^{page 265 note a} The expressions used by SirEllis, Henry (Original Letters, 2nd S. i. 94Google Scholar) writing 57 years ago are nearly as applicable now as then. “This eventful period,” says he, “though removed from us scarcely more than three centuries, is still among the darkest on our annals. Its records are confused, mutilated, and disjointed. They who wrote history in it had no talents for the task; and there was a ferocity abroad among the partizans of both the rival houses, which prevented many from even assembling the materials of history.”

It is from Mr. Halliwell Phillipps's introduction to Warkworth's Chronicle, edited by him for tho Camden Society in 1839, that I borrow this quotation. This was, perhaps, the most valuable contribution to the knowledge of the period which had appeared since Ellis wrote, and was calculated to raise great hopes, since well justified, of the utility of the labours to be performed by the Society then in its infancy.

^{page 266 note a} Subjoined are the titles and editions of the works to which I shall chiefly refer, with the abbreviations used in citing them.

William Wyrcestre or Worcester, cited as “Wyrc,” from Hearne's edition at the end of the second volume of Liber Niger Scaccarii, 2nd ed. London, 1771Google Scholar. Warkworth's, Chronicle of the First Thirteen Years of King Edward IV., ed. Halliwell, (Camden Society) 1839Google Scholar. Gregory's, WilliamChronicle of London, ed. Gairdner, (Camden Society), 1877Google Scholar, cited as “Gregory.” A Brief Latin Chronicle, ed. Gairdner, , in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, (Camden Society) 1880Google Scholar; and Brief Notes, an historical compilation in the same volume. The last three chronicles give several new facts and are otherwise very valuable. Fabyan's Chronicle, ed. 1533, cited as “Fabyan.” A Fragment of a Chronicle relating to King Edward IV. printed by Hearne at the end of Sprott's Chronicle. 1719, cited as “Hearne's Fragment.” Halle's, Union of York and Lancaster, 1548Google Scholar. Grafton's, Chronicle, 1568Google Scholar.

^{page 268 note a} The surrender according to the recitals in the Act of attainder and resumption, I Edward IV., took place on St. Mark's Day, April 25. Rot. Parl. v. 478Google Scholar, col. 1.

^{page 267 note b} Rot. Parl. ibid.

^{page 267 note c} Paston Letters, ed. Gairdner, 386.

^{page 267 note d} Rot. Parl. ibid.Paston Letters, 391.

^{page 267 note e} “Mense Aprilis Eegina Margareta per navem de Scocia adivit Franciam pro auxilio Regis Francio habendo.”— “Die Parasceves Regina Margareta cum quatuor navibus de Kyrkhowbhryth in Scocia per mare inter Walliam et Hiberniam adivit Britanniam… ac postèa, Andegavis ad patrem suum Regem Siciliee et consequenter ad regem Francie pro auxilio habendo.” Wyrc. 492, 493, events of 1461–2.

^{page 268 note a} The original bond is still in the French archives. See Douët d'Arcq, Inventaire des Sceaux de France, num. 10,044. The tenor of the instrument is given by MissStrickland, , Lives of the Queens of England, iii. 269Google Scholar.

^{page 268 note b} There must, however, be a mistake in the leader's name, for it is sufficiently clear that de Breze did not appear on the scene until November following, when he accompanied Margaret on her return from her first voyage, as we shall presently see.

^{page 268 note c} See Archaeological Journal, xvii. 53Google Scholar, for a notice of a safe-conduct, dated June 17, 1462, from James III. of Scotland, for Warwick and the other ambassadors proceeding into Scotland.

^{page 268 note d} See sheet Pedigree, Raine's North Durham, facing p. 326.

^{page 268 note e} Wyrc. p. 494. Gregory, p. 218, says she landed in Northumberland seven days before All Hallow Tide, that is, about Oct. 25. This seems the most correct.

^{page 268 note f} Fabyan, fo. ccxv.

^{page 269 note a} The number of ships is from Gregory—of men from W. Wyrcestre.

^{page 269 note b} Paston Letters, 463.

^{page 269 note c} Wyrc. p. 494.

^{page 269 note d} Wyrc. p. 494. “And there she took the Castle of Alnwick, and put it full of Frenchmen,” says Gregory, p. 218.

^{page 269 note e} Paston Letters, 463. “Eodem anno, circa festum Omnium Sanctorum percurrente rumore de advcntu Reginse Margaretæ cum copiosa multitudine Francigenorum, Scottorum, et Anglorum sibi adheerentium processit festine nobilis ille belliger comes de Warwik cum suis et subsecutus est rex Edwardus ut eam cum complicibus suis effugarent. Quse, fugâ initâ, tuciora qusesivit prsesidii loca.” Brief Latin Chronicle, p. 175.

^{page 270 note a} “A small carvel,” Halle and Grafton.

^{page 270 note b} The passages between the asterisks are nearly word for word with the narrative given in Hearne's Fragment, p. 291.

^{page 270 note c} At Bamborough. Hearne's Fragment.

^{page 270 note a} The Fragment, says, “seeing no remedy to scape they brent their ships and fled to an island thereby, where they were slayne and takin everychone,” by certain gentlemen there. Fabyan seems to have had before him the Chronicle of which Hearne preserves a “Fragment,” or the work on which it was founded, so near is their language. Fabyan, however, adds a few facts.

^{page 271 note a} A new, but I doubt if a very certain, light is cast on this passage by an assertion in Brief Notes, p. 156, that Margaret after taking Alnwick was besieged in Bamborough. The writer adds a curious variation of the Holy Island story partly unintelligible to me, owing to the false Latin. I give it verbatim. “Regina Margareta cepit castrum de Anwyk et obsessa erat in castro de Banburw. Et cum cc Anglici intrassent quandam parvam insulam in illis partibus ad succurendum se si necesse fuisset, ipsis nescientibus, advenerunt cccc de Francigenis ad eos includendos et capiendos, et subito in Anglicos irrûerunt; sed capti et interfecti erant ex Francigenis cc et plures, et alii fugierunt ut dicitur.”

^{page 271 note b} Wyrc; Gregory, p. 219. Warkworth, p. 2.

^{page 271 note c} Paston Letters, p. 464.

^{page 271 note d} Printed in Excerpta Historica, Bentley, p. 365.

^{page 271 note e} Stow has used this p. 417.

^{page 272 note a} Bamborough.

Garrison. Duke of Somerset, Lord Eoos, Sir Ralph Percy with 200 or 300 men (Cotton) [and the Earl of Pembroke. Brief Notes..]

Besiegers. Earl of Worcester (Cotton.) [He was at Dunstanborough according to Paston.] Lords Montagu and Ogle. Lords Strange, Say, Grey de “Wilton and Lumley (Cotton.) [Also the Earl of Arundel and 10,000 men. Brief Notes.]

Alnwick.

Garrison. Lord Hungerford, Sir Robert Whittingham (these two were old companions, an intercepted letter from them to Queen Margaret in Scotland written from Dieppe in August 30, 1461, acquainting her with the death of Charles VII. and cautioning her not to venture for the present to the Continent, will be found in Paston Letters, 413,) and Sir Thomas Fyndern and five or six hundred Frenchmen. [Brief Notes give the garrison at 300 men, and places Fyndern in Dunstanborough.]

Besiegers. Earl of Kent, Lord Scales and others {Cotton) [Earls of Warwick and Kent, and the Lords Powys, Greystock, and Cromwell with 10,000 men. Brief Notes.]

Dunstanborough.

Garrison. Sir Richard Tunstall, Doctor Morton (afterwards Bishop of Ely and Lord Chancellor) and Sir Philip Wentworth, 600 or 700 men (Cotton.) [Brief Notes add Sir T. Fyndern, “Ballivus de Kam” with six score men, but this must be a slip for six hundred.”]

Besiegers. Lords Fitzhugh, Scrope, Baron of Greystock, Lord Powys (Cotton). Earl of Worcester and Sir Ralph Grey (Paston), but the Earl of Worcester was at Bamborough according to Cotton. [Brief Notes name Lords Wenlock and Hastings “with other Lords “as besieging this Castle, placing Greystock and Powys at Alnwick.]

^{page 272 note b} Wyrc. ubi supra. Gregory, pp. 219, 220. This latter writer gives some curious particulars as to the good treatment Somerset met with at Edward's hands.

^{page 273 note a} And Frenchmen, Brief Latin Chronicle, p. 176, followed by Stow, p. 417. Halle and Grafton inform us that the Scots were 13,000 strong, and were under the command of Sir George Douglas. The information may be correct; but, owing to these chroniclers having (as we shall see in the sequel) antedated the battle of Hexham by two years, it seems at first sight to refer to the second and final capture of Alnwick by the Yorkists after that battle, in 1464.

^{page 273 note b} “Nostris non audentibus eis resistere,” Brief Latin Chronicle. “The English looking on,” Halle and Grafton. “Videntes se inferiores numero,” Wyrc. p. 495.

^{page 273 note c} Warkworth, p. 2, narrates this event in much the same way. He says de Breze had 20,000 Scots with him, and that either party was afraid of the other. “Had the Scots come on boldly, they mighte have taken and distressed all the Lords and Commoners, for they had laid so long in the field, and were grieved with colde and rain, that they had no courage to fight.” But these events are placed erroneously in 1 Edward IV. 1461.

^{page 273 note a} Wyrc. p. 496. Gregory, p. 220.

^{page 273 note e} See Brief Notes, p. 157, for the names of dukes, earls, &c. including Lord Dacre of the North, with the King Edward “in hys jorny into Scottlong at the fest of S^t Andrew in þe month of Decembyr. Anno Domini M^o. cccc LXIJ^o.” Stow (p. 415, ed. 1631) has copied this list down to the first six knights, adding “to the number of fifty-nine knights,” which number agrees exactly with the list in Brief Notes.

^{page 273 note f} Gregory, Brief Latin Chronicle. The Latin Chronicle here makes the following reflexion: “Et in hac tarn longa mora tocius pene milicie Anglicane illic adversus adversarios nostros congregate, quid, queso, memorabile, quid laude dignum actum est nisi quod predicta tria castra capta sunt?”

^{page 274 note a} So I translate “Scottos cum suis excuciens,” Br. Lat. Chron. p. 176.

^{page 274 note b} “Epulantibusque illis Londini et nescio quid agentibus.” Ibid.

^{page 274 note b} Gregory, , and see Hot. Parl. v. 511Google Scholar.

^{page 274 note d} Wyrcester puts the betrayal of Alnwick in May, 1463, which was after Queen Margaret's departure on her second voyage. He says that Grey expelled Ashley, who fell into the hands of Sir Ealph Percy.

^{page 274 note e} Page 220.

^{page 275 note a} Wyrc. p. 496. Easter fell on April 10 in 1463, and, as we have seen, it was in Lent that the Scots, or Lancastrian party, retook Bamborough. She fled away, says Gregory, p. 220, with all her council, and Sir Pierre de Breze and his Frenchmen (i. e. all who survived) by water with four balynggarys (vessels of some sort, ballengers, Froiss. See Ducange s. v. Balingaria): and they landed at the Scluse in Flanders, and left King Henry that was behind them, &c.

^{page 275 note b} Wyrc. ubi supra. The particulars of the reception of the Queen in Flanders are given in Du Clercq and the continuator of Monstrelet, as referred to later on. According to Du Clercq (Buchon, , Monstrelet, xiv. 297Google Scholar) Charolois was at Lille, the Duke at Hesdin. He says, the Duke gave her 2,000 gold crowns, de la Varende—as he calls Brezé—1,000, and each of her ladies 100 crowns, “et sy les feit convoyer hors de ses pays, “et tant qu'elle fust ès pays de Barois, ou estoit son frere, le due de Calabre, qui en estoit seigneur.”

^{page 275 note c} The statement in Hoarne's Fragment, p. 294, that in the same year (1463) King Harry was taken in the north, and Edmond Duke of Somerset with his brother John were yet in Scotland with Queen Margaret, &c. is of no value. Henry was not taken prisoner until 1465, and Edmond Duke of Somerset did not succeed to the title until 1464, when his brother Henry was beheaded after Hexham field. Indeed the passage is marked in the margin by a more recent hand: “False—for he (that is Edmond) was gon to the Burgon (i.e. to the low countries) the yere before.” See Letter of Sir John Fortescue in Ld. Clermont's Ilist. of The Family of Fortescue. 2nd edit. 1880, pp. 71–2Google Scholar.

^{page 276 note a} Hist. Croyl. Contin. Gale Script, i. 533Google Scholar. After a description of Towton field, he says, “Fugit etiam cum paucis eodem temporis articulo Eex Henricus in Scotiam, ubi continue et in castris eidem conterminis, per quatuor postmodum annos in magna delituit confusione. Regina verb Margareta cumfilio suo Edwardo, quern de præfato susceperat Henrico, etiam fugæ consulens, non cito denuò reversura, in partes interim secesserat transmarinas.”

^{page 276 note b} This date is correct, Rot. Parl. v. 498Google Scholar. The prorogation was not on June 18th but on the preceding day, and the reason assigned was the king's enforced absence to oppose his enemies of Scotland and his traitors and rebels. The prorogation was until November 4th.

^{page 277 note a} Commissions of array were issued on June 2, 3 Edward IV. (1463) under the Great Seal, because the French and others intended to invade the realm; Warwick was constituted warden of the West, and Montagu of the East March. Rymer, xi. 501.

^{page 278 note a} Rymer, xi. 509, 510.

^{page 278 note b} Brief Latin Chronicle, p. 178, see Mr. Gairdner's preface, p. xxiv.

^{page 278 note c} Gregory, p. 223. This is also mentioned in most of the books.

^{page 278 note d} Rot. Parl. v. 499Google Scholar.

^{page 278 note e} Fabyan, sub annis 1463-4. “In this yere and moneth of May, whyche was in the begynnyng of the iiij yere of King Edwarde, Lord John of Montagu, havinge then the rule in the northe partes, beynge warned of the comyng of Henry late kynge wyth greate power out of Scotland, assembled the northyn men, and mett with hym about Exam, &c.” Not a word, be it observed, about the presence of Queen Margaret. The movements of Montagu immediately before the battles are given with some little detail by Gregory.

^{page 278 note f} An episode of the battle of Hexham is not without interest. The author of the Brief Latin Chronicle, after noticing the battle, says—” Deliberata sunt in breve domino de Mowntagu castra de Langeley the Tawne, Turris de Exham; castrum etiam de Bywell. In quo quidem castro inventum est le helmet regis Henrici cum coronâ et gladio et faleris dicti Henrici. Et quo modo aut quo ipse evasit, novit deus, in cujus manu corda sunt Regum. Camd. Soc. p. 179.”

” John, Lord Montagu,” says Fabyan, (ccxv. v^o.) “after the battle of Hexham, chased Henry so nere, that he wan from him certayne of his folowers trapped with blewe velvet, and hys bycocket garnysshed with two crownes of golde, and fret wyth perle and riche stone.”

These two notes of trophies taken from Henry on the occasion of his flight differ in describing the head-piece as a “helmet” and as a “bycocket.” They may or may not both mean the same thing. What a “bycocket” was we shall see presently, but first I wish to call attention to the wonderful transformations which the word itself has undergone at the hands of the later chroniclers.

Halle (followed by Grafton), with a sneer at this unfortunate prince, says “King Henry was the best horseman of his company, for he fled so fast that no man could overtake him, and yet he was so near pursued that certain of his henchmen and followers were taken, their horses trapped in blew velvet: whereof one of them had on his hed the said King Henry's healmet. Some say his high cap of estate called (Halle, fol. ii. v^o.), (Grafton, ii. 661), garnished with two riche crowns, which was presented to King Edward at Yorke, the fourth day of May.”

The word seems to have puzzled the printers. Halle first misprints for a and then Grafton restores the t, but throws the indefinite article into the word with a capital Ilolinshed has further improved on Grafton and turned the head-piece into.

Spelman in his glossary has got hold of this monstrous corruption, “Abacot,” from Holinshed, whom he quotes, giving the definition “Pileus augustalis Regum Anglorum duobus coronis insignitus.” And from Spelman (or from Holinshed), Bailey, Ash, and, I believe, other English dictionary makers have inserted the ridiculous word.

The first article in the late Mr. Blanche's Cyclopædia of Costume is on “Abacot, Abocked, Abocket, Bycocket.” This very agreeable and learned writer has failed, probably from quoting at second hand, to see that the true word is Bycocket, and that Abacot, &c. &c. are mere corruptions. But I think he has shown clearly and for the first time what a Bycocket is.

Willement in his Regal Heraldry quotes a passage from Leland's, Collectanea, iv. 225Google Scholar, giving an account of the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth of York, on which occasion the Earl of Derby as Constable of England entered Westminster Hall, “mounted on a courser richely trapped, and enarmed (that is to say) Quarterly, Golde, in the first quarter a lion gowles, having a man's head in a Bycockett of silver, and in the second a lyon of sable. This trapper was right curiously wrought with the nedell, for the mannes visage in the Bycockett shewde veryle (Pfayrle) well favorde.

Willement is inclined, but no doubt wrongly, to connect this curious bearing with another device borne in a banner at Elizabeth of York's funeral. Mr. Planche, however, more judiciously observes that the device of a lion with a man's head in a “bycocket” did not belong to the Stanleys. But, says he, it is to be seen in a standard of John Ratcliff, Baron Fitzwalter (Book of Standards, Coll. Arms,) and he finds that Fitzwalter and others were associated in 3rd Henry VII. for exercising the office of High Steward of England at Queen Elizabeth's Coronation.” It is therefore clear that it was Lord Fitzwalter as High Steward, and not the Earl of Derby as constable, who rode the courser so “trapped and enarmed.”

Mr. Planché in his Plate I. lettered, I am sorry to say, “Abacot,” instead of “Bycocket,” figures the man-lion from Fitzwalter's standard, temp. Henry VII. where the Bycocket on his head is evidently identical with the so-called cap of estate or cap of maintenance, of which his drawings on the same plate show examples from the seals of Edward the Black Prince and Richard Duke of York, and from the grant to John de Kingston by Richard II. Harl. MS. 5804, with other specimens. After remarking “that the (Abacot or) Bycocket was not peculiarly a royal cap of state appears from an entry in a fifteenth century MS. (L 8, fol, 54 b. Coll. Arms) entitled ‘The apparel for the field of a baron in his Sovereign's company,’ Item, another pe. (? paire) of hostyng harness [to] ryde daily with all, with a bycocket, and alle other apparel longynge thereto,” he goes on to say, “It is, I think, evident, that the (abocock or) bycocket was the cap so frequently seen in illuminations of the fifteenth century turned up behind, coming to a peak in front, varying and gradually decreasing in height, encircled with a crown when worn by regal personages, and similar to if not identical with what is now called the knight's chapeau, first appearing in the reign of Edward III. and on which (when used upon a helmet) the crest is placed.”

The word is French, but of uncertain derivation. Under the word Bigacia, Ducange says “Bicoquet vero, et biquoquet, ornamentum est capitis, capitii species, in Addit. ad Monstrel. anno 1465, fol. 10 v^o. Un Breton, archier de corps du due de Berry, accoustre d'une brigandines et un Bicoquet sur son chief, garni de boutons d'argent dore.” He cites also a will dated 1473 containing a bequest of a “Biquoquet fourni d'argent.” Eoquefort gives the word with the same meaning. I cannot find it in any of the other old French glossaries which I have been able to consult, and M. Littre has not included it in his great French Dictionary.

There is some authority, at least so M. Viollet le Due seems to think, for a bicoquei having at one time been a particular kind of helmet. See Planche's Cyclopaedia, i. v. Bycocket, a distinct article, in which he discusses this opinion.

^{page 280 note a} Patent 4 Edward IV. l^a pars. m. 10, Carte rightly gives the date of this creation as May 27, and Wyrcestre, p. 499, agrees with this: “Dominus Bex postea (t. e. post praelium apud Hexham) in festo Trinitatis pro honore captionis dicti ducis Somersetise creavit prasdictum Dominum Mountagu in Comitem Northumbrian, deditque eidem Comiti omnia dominia et terras qua? quondam fuerunt Henrici Percy infra Comitatum Northumbrian” Yet in a patent passed May 26, 4 Edward IV. John “Earl of Northumberland and Lord of Montague,” has commission to treat for peace with Scotland. (Rot. Scot. 4 E. IV. m. 14.)

And the narrative of the siege of Bamborough (MS. Coll. Armor.) printed in Warkworth, Note, p. 36, and in Bohn's Chronicles of the White Hose, a useful little book, begins “May 27, Anno Domini 1464. The King lay in the palace of York and kept his estate there solemnly, and there cheated he Sir John Neville Lord Montague Earl of Northumberland.”

Dugdale, , Bar. i. 307Google Scholar refers to the same patent roll, but to the wrong membrane, 6 instead of 10, and dates the patent May 23.

The creation is dated by subsequent writers (all incorrectly) as follows:—

^{page 280 note b} Radulfus Gray fugit de Hexham ante bellum inceptum ad castrum Bamburghe, et post bellum de Hexham multi ex parte Regis Henrici fugerunt in eodem castro. Et non longb postea comes Warwick cum maximis bumbardis obsedit idem castrum. Wyrc. p. 499. Fabyan, p. ccxvi. mentions also the capture of Sir R. Grey, and the fall of the castle. Grey was beheaded at Doncaster as soon as his wounds were cured.

^{page 281 note a} Mr. Halliwell's Notes on Warkworth, p. 34. See Rot. Parl. v. 512Google Scholar.

^{page 281 note b} Rot. Parl. v. 500, 508Google Scholar.

^{page 281 note c} Ibid. v. 511.

^{page 281 note d} Rot. Parl. ibid.

^{page 281 note e} See Gregory, pp. 220, 223

^{page 282 note a} I have to thank Mr. C. T. Martin, F.S.A. for his kindness in verifying Dugdale's citation of the inquisition mentioned above. He informs me that a second inquisition also referred to by Dugdale (Esch. 5 Edward IV. No. 38) a few lines lower down, gives no date of the Duke's execution.

^{page 282 note b} It may here be noticed, that Banks Extinct and Dormant Baronages, ii. 262Google Scholar, Courthope's Nicolas's Historic Peerage, and Burke's Extinct and Dormant Peerages, all agree in beheading Robert Lord Hungerford, another important Lancastrian commander, at Hexham in 1463, instead of 1464.

^{page 284 note a} This is the most probable, forHalle makes Queen Margaret give the custody of Bamborough to Sir Ralph Grey, who, as we have seen, was in 1462 on the Yorkist side, but, having changed party, defended the same castle in 1464, after Hexham was taken, when the place fell, and he was beheaded as above stated. And again, before mentioning the taking of Bamborough (1462) he tells how Margaret took Alnwick, and says she made de Breze captain there, and that he held it with his Frenchmen till rescued. It was de Breze's son who was really left in Alnwick and rescued by his father in the first week of 1463.— Vide ante. Halle afterwards gives (as above) the story of the rescue, but puts it after Hexham—thus confusing it with the final reduction in 1464.

^{page 285 note a} Page 279, reprint of 1811.

^{page 285 note b} Page 435.

^{page 286 note a} Warkworth gives the date correctly, so does Stowe, whose account of the three years 1462—4 is very accurate. He notices the first and second captures of the castles by the Lancastrians in the right places.

^{page 286 note b} Lives of the Queens, 2nd edition, iii. 271Google Scholar.

^{page 287 note a} History of England, ii. 767Google Scholar.

^{page 287 note b} Page 273, note. I can find in the psewffo-Monstrelet no suggestion of the kind.

^{page 289 note a} Monstrelet, ed. 1595, iii. 9C.

^{page 290 note a} Johnes's Monstrelet, ed. 1840, ii. 288.

^{page 290 note b} Miss Strickland seems to have used Johnes's translation, for she observes, no doubt correctly, that Hainault must be a blunder of a copyist for England. It is, I think, quite impossible that the Queen, either on her first or her second voyage, could have got into Hainault at all.

^{page 290 note c} The original letters are in the possession of Sir John Lawson of Burgh, Bart, and will be found printed in the Archceologia, XLVII. p. 190Google Scholar.

^{page 291 note a} Œuvres choisies de l'Abbé Prévost. Amsterdam, 1784, tome xir. pp. 207—233Google Scholar.

^{page 292 note a} Yet again, in the contemporary chronicle of Adrien de But (Belgian Doc. Inédits. 1870, p. 454), there is this brief notice of a robbery in connection with Margaret's second voyage in 1463:—

” Margarita regina Anglise cum Edwardo parvulo filio, venit at curiam Ducis Philippi, qui fecit earn deduci ad Lotharingiam, sed in via deprsedata fuit.”

This seems rather to mean that it was on the journey to Lorraine that she was waylaid, and not before arrival at the ducal court. Can the adventure, after all, have happened in Hainault, as Mr. Johnes so unaccountably states? That province is not exactly out of the road from Bruges to Verdun.

^{page 292 note b} Rapin has been followed without suspicion by the compilers of L'Art de verifier les Dates, vii. 149, ed. 1818Google Scholar.

^{page 292 note c} It is by no means clear whether he intends to place this event in 1463 or 1464; the real date being 1465.

^{page 293 note a} Page 145, seqq. 5th ed. 1849.

^{page 293 note b} The date of the Queen's landing in Bretagne is given in the margin as “1463 April 8,” and as the first event of that year. This is no misprint for 1462, as is shown by the day of the month. This corresponds with Good Friday, 1463, and Lingard was evidently following William Wyrcestre, who says the landing in Brittany was on that fast-day, “Dies Parasceves,” but somehow he has gone one year forward. Good Friday, 1462 (the real date) fell on April 16. Miss Strickland, p. 267, quotes Lingard for the landing in Brittany as on April 8, 1482. She has set right the year, but, failing to observe that the day of the month depended on Easter, has not altered 8 to 16.