Posts Tagged ‘Gloucester’

Sunday 30 March 1264: an abbey, a saint and a curse

Sunday, March 30th, 2014

Henry’s forces were assembling in Oxford. The charter roll shows that those present on 30 March included: the king’s brother, earl Richard; the earl’s son, Henry of Almain; Humphrey de Bohun, earl of Hereford; Hugh Bigod, who had been Justiciar in the early days of the reform movement; Philip Basset; Roger de Mortimer; James Audley; Robert Walerand; John de Grey; and Warin de Bassingbourn. They were witnessing a charter for the citizens of Worcester, who were granted a range of privileges and liberties, in return for an increase in the farm, for the good service they had rendered to the king and lord Edward; perhaps this was some compensation for the recent sacking of the city by Robert de Ferrers. Henry had promised to pay the expenses of those coming to Oxford to join his army. This must have been a problem, particularly with the Treasury either closed or inaccessible, in rebel-held London. Henry was presumably using the Wardrobe to administer his finances, and seems to have taken some steps to direct revenues there, rather than to the the Treasury: £200 from the farm of Southampton was paid to the Wardrobe on 27 March. (Royal Charter Witness Lists, 332; CChR 1257-1300, 48; CLR 1260-67, 132; Wardrobe Accounts Henry III, 109)

The fine roll shows another source of revenue, resulting from the siege of Gloucester and lord Edward’s eventual success in taking the town. On 15 March, Henry had sent orders to Roger de Clifford, his constable of Gloucester castle, concerning the property of St Peter’s abbey which had been confiscated; the abbey had until 23 March to make amends for recent offences. On 27 March, the fine roll records that the abbot and convent had paid 100 marks to the Wardrobe. This was a fine paid because they had harboured barons (hospitaverunt barones) in the abbey without the king’s permission, and to have the king’s goodwill. This may be an indicator both of the sympathies of many churchmen, who supported the barons, and of the way in which Henry was raising cash. The abbey did not have to dip into its own reserves, however; on the same day as the fine was recorded, the tenants of the abbey were instructed to contribute an aid to the abbot and convent, for the relief of its debts. The abbot was also given an allowance for the provisions which Roger de Clifford had taken from his property, for supplying the castle. (Close Rolls 1261-64, 336; CFR 1263-64, no. 90; CPR 1258-66, 308; CLR 1260-67, 135)

St Frideswide, from a window in Christ Church, Oxford, designed by Edward Burne-Jones

St Frideswide, from a window in Christ Church, Oxford, designed by Edward Burne-Jones

While he was in Oxford, Henry granted the prior and convent of St Frideswide’s an annual payment of 100s. to pay for a chaplain and candles at the saint’s shrine. This was the sort of gesture which one might expect from a pious king like Henry, but contemporary chroniclers were more impressed by the fact that he had entered Oxford at all. There was said to be a curse, which no previous king had dared to defy. Supposedly, Frideswide (d. 727) was the daughter of the king of Oxford. She became an abbess, and was pursued by the lecherous king Algar of Leicester. Frideswide went into hiding, and when Algar tried to enter Oxford he was struck blind. The Osney chronicle said that Henry entered the church of St Frideswide with great devotion, which no king had attempted since the time of king Algar; he gave many goods to the church, and promised more if God gave him victory over his enemies. (CPR 1258-66, 308; John Blair, ‘Frithuswith’, ODNB; Flores Hist, II, 487; Ann Mon, IV, 142-3)

 

Sunday 16 March 1264: Oxford, Gloucester and London

Sunday, March 16th, 2014

Henry III stayed in Oxford all week, waiting for his followers to respond to the summons he had sent out. He sent the students away, as many undisciplined men (indomiti) would be coming to the town. Henry would not be able to guarantee the safety of the clerks in an armed camp; in addition, his troops would presumably need to take over the students’ accommodation. We know the names of some of those who were already with him, because there is an entry on the charter roll from 14 March, the first charter to be recorded since December. The witnesses who were present in Oxford include earl Richard, Hugh Bigod, Philip Basset, Roger Leybourne, Warin de Bassingbourn, Roger Mortimer and James Audley – some of the leading royalist commanders. (Foedera, I, 1, 435; Royal Charter Witness Lists of Henry III)

The fine roll this week shows that Henry was losing such support as he had had in Wales. Back in 1257, he had granted the manors of Market Harborough, Great Bowden and Kingsthorpe to the Welsh magnate Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn. This was a reward for Gruffydd’s service to the king and lord Edward, against the rising power of Llywelyn ap Gruffydd. Gruffydd lost his lands and chattels in Powys during the war in Wales, but he and his family would be sustained by these English manors. In 1263, Gruffydd evidently saw which way the wind was blowing, and deserted the king’s cause, to attach himself to Llywelyn. Henry responded on 14 March, taking away Gruffydd’s manors, committing them to be managed by the men of those manors instead. (CFR 1257-58, no. 140; CPR 1247-58, 560, 608; CFR 1263-64, nos. 87-8)

Lord Edward began the week trapped in Gloucester castle, with baronial forces holding the town, and the troops of Robert de Ferrers approaching, following their sack of Worcester. In Robert of Gloucester’s verses:

Then they saw out of the tower the earl Robert of Ferrers
At the town’s end come, with noble men and fierce,
From the direction of Tewkesbury, armed well each one,
Horse and men, all ready battle to do anon.
When sir Edward saw this, nothing was he glad,
For it was said that he was not so sore afraid of any one.

Bishop Walter de Cantilupe negotiated a ceasefire between Edward and Henry de Montfort, much to Ferrers’ annoyance. Edward promised to arrange terms for peace by 13 March. De Montfort’s baronial forces withdrew from the town, under the terms of the agreement, which Edward promptly disregarded, ‘with foxlike cunning.’ Edward occupied the town, imprisoned the leading citizens and extorted a large ransom. The gatekeepers who had been tricked into letting the baronial forces into Gloucester were hanged from the west gate. The ransom was said to be £1,000; Roger Clifford, the royalist constable of Gloucester castle, was ordered to send £100 of this directly to the king. The king did take steps to negotiate with his opponents: on 13 March he appointed proctors to seek Simon de Montfort and negotiate with him, in the presence of a French envoy. (Church Historians, V, 365-6; Ann Mon, III, 228; Flores Hist, II, 487; Close Rolls 1261-64, 336-7; Foedera, I, 1, 436)

London remained hostile to the king. It is notable that he had avoided the capital when he travelled from Rochester to Oxford. The city was controlled by baronial sympathizers, who appointed a constable and marshal to command the Londoners. The Tower appears to have been in the hands of Hugh Despenser, who had been appointed Justiciar (the chief administrative and judicial officer) and keeper of the Tower by the baronial council in 1260-61. Despenser had returned to these offices in 1263, when de Montfort was briefly in control. Although he ceased to function as Justiciar in October 1263, as Henry re-asserted his authority, Despenser seems to have kept control of the Tower. This week, Despenser and the Londoners attacked and plundered earl Richard’s manor of Isleworth, and destroyed his house in Westminster. The London mob also ‘ravaged with fire and destruction’ the estates of other royalists, including Philip Basset. Basset was one of the charter witnesses with the king in Oxford; he was also Despenser’s father-in-law, and had replaced him as Justiciar between 1261 and 1263. The Londoners are said to have attacked and imprisoned the king’s clerks, the barons of the Exchequer and the justices of the Bench. Henry responded by imposing sanctions (as we would now say): the constable of Windsor castle was to prevent supplies reaching London by boat, cart or pack-horse; royalist supporters were not to pay debts owed to burgesses who held their manors, which were to be seized by the sheriff of Kent. (Cronica Maiorum, 61; Ann Mon, IV, 140-1; Flores Hist, II, 487; Close Rolls 1261-64, 375-6)

Sunday 9 March 1264: summoning an army

Sunday, March 9th, 2014

After a relatively quiet few weeks, Henry III had a sudden burst of activity. He moved from Rochester, via Windsor and Reading, to Oxford. He resumed control of the machinery of government. And he summoned his supporters to prepare for all-out war.

Henry arrived in Oxford at a difficult time. There had been violent riots, following conflict in 1263 between the university and the city authorities over scholars’ immunity from arrest. Henry had written to the chancellor and the mayor from Rochester on 28 February, supporting arbitration, and ordering the scholars to remain peacefully in the town. According to Robert of Gloucester, further troubles broke out just before the king’s arrival, on the first Thursday in Lent (6 March). (History of the University of Oxford, I, 128-9; CPR 1258-66, 383; Church Historians, V, 364)

C60-61_m5_returnK

The fine roll records the king’s return. There are similar headings in the patent, close and liberate rolls during this week. The second entry here, ‘De homagio’, concerns the de Vere inheritance.

Although Henry had returned to England on 15 February, it was not until this week that the Chancery rolls recorded his return. His brother Richard stopped authorizing writs, and it was Henry himself who witnessed entries on the rolls from 4 March onwards.

The second fine roll entry which Henry witnessed concerned the earl of Oxford’s estates. Hugh de Vere, earl of Oxford, had died in December 1263. His estates had been taken into the king’s hands, to be administered by William of Axmouth (along with much else, as we have recently seen). The heir, Robert de Vere, had now done homage for Hedingham castle and all his father’s other possessions, which were to be handed over to him. If this was an attempt to win support from the new earl, it failed: de Vere fought with the baronial forces at the battle of Lewes; he was one of the young men whom de Montfort knighted on the eve of the battle. (CFR 1263-64, no. 80)

While he was at Windsor on 6 March, Henry sent letters to some 120 nobles and knights, instructing them to gather at Oxford at the end of March, with their followers, with horses and arms. Similar letters went to the bishops and abbots, and to the sheriffs of each county, who were to provide their due military service. The nominal reason for this summons was to deal with Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, who was occupying the lands of the king and Edward, occupying and destroying their castles. There was a hint of the real reason in a note in the close roll after the list of those summoned: ‘Those who are against the king are not written to.’ There was also a hint of the king’s actual target: he appointed John Lovel as constable of Northampton castle, and ordered Roger of Walton, who held it for the barons, to hand it over to Lovel. (Close Rolls 1261-64, 377-80; CPR 1258-66, 306)

Those against the king had taken the town of Gloucester, as we saw two weeks ago. Lord Edward, after capturing Humphrey de Bohun junior’s castles, moved rapidly to the rescue of the royalist garrison in Gloucester castle, which continued to hold out. Edward forced his way into the castle, getting past the baronial besiegers either by repairing the bridge over the Severn, which had been burned, or by taking a ship belonging to the abbot of Tewkesbury. (Flores Hist, II, 486-7; Ann Mon, II, 227; Church Historians, V, 365)

Sunday 24 February 1264: writs and verse

Sunday, February 23rd, 2014

Henry III’s return to England seems somewhat muted after the successful completion, from his point of view, of the arbitration by Louis IX. Henry spent this week in Canterbury, accompanied by Hugh Bigod and Roger Leybourne, who had gone to France to urge his return. Henry’s only recorded activity consists of a few writs issued in Canterbury: an order to the authorities in Dover to obey Leybourne’s bailiff, a writ in favour of a Canterbury church, and some minor grants for the benefit of members of his entourage.  Henry had not even resumed control of the machinery of government. The clerks of the Chancery remained with earl Richard in Hereford, where they recorded writs and fines made on his authority. (CPR 1258-66, 381-2; Close Rolls 1261-64, 335; CFR 1263-64, no. 77)

Richard was a good deal closer to the significant events of this period. Confused fighting and pillaging was going on in the Welsh Marches and Midlands. Simon de Montfort’s sons Henry and Simon junior were attacking the lands of the Marcher lords, taking Thomas Corbet’s castle at Radnor and Roger Mortimer’s castle at Wigmore. (Gervase of Canterbury, II, 233) Richard was trying to provide financial support for the royalist forces, commanded by lord Edward: the city authorities in Worcester, Shrewsbury and Hereford were instructed to anticipate the next two instalments of the farm of those towns, and pay it in advance to Edward; they were to do this without fail, ‘to despatch certain most urgent business of the king, for which he is at present in great need of money.’ (CLR 1260-67, 131)

The 1264 pipe roll shows that the citizens of Worcester did indeed pay the £30 they owed for the annual farm of their town to lord Edward, for carrying out the king’s business. (E 372/108 rot 10d) Shrewsbury also provided Edward with £30, although this was not recorded until 1267.  (E 372/111 rot 6) Herefordshire accounted a year later, covering all the transactions of the past seven years – the Exchequer did its best keep track of what it was owed, even in these turbulent times – and recorded that the citizens of Hereford provided Edward with £40 for carrying out the king’s business in Wales. (E 372/112 rot 11d)

Edward was thus able to pay and provision his troops. He joined forces with Mortimer, and captured Humphrey de Bohun’s castles at Hay and Huntington. (Flores Hist, II, 486) But he was too late to prevent a remarkable coup by the baronial forces in Gloucester. The king had committed Gloucestershire to Roger de Clifford, and ordered him to hold the strategically important bridge over the Severn. His local rival, John Giffard of Brimpsfield, supported de Montfort. The English verse chronicle attributed to Robert of Gloucester gives this account, translated into modern English (or at least 19th-century English) by Joseph Stevenson (Church Historians, V, 363):

And sir Roger de Clifford kept Gloucester also,
And at each end of the town placed a good watch.
Sir John Giffard came one day, and sir John de Balun there,
Riding upon two woolpacks, merchants as if they were,
To the west gate over the bridge, and asked the porters,
To let two woolmongers bring in their merchandise.
Covered they both were with two Welsh mantles.
When the gates were undone they both hopped down
From their horses, and cast their mantles away anon,
And then they stood armed from the head to the toes.
Then were the porters sore afraid at that sight,
And threw them the keys, glad that they might. …
Then the barons had the town, and the king had the castle.

It is not often that a source for 13th-century history reads more like a ballad of the adventures of Robin Hood.

Henry III Fine Rolls Blog Sunday 28 October to Sunday 4 November 1257

Tuesday, November 13th, 2012

King Henry III spent all this week at Westminster.  On Sunday 28 October, his forty-second regnal year opened, Henry having been crowned at Gloucester on 28 October 1216. The new regnal year meant that the chancery clerks had to begin a fresh set off rolls.  If one clicks here,  one can see the first membrane of the fine roll for the forty-second year.

Evidently, a space has been left for a big heading in capitals,  such as is found early in the reign, which would have proclaimed that this was ‘The Roll of Fines for the forty-second year of King Henry son of King John’. The clerk, however, could not be bothered with that and contented  himself with writing in a tiny hand ‘fines anni xlii’, leaving blank space all around.  One is tempted to think that this reflects the low morale of the chancery staff as Henry’s rule became more and more ineffective and contentious. No one, however, could have foreseen that by the end of the regnal year a revolution would have stripped the king of power.

The week in the fine rolls had many points of interest, but one may be singled out. The question is often raised as to just how valuable the chancery rolls were as records of royal government. Were they ever consulted to see what the king had done? Entry no. 18 from this week provides an example of when they were.  (This is eighteen entries down in the image above). It shows  the king informing the exchequer that, ‘having inspected the rolls of the chancery’, he has found that Master Roger de Cantilupe ‘had quittance of the common summons before the justices of common pleas in their last eyre in Somerset’. What this means is that Roger had been let off appearing before the justices on the first day of their business in Somerset in answer to the general summons sent round for people to attend. Accordingly, the king went on, Roger was to be pardoned the amercement of one mark imposed on him by the justices for his ‘default’ in  not turning up.   The actual record showing Roger’s exemption is  found on the close rolls for Henry III’s fortieth year, being on the dorse of membrane 19 (Close Rolls 1254-6, p.380), so quite a considerable search must have been necessary to find it.

The fine rolls for this week, under 1 November, also record the king’s grant to Elyas Marshal of land in Alton in Hampshire. Probably this was put on the fine rolls so as to inform the exchequer, through the originalia roll (the copy of the fine roll  sent the exchequer)   of the rent which Elyas was  to pay.  The ‘in the roll’ annotation to the entry made by our editors (no.17 in the translation ) shows that  there was such an annotation on the originalia roll. This would have been made by the exchequer and indicated it had put the debt into the pipe roll, the record of the annual audit of money owed the crown.  The charter corresponding to the entry likewise bears the date 1 November. It has an interesting witness list which shows those who were soon to make the revolution were not outsiders and strangers to the court. It is headed by Roger Bigod earl of Norfolk, and also includes his brother Hugh Bigod, who were both to be leading revolutionaries.  It also features the king’s half brother, William de Valence, whom the revolution was to expel from England.  Two foreign courtiers, the Savoyard steward, Imbert Pugeys and butler, William de Sancta Ermina (another to be expelled) featured alongside two native stewards, John and William de Grey. One puzzle  concerns John de Warenne, who was earl of Surrey. Why in the witness lists here (as elsewhere)  is he not given the title of ‘earl’?

Next week, Henry has humiliating news about his gold coinage.

Henry III’s Fine Rolls Blog Sunday 15 April to Saturday 21 April 1257

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012

During this week, Henry III left Westminster to spend some time at Merton priory in Surrey. From there he was to move on to Windsor, before returning to Merton,  arriving back at Westminster in the middle of May. These kind of trips out and around the capital, taking in Windsor, and either  Merton  to the south, or St Albans to the north, were characteristic of Henry’s itinerary.  Westminster, with its palace, patron saint and abbey, was his favourite residence, quite apart from being, or perhaps in spite of being, the seat of government.  But Henry also delighted in Windsor. He had made it  into a luxurious palace where his queen and children were based. A visit to Windsor fitted well with a stay at Merton or St Albans where Henry could be sustained both by the prayers of the monks and their food and drink.  How one wishes, there was a Merton chronicle to match the picture  of Henry’s visits to St Albans given by Matthew Paris.  At least the witness lists to royal charters show who was with Henry at Merton, and they included both his brother in law, Simon de Montfort, and his half brother, William de Valence.

The week has a fascinating variety of material on the fine rolls.  On 18 April at Merton, the twenty-four jurors of Romney marsh (the men elected to keep the marsh) fined in one mark of gold for having the judge, Henry of Bath, hear and determine the disputes between them and the men of the marsh about the repair of the marsh’s embankments and drains. (No. 554 in the calendar).   As Hasted puts it in his History of Kent, this led to  ‘the ordinances of Henry de Bathe, from which laws the whole realm of England take directions in relation to the sewers’:  ‘Romney Marsh’, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent: Volume 8 (1799), pp. 465-473. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=63514&strquery=jurors  Date accessed: 15 April 2012.

The king’s financial needs led to further measures for the selling of his woods in order to raise 3000 to 4000 marks. The treasurer of the exchequer, Philip Lovel, was too busy to attend to this, and so Adam de Grenville was appointed in his place. (No.565).

The next entries (nos.566-7), dated to 20 April at Merton, concerned the appointment of the  Yorkshire magnate, John de Eyville, as chief justice of the royal forest north of the Trent, which meant the northern forests were under his control.  John fined in two marks of gold for the office and agreed to pay 10 marks more a year for it than his predecessor,  terms which hardly seem extortionate.  John was to be a leading rebel in the civil war, but clearly he had not been excluded from office and favour beforehand.

Finally, to return to lampreys. In entry no.557, the exchequer was ordered to allow the king’s bailiffs of Gloucester £25 10d which they had spent buying  and transporting lampreys and other things for the king and queen during Lent.  This entry was cancelled, the reason (not stated) being that it should  have been placed on the liberate rolls. There more detail was given. The writ to the exchequer was issued on 19 April from Merton. 191 lampreys and 6 shad had been sent to the king and 55 lampreys and 2 shad  to the queen. Taking no account of the shad, this suggests a lamprey cost around 2 shillings or 24 pence. Given that a penny was enough to supply a pauper with food for one day, lampreys were evidently  expensive fish.

The cancelled entry about lampreys is seventeen from the bottom on the membrane covering this week; that about Romney marsh twenty from the bottom.

Lampreys

Wednesday, March 21st, 2012

Lampreys were the favourite fish of Henry III and Queen Eleanor, judging at least from a statement in a letter close that they found all other fish ‘insipid’. Lampreys were particularly caught in the Severn at Gloucester. For the men of Gloucester offering lampreys for a concession see Cal. Fine Rolls 1233-4, no.74.

In the KCL MA course on Magna Carta, there was some discussion of lampreys and what they looked like. Claire fitzGerald with praiseworthy initiative followed this up and as these images show brought one in for us to see. The image was taken by Richard de Renzy Channer also of the MA.

Henry III’s Fine Rolls Blog Sunday 24 July – Saturday 30 July 1261

Wednesday, July 27th, 2011

This was yet another week Henry III spent in the Tower of London. It was, however, to be the last of this stay, doubtless to Henry’s relief, and indeed to the relief of the readers of this blog.

The kingdom was now on the brink of civil war.  In Gloucester there was a dramatic confrontation. The local knight, William de Tracy sought to take over the sheriffdom and hold his own session of the county court. In response,  the king’s nominee, a foreigner and favourite of the queen, Mathias Bezille,  dragged William from the court, trampled over him in the mud and hauled him off to imprisonment in the castle.  The situation was particularly threatening in Kent. There Simon de Montfort and Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester, went round the Cinque Ports and secured a written undertaking that they would  stand with the barons and prevent the entry of foreigners, which meant in practice the entry of foreign soldiers being called in to aid the king. In a striking example of the rhetoric which justified what amounted to rebellion, the barons claimed, in the language of the revolution of 1258,  to be acting ‘for  the honour of God, the faith of the king and the profit of the realm’.

Henry’s response came in remarkable letter which he issued from the Tower on Saturday 30 July.  It was first of series, concocted  in this period, appealing for the allegiance of his subjects.  Addressed to the knights, free tenants and everyone else in Kent, Henry  reminded  them of the oath of fidelity they had sworn when he was last in the county (see the blogs for early May). He then enjoined them to give no credence to   suggestions and assertions contrary to that fidelity, by which his mind  might be moved and disturbed. They were to maintain themselves ‘in their devotion and pristine fidelity, so that from us, who wishes to be bound to you most especially in all love, you will deserve to find  secure recourse in  your affairs’.

The mounting crisis was  reflected in the fine roll business.  Only seventeen writs to initiate or further common law legal actions were purchased in this week, as opposed to forty-nine the week before.  Clearly travel was becoming difficult and dangerous.

It was time for Henry to act. How he acted will be seen in next week’s blog.

Henry III Fine Rolls Blog Sunday 24 April (Easter Day) to Saturday 30 April 1261

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

Last week, Henry III at last left the Tower of London and set up court at St Paul’s doubtless in the bishop’s house there. He was able to celebrate Easter Day, 24 April, at St Paul’s rather than in the great fortress. Yet that was still a terrific breach with custom. Since 1239 Henry had always celebrated Easter at Westminster Abbey. The only exceptions were 1243 and 1254 when he was in France.  Between 1230 and 1238, the pattern had been different. The great feast had then been shared between Westminster, Gloucester, Canterbury, Clarendon and (most popular of all)  Reading abbey.  The change, of course, reflected  how Henry’s devotion to Edward the Confessor had come to dominate his life.  He would always celebrate Easter beside his patron saint. How grievous now to be unable to do so.

Even worse, St Paul’s itself  was not entirely secure, as the fine rolls reveal for the first time. The usual itinerary of Henry III has him at St Paul’s for the whole period from 23 to 29 April.  Indeed it was at St Paul’s, on 28 April, as the fine rolls show, that Henry took the homage of the Nicholas de Cantilupe in return for a relief of £5 for the knight’s fee he held from the crown. This was in strict accordance with the level stipulated by Magna Carta.  But the fine rolls also show that Henry was briefly back at the Tower on the twenty-sixth.  It was from there that he issued the order  putting Elyas de Rabayne back in possession of his properties.  Evidently Elyas, the Poitevin castellan of Corfe expelled in 1258,  had acted on Henry’s invitation (see the blog for 10-16 April) and had returned to England.   Elyas may have brought vital information about the situation at Dover for next day Henry ordered money to be sent there for the expenses of his household.  He had taken the momentous decision to dash to Dover and seize the  castle.  This was not a decision he made alone for  his brother, Richard earl of Cornwall and king of Germany,  the Queen and her  uncle, Peter of Savoy, the Norman John de Plessy (earl of Warwick through marriage), and the king’s most faithful and brilliant counsellor, John Mansel,  were all at court around this time.  Leaving Mansel behind in command of the Tower, Henry  left London on 29 April and by the end of the day had reached Rochester.

The exigencies of this week may explain a falling off in the routine business on the fine rolls. Only twelve of the common law writs were sought as opposed to seventeen the week before. It will be interesting to see how far the flow was affected by the move on Dover. For Henry, of course, that was not a consideration. The vital question was what would happen which he got there. Would he manage to get control of the great castle, widely thought of as ‘the key to England’?