and regarded the priesthood as superfluous. Power, he argued, should lie with the King and the chief n.o.bles, a view John of Gaunt enthusiastically endorsed.

John likewise wished to curb the power wielded by high-ranking churchmen, and by 1371 had become Wycliffe"s patron. That year, John had backed Parliament"s calls to restrict public offices to laymen only. Wycliffe also believed that peace with France was essential, and may have influenced John"s own views on this issue. The Duke"s admiration of Wycliffe"s political stance led some people to believe that he also supported the doctor"s increasingly provocative opinions on the Church and its doctrines,39 but this would have been surprising in a man with such ultraconservative religious views, whose actions show him to have been essentially opposed to most of Wycliffe"s theological teachings.

John"s willingness to champion and protect Wycliffe, and his enduring loyalty towards him, which was to provoke a backlash on his own probity and reputation, strongly suggest that he liked and respected his protege, enjoyed discussing and debating political and religious issues with him, and believed him to be sincere and much misunderstood. But according to Knighton, it was he himself who was "deceived", and in the end, after years of defending the ever-more-controversial Wycliffe, even John would abandon him.

The Princess of Wales supported Wycliffe too; he was a familiar figure in court circles and Katherine Swynford must have known him. It is easy to imagine this intelligent woman joining in his stimulating conversations with her lover, and although of course there is no evidence that she ever did so, it is more than possible. We do not know enough about her to surmise that she was in sympathy with Wycliffe"s teachings, for in every known respect she was religiously orthodox. But maybe she was swayed by her lover on the doctor"s political opinions.

In July 1374, John rode north to Tutbury to see his wife and children, then in early August, he was at Leicester,40 perhaps with Katherine, but he was back in London by 11 September to commemorate the sixth anniversary of the d.u.c.h.ess Blanche"s death, the first he had been able to attend for he had been abroad every previous year and consequently the most splendid to date.

The magnificent obit took place on 12 September.41 On the evening beforehand, after Vespers in St Paul"s, the Duke entertained the clergy to a banquet in the cathedral that consisted entirely of sweet confections and included ginger confits, aniseed, cinnamon, a marble plate of expensive sugar bon-bons, sweetmeats and nuts, and seventeen gallons of wine in earthenware jugs.

The anniversary itself began with a procession from the Savoy to St Paul"s Cathedral, which had been rendered suitably sombre with funereal black hangings brought from the Savoy. Around Blanche"s partially completed tomb there burned thirty-six new wax candles in place of those that had been lit there daily, and on the tomb stood eight metal bowls containing mortar lights. Further illumination came from the torches held by twenty-four poor men who had been given gowns and hoods in the blue-and-white Lancastrian livery colours and stood encircling the tomb. In the presence of the Duke and his retinue, a senior canon, a.s.sisted by the ma.s.sed cathedral clergy and choristers, celebrated High Ma.s.s at the chantry altar. Afterwards, the company returned to the Savoy for a further taste of the Duke"s famous hospitality, and consumed roasted beef, lamb, goose, pork, pigeons, pullets and salted fish, some cooked with costly spices, followed by fruit, bread and wafers, the food being washed down with sixty gallons of wine and eleven gallons of ale. The total expenses for the obit were 40 (13,657).42 In the years to come, Blanche"s anniversary would remain an important event in the Lancastrian calendar, but the Duke was not always able to attend, and the ceremonies were rarely as lavish as this one, some only costing 10 (3,877).

Did Katherine Swynford grace the obit that took place in 1374? If the ducal children were present, she would have had a legitimate reason for being there, but there is no record of them attending; the names of only two of the guests are recorded.43 Furthermore, the pattern of John"s travels both before and after the anniversary suggests that his womenfolk and children were in the Midlands at the time, and it looks as if he made haste to rejoin Katherine afterwards. For as soon as all was done, John rode north to Yorkshire, reaching his castle at Tickhill before 22 September. By the 23rd, he had moved south to his manor of Gringley in Nottinghamshire, and by the 25th, he had travelled the thirty miles to Lincoln.44 As Kettlethorpe was on the way, it is more than likely that he spent the night of the 24th there with Katherine.45 On the 26th, at Savenby, he ordered John de Stafford, his receiver in Lincoln, to pay a gift of twenty-five marks (2,845) to Katherine "for services rendered".46 This indicates that, after John had ridden to London for the obit, she had travelled from Leicester to Kettlethorpe to await his coming, and rode forth with him when he left it. John had gone south to Stamford by 29 September, and was back in residence at the Savoy from October to December.47 On 10 December, the Duke appointed a trusted esquire, Thomas Burton, as governor to his heir, seven-year-old Henry,48 who was now too old to have a governess. The boy was given not only a tutor, but also a chaplain and a keeper of his wardrobe, and sent to live in the household of Lady Wake, his former mistress.49 By 1376, Henry had been a.s.signed a "military master" to teach him the arts of war, and his sisters had been given their own chamber and wardrobe, a household within a household, with Katherine Swynford in charge of it.

At Christmas, it would appear that Katherine was with John at Eltham, where he celebrated Yuletide and New Year with the King.50 Since Alice Perrers was presiding over the court as unofficial queen, Edward III could hardly have complained about the presence of his son"s mistress; in fact, he probably welcomed her, for he had known Katherine since her childhood, and his kindness to her at the time of her widowhood suggests that he liked her well. Her presence at court is indicated by a New Year gift from her lover: on 1 January 1375, "with my especial grace", John granted her the lucrative wardship of the lands and heir of his late retainer, Sir Robert Deyncourt, "and the right of the marriage of the heir for Blanche her daughter",51 his G.o.dchild. Sir Robert was possibly related to one of the Duke"s retainers, John Deyncourt, Constable of Kenilworth Castle,52 whom Katherine probably knew quite well.

In fulfilling his obligations as her sponsor, the Duke intended that Blanche Swynford, who at almost twelve was nearing marriageable age, should be wed to young Robert Deyncourt. On 13 January, he gave orders to his steward, Oliver de Barton, to "carefully guard the heir till such time that Dame Katherine will send for him, when you will deliver him and the guard of the lands to her".53 The wording of this warrant reveals John"s respect for Katherine and his confidence in her acting autonomously. There is, however, no record of the marriage taking place, nor is there any further reference to Blanche Swynford in contemporary sources, from which we might sadly conclude that she did not live to see her wedding day. Robert Deyncourt, however, survived to press in 138792 for the rest.i.tution of his lands.54 On 2 January 1375, John rode to Hertford Castle to visit his wife, while Katherine presumably travelled home to Kettlethorpe. At Hertford, on his arrival, John issued an order to John de Stafford to pay Katherine one mark (114), perhaps for a wager she had won over Christmas. On the same day, he granted her the more handsome sum of fifty marks (4,709) per annum, possibly because she was pregnant again; this allowance was also to be paid by John de Stafford.55 John had returned to the Savoy by 14 January, when he ordered de Stafford to send a tun (a large cask holding 252 gallons) of the best Gascon wine to "our very dear and well-beloved Dame Katherine de Swynford" at Kettlethorpe; "if none can be found, send a vat of the best wine from the Rhine that you can find".56 This was a parting gift, for he was soon to go abroad again. Edward III had declared his readiness to make a truce with France, which was now a matter of necessity after Bayonne had fallen to the enemy; in February, John, who was to head the English emba.s.sy, was granted the diplomatic powers necessary to negotiate the truce, and by 9 March he was in Dover, ready to sail. John Wycliffe was in his retinue. The Duke arrived in Bruges on 24 March, and presided over the peace conference that lasted until 27 June, when a one-year truce with the French was concluded. By 15 July, he was back in England.57 The summer of 1375 was very hot, with a severe drought. Katherine appears to have spent these months at Kenilworth, and it was probably at this time that she bore the Duke a second son, for in August, he ordered that two chariots of wood for fuel be delivered to Elyot, the midwife of Lincoln. Elyot is elsewhere in the Register referred to as a midwife of Leicester, but this grant suggests that she had moved to Lincoln to attend Katherine Swynford in childbirth when necessary and was being suitably rewarded.

John of Gaunt"s Register for 1375 has references to two other women connected with Katherine. The first was Agnes Bonsergeant, a widow, who was rewarded with a life pension of five marks (486) for services she had performed for Katherine when she was her nurse;58 this was the lady who had been appointed by Queen Philippa to look after her young ward. As Professor Goodman points out, it was usual for princes to award pensions to their own nurses or those of their wives, but virtually unheard of for a royal Duke to remember the nurse of his mistress in this way, and an unmistakable indication of how deeply John had come to feel for Katherine and how important she was to him. It is also possible with her pension being awarded at this time that Agnes a.s.sisted at Katherine"s confinement.

The Register also records an undated payment which perhaps belongs to 1375 of 66s.8d (942) to John, son of Hawise Maudelyn, "damoiselle of our very dear and beloved Dame Katherine de Swynford".59 Another grant made by John may also have marked a birth, for on 24 July, he ordered Oliver de Barton, his seneschal in Nottinghamshire, and Richard de Lancaster, park warden of his manors of Gringley and Wheatley in that county, to send to his "beloved Dame Katherine Swynford or her attorney, sixty oaks suitable for building from any of our parks thought convenient, and which, in your judgement, will best profit her for the improvement of her houses at Kettlethorpe".60 From this and the 1372 grant of oaks, it is clear that Katherine"s programme of improvements was well under way, and that John"s new gift was intended to further a.s.sist her in making the manor a residence fit for their children. Also during 1375, he arranged for Katherine to be paid 100 marks (9,419), to be delivered into her own hands;61 this was possibly provision for their two children.

This pattern of gifts and grants had occurred before, probably in connection with the conception and birth of John Beaufort, and it was to be repeated in the future. In 1375, it perhaps marked the advent of a second Beaufort. This evidence is not conclusive, but the repet.i.tion of this pattern on each of four occasions may well point to Katherine"s illicit pregnancies and the Duke"s discreet arrangements for the maintenance of their expanding family.

An undated warrant in John of Gaunt"s Register possibly belongs to the period 23 July26 September 1375 (or perhaps 1377), and might have formed part of this provision. In it, in consideration of the good and agreeable service that she had rendered to the d.u.c.h.ess Blanche, John granted Katherine "all the tenements that we own in our honour of St Botolph" this being a manor on the east side of the River Witham in the thriving port of Boston, Lincolnshire, which had been part of the Honour of Richmond since the time of William the Conqueror. The tenements (which could have been lands, dwellings, rents or commercial premises) granted to Katherine had formerly been held by Geoffrey de Sutton, doubtless a connection of the prominent Lincoln family. Katherine was to hold these tenements and the profits from them from the Duke and his heirs for the term of her life.62 Boston was a flourishing port at this date, second only to London in prosperity, and boasting fifteen merchant guilds; the beautiful parish church of St Botolph, with its famous squat tower, the "Boston Stump", was rebuilt in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries by mercantile wealth. In 1369, Edward III had established a staple for wool and leather in Boston, and trade with the Low Countries was booming. Much of the mediaeval town has long since disappeared, but although there are no records to show where Katherine"s properties were, there are clues.63 All that we know for certain is that Katherine"s tenements lay in the parish of St Botolph. When, in 1774, its churchyard was extended, many old houses and shops were demolished. Hers may have been among them, but there is some evidence to suggest that she owned Gisors Hall, a substantial building that survived into the nineteenth century.

In 1372, before he relinquished the earldom of Richmond, John of Gaunt had held a "messuage" a house with land and outbuildings in St Botolph called "Gisorshall".64 Gisors Hall, probably built around 1245, stood in a part of town that, centuries later, would become South Square, a s.p.a.cious and desirable residential area backing on to the river; the hall occupied the north-west corner plot. In 1282, it had been held of the Honour of Richmond by John de Gisors, after whom it was named. He belonged to an important merchant family that traded in Boston and London; in 1245, a John de Gisors had been Mayor of London. In 1282, Gisors Hall had been a capital messuage comprising buildings, gardens and a yard, set in two acres of land an ideal town residence.

When, in 1810, Gisors Hall was partly demolished and rebuilt as a granary, stone fabric from the old building was incorporated in the new. A drawing that was made of the granary in 1856 shows a double-gabled stone frontage with two mediaeval mullioned windows sporting ogee arches on the upper floor, with Victorian brickwork arches surmounting them. At ground level may be seen two double-arched doorways to allow access for carts bringing grain a nineteenth-century feature and an old Gothic doorway at one end.

Katherine"s ownership of this property is suggested by the fact that in 1427, after the death of her son, Thomas Beaufort, it was recorded that he had had a messuage called "Gisours Hall" in Boston, with the customs and franchises thereto belonging, just as his father had had in 1372.65 Quite clearly, Gisors Hall was no longer a part of the Honour of Richmond in 1427, so possibly it had been alienated and sold to Geoffrey de Sutton in the 1370s, then repurchased by John of Gaunt, who granted it to Katherine Swynford, who in turn bequeathed it to Thomas Beaufort.

Katherine"s familial connections with Boston were enduring. Between 1400 and 1404, her sons Thomas and Henry Beaufort were admitted to the fraternity of the town"s Corpus Christi Guild, of which Edward III, Philippa of Hainault, Duke Henry of Lancaster, the Black Prince and Blanche of Lancaster had also been members. (There was also an a.s.sociated guild dedicated to St Katherine; did Katherine Swynford ever pay her respects to her name-saint"s image in that guild"s chapel in St Botolph"s Church?) In 1500, a substantial house called Spayne"s Place in Boston was recorded as being the property of Katherine"s great-granddaughter, Margaret Beaufort, Countess of Richmond and Derby, the mother of Henry VII. In the fourteenth century, the de Spayne family had been prominent merchants, guildsmen and aldermen in the town, and Spain Lane is said to be named after them; however, there is no trace of Spayne"s Place there, although it could have stood in Spain"s Court, an opening on the south side; the ancient buildings that line the street were probably once the family"s warehouses.

Given her connections with Boston, Katherine must have visited the town on several occasions, and become acquainted with its leading burghers; she possibly had mercantile interests there, and might have known or visited Spayne"s Place, but there is no evidence that she owned it or that it descended from her to Margaret Beaufort; on the contrary, in 1487, it was one of the properties of the earldom of Richmond, once held by Margaret"s late husband, Edmund Tudor, that were granted to her by her son the King.66 Interestingly, according to an Inquisition Post Mortem of 1546, Margaret Beaufort also held Gisors Hall. Unless it had been returned to the Honour of Richmond at some stage, it might well have pa.s.sed to her by descent through the Beauforts; Thomas Beaufort left no children, so his eldest brother"s son, John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, Margaret"s father, was his heir. In 1545, Spayne"s Place was sold by Henry VIII to the Corporation of Boston. How long it survived after that is not recorded.

The son probably born to Katherine in the summer of 1375 and therefore conceived during the Duke"s visit to Lincolnshire the previous September was almost certainly Henry Beaufort, who was probably named after Henry, Duke of Lancaster. It has been suggested that Henry was the youngest of the children that Katherine bore the Duke: in 1398, in connection with his being appointed Bishop of Lincoln, he was described as admodum puer just a boy. But this was probably merely a derisory comment on his elevation to episcopal rank at the age of just twenty-three. The seventeenth-century genealogist, Francis Sandford, describes the arms of Henry Beaufort in Wanlip Church, Leicestershire, as having a crescent as a cadency mark, which in Sandford"s day indicated a second son.67 More tellingly, Henry is second in the list of the Beauforts in the Letters Patent legitimising them in 1397.

In August 1375, John was at Leicester68 with Katherine, and it was probably at this time that William Ferour, the Mayor of Leicester, spent 16s. (226) on a gift of wine for "the Lady Katherine Swynford, mistress of the Duke of Lancaster", doubtless in the hope of securing her patronage; this payment is recorded in the civic records for the year 13756.69 This approach by the Mayor is the first evidence that her position of influence with the Duke was becoming public knowledge. It also shows that the Mayor thought an appeal to Katherine would be more successful than one to the d.u.c.h.ess Constance; to this extent, as Professor Goodman points out, she had usurped the d.u.c.h.ess"s rightful place in Lancastrian affairs.70 Nevertheless, there is no evidence that she exploited or abused her influence. On the contrary, she seems to have avoided embroiling herself in politics, and kept very much in the background. Although there are very few known instances of her exercising any powers of patronage, the Leicester records show that she occasionally used her influence for the benefit of others, while there is evidence to suggest that if she did ask favours from the Duke, it was usually for her own family members, such as her brother-in-law, Geoffrey Chaucer, and her sister Philippa. But she was no Alice Perrers, feathering her nest at the Crown"s expense: no chronicler ever accused her of such greed and rapacity, nor of the bribery and corruption that would bring Alice down.

Certainly Katherine profited materially from her relationship with John of Gaunt, but never excessively. His recorded gifts to her demonstrate his generosity, his care for her welfare and his desire to please her; they made her wealthy, but not ostentatiously so, and they were hardly lavish compared to Alice Perrers" ill-gotten gains. Nor did he abuse his political power or misappropriate public funds to indulge Katherine. In fact, she seems to have retained her autonomy as a widow and pursued her private financial and other interests when she was not with her lover, which was relatively often.

It is reasonable to suppose that Katherine accompanied John when he moved to Kenilworth later in August, and that this was only one of many visits that she made to this imposing castle, which she must have come to know well.

Kenilworth, which lies four miles north of Warwick, was to be one of the most magnificent of the castles owned by John of Gaunt, who, by 1377, had begun building a sumptuous range of apartments and lodgings there. This ma.s.sive and important stronghold, built of golden sandstone, dated from the early twelfth century, and had been extended and formidably fortified by King John who surrounded it on three sides with a defensive lake called "the Mere" and Henry III, whose mighty keep still stands. In 1265, the castle had fallen to the latter after a nine-month siege during the Barons" Wars, and in 1267, it had been granted to Henry"s younger son, Edmund Crouchback, founder of the House of Lancaster. Since then, it had remained one of the chief Lancastrian seats, and under John of Gaunt, it was to become a luxurious palace. He built the ma.s.sive Perpendicular great hall, which still survives in a ruined state, and an extensive range of private apartments and domestic offices, also now ruined.71 John"s great hall, or "New Chamber", which measures 90" by 45", was accessed at one end by an external processional stair leading up from the inner court to an imposing main doorway decorated with fine stone panels and carvings, and set within a vaulted porch. The other end of the hall was graced by an oriel window; in the privacy of its embrasure, which had its own fireplace, would be set the Duke"s table, where he would eat with his family and friends; Katherine must have sat at board with him here on many occasions. The rest of his household dined at trestle tables placed along the length of the hall, which was heated by two vast fireplaces of carved stone and lit by four huge traceried windows with stone seats in the alcoves beneath. Anyone sitting there reading or sewing as Katherine might well have done would have benefited from the natural light such windows afforded. The vast timber hammerbeam roof has long disappeared, as has the wooden floor of the hall, but much remains of the once-vaulted undercroft, which was used for storing wine and provisions. From here, a north-eastern doorway led to the three-storey service block known as the Strong Tower, which housed the kitchens, bakehouse, servants" quarters and other domestic offices.

Adjacent to the great hall at the south-western end were the Duke"s apartments, accessed through the Saintlowe Tower; this range overlooked the Mere. It was here that his family, knights, esquires and, of course, Katherine would have lodged with him. His great chamber, known as "the White Hall", was a rectangular room located on the first floor; this was where he gave audiences and received guests, seated on a throne on a dais beneath a canopy of estate bearing the royal arms of Castile. Gaunt"s Tower, a four-storeyed edifice that lay beyond the chamber block and projected over the lake, contained his private lodgings, or lesser chamber, which could be reached via a spiral staircase leading from a door in the inner court, although it must surely have been possible to access them from the great chamber. Gaunt"s Tower also contained a chapel, and had garderobes on the ground and first floors. Outside was a garden, which was enclosed in September 1373,72 possibly to allow the Duke some privacy with his mistress, and along the causeway that now leads to a car park, there was a tiltyard.

Work on Kenilworth continued on and off until 1394, cost the Duke a princely fortune, and provided employment for numerous masons, carpenters, goldsmiths and embroiderers. In its finished state, it was the embodiment of its owner"s status, splendour and authority, which was doubtless his intention, and in later years it replaced the Savoy as the showpiece of the Lancastrian inheritance. The great hall, which has been called one of the finest fourteenth-century rooms in England, is said to have inspired Richard II"s remodelling of Westminster Hall in the 1390s.

In September, when John moved south to tour the West Country,73 Katherine returned to Kettlethorpe, and it is often erroneously claimed that she used her influence at this time to get the Fossd.y.k.e cleared.74 This, the oldest ca.n.a.l in England, had been constructed by the Romans around AD 120, to link the River Trent at Torksey to the River Witham at Lincoln, eleven miles away, and during the Middle Ages it had become a major waterway for the transport of wool from Nottingham, Hull, York and other places. But for thirty years now it had been silted up, and it was claimed that 1,000 (282,562) had been lost in trade as a result. During the Michaelmas law term of 1375, a Lincoln jury had made representations about this, pointing out that local landowners such as "the Lady Katherine de Swynford", whose manors and lordships ab.u.t.ted the Fossd.y.k.e, "ought and were wont to clean, empty and repair" their own stretches of the d.y.k.e, according to an ancient rota; but clearly they had long since ceased to perform their responsibilities in this respect. The protest fell on deaf ears. On 15 May 1376, a commission of oyer and terminer was appointed at Westminster "on complaint by the citizens of Lincoln . . . that the d.y.k.e is now obstructed partly by riparian [i.e. riverside] owners [Katherine Swynford being one of them] who have meadows and pastures on both sides of the d.y.k.e, taking across their cattle in summer to pasture, and also by gra.s.s growing therein in unusual quant.i.ties".75 Far from agitating to have the ca.n.a.l cleared, Katherine and other landowners were taking advantage of it being silted up. Yet despite parliamentary intervention, nothing appears to have been done, for in 1384, another commission headed by John of Gaunt himself was appointed to solve the problem,76 but even he was not entirely successful, for efforts were still being made to have the Fossd.y.k.e cleared in 1518, and the problem was only finally solved by an Act of Parliament pa.s.sed in 1670.

By the end of September, John had returned to the Savoy77 to prepare for yet another round of peace negotiations in Bruges. Having arranged for his three-year-old daughter Catalina to have her own chamber at Melbourne Castle, where she would be looked after by a Castilian lady called Juana Martyns,78 he departed with Constance for Bruges at the end of October 1375.79 Katherine was probably still at Kettlethorpe at this time.

John apparently took Constance with him because she was expecting his child; no doubt he relished the prospect of her bearing a son and heir to Castile while the eyes of all Europe were on Bruges. Prior to her confinement, the d.u.c.h.ess went on pilgrimage to the shrine of Saint-Adrien de Grammont,80 but the boy she bore late in the year at Ghent another John of Gaunt appears to have been sickly, and died young, possibly in November 1376. Constance would hardly have travelled abroad at full term, so her baby was probably born several weeks after her arrival in Flanders, in early December. In that case, she must have fallen pregnant just before John left for Bruges in early March.

Constance would not conceive again for nearly ten years, when there would be compelling political reasons to produce a son. Comparing this dismal record with that of Blanche of Lancaster, who bore seven children in nine years, and Katherine Swynford, who had at least four in the same time-span, it can only be concluded that conjugal relations between the Duke and d.u.c.h.ess were now either very infrequent or had ceased entirely, probably because of John"s pa.s.sion for Katherine Swynford and Constance"s own antipathy. She seems to have been more preoccupied with her Castilian ambitions than with her husband, and she could not hope to compete with the other woman in his life, whose influence was so all-embracing.

John remained in negotiation at Bruges until at least 20 January 1376, then made a brief visit back to England before returning to the peace conference for the conclusion on 1 March of a new truce, which would prolong the first until April 1377 and bring hostilities to a halt.81 The lavish ostentation, "rioting, revelling and dancing" all funded by public money that attended John"s emba.s.sy attracted much criticism from the chroniclers, who suspected that he was only advocating peace in order to enrich himself.82 The Duke and d.u.c.h.ess sailed home at the end of March, and on 23 April John was at Westminster for the annual feast of the Knights of the Garter that Edward III hosted to mark St George"s Day. Five days later, what was to become known as the "Good" Parliament met at Westminster, summoned because the King was in desperate need of money, and John of Gaunt found himself facing one of the worst crises of his career.

"His Unspeakable Concubine"

John of Gaunt was now the most hated and feared man in England. "Oh, unhappy and unfortunate Duke!" fulminated Walsingham in 1376. "Oh! Those whom you should lead in war you betray by your treachery and cowardice, and those whom you should lead in peace by the example of good works you lead astray, dragging them to ruin!" People of all ranks were suspicious and envious of the Duke"s vast wealth and power, his incomprehensible to the insular English foreign ambitions, and the trappings of sovereignty that underlined his kingly rank; churchmen abhorred his anti-clerical stance and his patronage of John Wycliffe; his perceived military failures, his staunch advocacy of a peace policy, and the recent truce he had negotiated outraged all those who felt that the English should be winning great victories over the French, as in the glory days of Edward III and the Black Prince; and the common people, long burdened by the crippling taxes levied to pay for no more than a series of humiliating losses in the war with France, blamed John for England"s misfortunes. This mounting resentment had been building for some time, and was now about to explode.

No Parliament had been called since November 1373, and such was the importance of this new session that the desperately sick Black Prince

Prev List Next