1. The emphasis here is on official representation by a national delegation, comprising royal ambassadors and representatives of the clergy in the king's realm, acting in obedience to royal instructions. Individual proctors representing bishops, cathedral chapters, or religious houses— sometimes one person would carry several procurations—might arrive ahead of, or separately from, the official delegation and would presumably enjoy more independence than the members of the latter. For further information about the composition of the English delegations to Basel, see Schofield, A.N.E.D., “The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, xii. no. 2, London 1961, 167Google Scholar; also “An English Version of Some Events in Bohemia during 1434,” The Slavonic and East European Revue, xlii, no. 99, London 06 1964, 324.Google Scholar

2. The total length of the Council has been estimated at 18 years, 1 month, and 8 days; Pérouse, G., Le Cardinal Louis Aleman, president du concile de Bâle, et la Fin du grande Schisme, Paris 1904, 460Google Scholar; it was not of uniform importance throughout its life; during the first two years it grew slowly from an inauspicious beginning; for some years before its dissolution it had fallen into insignificance.

3. For a full account of the first English delegation see Schofield, “The First English Delegation to the Council of Basel,” loc. cit.

4. Schofield, art. cit. 173, 176, 179–81.

5. E. F. Jacob, Henry Chichele and the Ecclesiastical Politics of His Age, 19; see also Schofield, art. cit. 191. It is doubtful that this plan was ever carried out.

6. The last-mentioned clause of the oath was added only on 24 April 1433, Monumenta Conciliorum Generalium Saeculi XV. Concilium Basiliense Scriptores, ed. F. Palacký, E. Birk. (Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften) Vienna 1857–1886, ii. 342–3.Google Scholar The texts of three English protestations about the Council's adoption of deputations instead of “nations” were printed by Zellfelder, A., England und das Basler Konzil, (Historische Studien, ed. Ebering, E., Band 113) Berlin 1913, 248–256Google Scholar; see also Schofield, art cit. 182–3, 194–5.

7. Schofield, art. cit. 183.

8. The Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, ed. G. Williams, (Rolls Series) London 1872, ii. 61–6.Google Scholar

9. Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, ed. J. D. Mansi, Venice 1792, xxx. 663–4.Google Scholar

10. Schofield, art. cit. 184–196.

11. On the second English delegation, see Zellfelder, op. cit., chap. 3, “Teilnahme Englands am Basler Konzil (Vom August 1434 bis zum Kongress von Arras, Juni 1435),” 89–129; also Jacob, E. F., Chichele and Ecclesiastical Politics, 20–2Google Scholar; “Two Lives of Archbishop Chichele,” Bulletin of John Rylands Library, xvi. no. 2. Manchester 1932, 27–8Google Scholar; “Englishmen and the General Councils of the Fifteenth Century,” in Essays in the Conciliar Epoch, Manchester 1953, 56.Google Scholar

12. The Register of Henry Chichele, Archbishop of Canterbury (1414–1443), ed. E. F. Jacob, Canterbury and York Soc., Oxford 1945, iii. 242–50.Google Scholar

13. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 263.Google Scholar

14. Monumenta Conciliorum Gencralium, ii. 564–74;Google Scholar Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, ed. Mansi, Venice 1788, xxixGoogle Scholar; Concilium Basiliense. Studien und Quellen zur Geschichte des Concils von Basel, ed. J. Haller, etc. Basal 1896–1936, iii. 19, 20Google Scholar; Valois, N., La Crise Religieuse du XVe siècle Le Pape et le Concile, 1418–1450, Paris 1909, i. 302–9.Google Scholar

15. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 265–7.Google Scholar

16. Schofield, art. cit. 196.

17. Jacob, , Chichele and Ecclesiastical Politics, 7–12Google Scholar; “Two Lives of Chichele,” 15–6, 18, 19; “The Bohemians at the Council of Basel,” Prague Essays, ed. R. W. Seton-Watson, Oxford 1949, 103.Google Scholar

18. Jacob, , “The English Concordat with the Papacy in 1418,” Bulletin of the International Committee of Historical Sciences, Paris 1938, x 405–6Google Scholar; “Some English Documents of the Conciliar Movement,” Bull, of J. Rylands Lib. xv. no. 2. 1931, 29Google Scholar; see also, “A Note on the English Concordat of 1418,” Mediaeval Studies presented to Aubrey Gwynn, S. J. ed. J. A. Watt, J. B. Morrall F. X. Martin, Dublin 1961, 349–358.Google Scholar

19. Zellfelder, op. cit., 262–3; Concilium Basil. iii, 233; v. 105; Monumenta Cone. Gen. ii. 765–6.Google Scholar

20. Concilium Basil. iii. 246–483 passim.Google Scholar

21. Haller, J., England und Rom unter Martin V, Quellen und Forschungen aus italienschen Archiven und Bibliotheken, Rome 1905, viii. 259Google Scholar; Concilium Basil. iii. 199–413Google Scholar passim; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 765, 782–3Google Scholar; Zellfelder, op. cit., 260–296.

22. The decree against annates was one of eleven passed at the twenty-first session on 9 June 1435; Sacrorum Conc. Collectio, ed. Mansi, xxix. 104–8Google Scholar Concilium Basil. iii. 413Google Scholar; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii, 801Google Scholar; see also Valois, op. cit., i. 372–7; Waugh, W. T., “The Councils of Constance and Basel,” Cambridge Mediaeval History, 1936, viii. 34.Google Scholar

23. Concilium Basil. iii. 400. 408Google Scholar; v. 134–5; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 800.Google Scholar The decree, having been approved by a general congregation om 30 May, was promulgated at a formal session on 9 June.

24. The last traces of the delegation's members in the records of the Counciloccur in late July and during August 1435; Concilium Basil. iii. 455, 463, 483.Google Scholar

25. Only Pierre Cauchon, the bishop of Lisieux, who led the Lancastrian French embassy at the congress, and William Sprever, the English notary, went direct from Basel to Arras. Dickinson, J. G., The Congress of Arras, 1435, Oxford, 1955, 40–8.Google Scholar

26. Calendar of entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britani and Ireland, Papal Letters, ed. J. A. Twemlow, London 1909, viii. 212–9Google Scholar; see also Jacob, E. P., “Chichele and Ecclesiastical Politics,” 15; “Two lives of Chichele,” 24–5Google Scholar, Vickers, K. H., Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, London, 1907, 327.Google Scholar

27. On 13 July 1433 the Council had decreed that free capitular elections were to be universally restored; this was a measure that the Council did not take very seriously itself, but one which was capable of attracting to Basel very many appeals from parties to disputes such as this concerning Worcester; Valois, op. cit. i. 371–2; ii. 31.

28. Dickinson, op. cit., chap. 3: “The Burgundian Volta-Face”.

29. Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council of England, ed. H. Nicolas, London 1834–1837, v. 365.Google Scholar

30. Dickinson, op. cit., 174–5.

31. Ibid.. 173–181; Foedera, Conventiones Litterae et cuiuscumque Acta Publica inter Reges Angliae et alios, ed. T. Rymer, The Hague, 1739–1745, v. I. 21Google Scholar; f. Incerti Scriptoris Chronicon Angliae ed. J. A. Giles, London 1848, 14.Google Scholar

32. Dickinson, op. cit., chap. 4, especially 97–102.

33. The Commentaries of Pius II, ed. F. A. Gragg and L. C. Gabel, Smili College Studies in History, Northampton, Mass. 1937, xxii. 16, 20–1.Google Scholar On the purpose of Aeneas's mission. see Dunlop, Annie I., The Life and Times of James Kennedy, Bishop of St. Andrews, St. Andrews University Publications, xlvi, Edinburgh and London, 1950, 16Google Scholar; Dickinson, op. cit., 130. On his mission, see also Mitchell, R. J., The Laurels and the Tiara, Pius II 1458–1464, London 1962,Google Scholar chap. 5; Ady, C. M., “Pius II and his Experiences of England, Scotland and the English,” English Miscellany, Rome 1958, ix. 41–9.Google Scholar Concerning the printed versions and English translations of The Commentaries, see Mitchell, op. cit., 294. See also, Morrall, J. B., “Pius II and his Commentaries,” Historical Studies, III, ed. Hogan, J., Cork 1961, 25–31.Google Scholar

34. Zellfelder, op. cit., 150–5, 163; cf. Haller, J., Piero da Monte, Ein Gelehrter und päpstlicher Beamter des 15 Jahrhunderts, Seine Brie fsammlung, Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts, Rome 1941, xix, *45.Google Scholar

35. Haller, op. cit., 244, 260.

36. Concilium Basil. iii. 467–607Google Scholar passim iv. 5–129 paasim; v. 170; vi. 684, 687, 692, 736: Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 237Google Scholar; cf. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 68.Google Scholar He was deprived of his see by Eugenius in 1439. Henry VI then supported the papal nominee as his successor, but in 1440 de la Planche appears to have been in favour with Henry once again, perhaps only briefly for in that year the anti-pope, Felix V, made him a cardinal. Gallia Christiana, in provincias ecclesiasticas distributa, Paris 1715, i. 1054Google Scholar; Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 32–4Google Scholar; ii. 407: Foedera, v. I. 87, 109Google Scholar; Lodgo, E. C., Gascony under English Rule, London 1926, 145.Google Scholar

37. He was incorporated in the Council on 24 April 1434 and was then acting as a proctor of the archbishop of Cashel; Concilium Basil. iii. 79. On de Poers, see Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers, Papal Letters, viii. 77, 150, 354, 610; Cotton, H., Fasti Eoclesiae Hibernicae, Dublin 1851, i. 121, 183, 394.Google Scholar On his role at Basel in this later period: Concilium Basil. iii. 513–88Google Scholar passim; iv. 6–351 passim. (In the index to the third volume of this work, “archidiaconus de Anglia” and “Robertns de Anglie” are both identified as de Poers; in the fourth volume, however, a distinction is made between a person who can be identified as de Poers, on the one hand, and “Robertus de Anglia” and “decanus or doctor Anglicus,” on the other; yet, from Ibid. iii. 588; iv. 281, 285, it appears that “Robertus de Anglia” and de Poers are probably the same person.)

38. Zellfelder, op. cit., 148, gave the title, “Die Scheinvertretung Englands am Basler Konzil,” to his account of this period.

39. The bishop of Coutances was Philibert de Montjeu. In 1438 Henry was apparently considering his replacement; Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 20–2.Google Scholar The bishop of Evreux was Martialis Formier. Beaupère (Pulchripatris) joined the Council as a representative of the university of Paris in 1431. Henry VI had given him a eanonry at Rouen in 1430. He subsequently took part in the trial of Joan of Arc. He also held a prebend at Besançon. Valois, op. cit., i. 118; de Beaurepaire, C., Notes sur les Juges et les Assesseurs du Procès de Condemnation de Jeanne d' Arc, Rouen 1890, 27, 28.Google Scholar Although he had already shown anti-papal sentiments at Basel in 1434 (Valois, op. cit., i. 320) he appears to have pleased Henry VI when he came to England on behalf of the Council in 1435 to report on the arrangements for the forthcoming congress of Arras. See also Allmand, C. T., “Un coneiliariste nivernais dn XVe Siècle; Jean Beaupère,” Annales de Bourgogne, no. 139, 1963, xxxv. 150.Google Scholar On his return to Basel he was wearing a collar of the king of Engand; Concilium Basil. iii. 560.Google Scholar For his later career at Basel see Valois, op. cit., ii. 137, 241; Allmand, art. cit. 150–2.

40. Concilium Basil. iii. 543, 603Google Scholar; iv. 5, 226, 302, 310. During 1436 the Council received applications for various kinds of dispensation from members of religious orders, one from Ireland and two from England, at least one of the latter being from the province of York; ibid. iv. 147, 152–3, 230, 268, 314. It is interesting that during the second delegation's attendance at Basel, 1434–5, similar applications were received from Ireland and England (mostly, although not all, from the province of York) Ibid. iii. 202–476 passim. The Council's arrogation of the power to dispense in a wide variety of cases was one of the complaints which Eugenius made in the “Liber Apologeticus” which he issued in 1436; Annales Ecclesiastici, ed. C. Baronius, Barni Ducis 1874, xxviii. 199–201Google Scholar; the same complaint was made by da Monte when he spoke before the king late in 1437, Haller, op. cit., 248.

41. Concilium Basil. iii. 537, 538–9Google Scholar; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 832.Google Scholar

42. Concilium Basil. iii. 565, 567, 588–9, 594Google Scholar; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 833–4Google Scholar; Basler Chroniken, ed. W. Vischer, etc. Leipzig 1872 etc, v. 477.Google Scholar

43. Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 882–3.Google Scholar

44. Ibid. 883; Concilium Basil. iv. 18, 122.Google Scholar

45. Concilium Basil. iv. 126–7, 215, 225–7Google Scholar; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 883.Google Scholar Stephen de Novaria had accompanied Benupère on his mission to Henry VI in 1435. He was then described as the king's advocate at Basal and at the sacred consistory. On the way back to Basel he was held prisoner for a time in Germany; Calender of Patent Rolls, Henry VI, Public Record Office, London 1907, ii. 461Google Scholar; cf. ibid. 489; Foedera, v. i. 17Google Scholar; Concilium Basil. iii. 560Google Scholar. See also Steel, A., The Receipt of the Exchequer,1377–1485, Cambridge 1954, 198.Google Scholar

46. Zellfelder, op. cit., 150–5, 163; Haller, op. cit., *45–6, *50, *51–3 Some of da Monte's letters were also printed by Zanelli, A., “Pietro del Monte.’ Archivio storica lombardo, Giomnale della Societa Storica Lombarda, 4tk ser. vii. viii. Milan 1907,Google Scholar and Hofmann, G., “Briefe eines päpstliehen Nuntins in London über das Konzil von Florenz,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica. Rome 1939, v. 407–33.Google Scholar

47. Calendar of entries in the Papal Registers, Papal Letters, viii. 282Google Scholar; Haller, op. cit., 186–192. On da Monte's own view of his mission, see ibid. 56.

48. Cf. Jacob, , Chichele and Ecclesiastical Politics, 23.Google Scholar Da Monte wrote to the archbishop of Florence from London on 26 August 1435, expressing his surprise that, although the pope had sent orators to many places to oppose the Council's decree against annates, none had been sent to England, Haller, op. cit., 8–9. In September 1436, Eugenius wrote to the king and to Beaufort renewing da Monte's appointment, ibid. 193–4; by this time, the decree against annates would probably have been mentioned in any instructions given to da Monte; in Eugenius's Liber Apologeticus, which was issued to papal nuncios at about this time, the decree and the Council's appointment of collectors to gather the taxes due to the papacy were among the charges made against the Council; Annales Ecclesiastici, xxviii 197, 200–1, 210Google Scholar; cf. Haller, op. cit. *50, note 113.

49. Haller, op. cit., 42, 47, 52, 123–4 127–9, 167; cf. 167–8.

50. Ibid. 42, 71, 115, 149.

51. Ibid. 230–41, 241–71; Zellfelder, op. cit., 323–38.

52. Haller, op. cit., 252, 254.

53. Ibid. 15–17, *68–70, *71.

54. Valois, op. cit., chap. 5, “La Rupture Definitive 1435.1438; ” Gill, J., The Council of Florence, Cambridge 1959,Google Scholar chap. 3: “The Council of Basel and the Greeks (1431–7).”

55. The Paston Letters, 1422–1509, ed. J. Gairdner, London 1900, i 31–5Google Scholar; Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council, iv. 287–8.Google Scholar

56. Ibid. iv. 210–2.

57. Zellfelder, op. cit., 317; Schofield, art cit. 171.

58. Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 71–2Google Scholar; vi. 312–5 (with date 13 Nov.); “Henry VI” in Dictionary of National Biography (art. by T. F. Tout), London 1891.Google Scholar For some months he had already attended the council regularly and during the previous two years had performed some functions in the administration; arlane, K. B. Macf, “The Lancastrian Kings,” Cambridge Medieval History, viii. 398Google Scholar: Baldwin, J. F., The King's Council in England during the Middle Ages, Oxford 1913, 184Google Scholar; Plucknett, T. F. T., “The Place of the Council in the Fifteenth Century,” Transactions, Royal Historical Society, London, 4th ser. 1918, i. 181.Google Scholar Cardinal Gasquet accepted the contents of the royal letter to the Council of Basel, dated 17 July 1433, (Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 61–6)Google Scholar as an expression of the king's own views but, as he was then aged eleven, this seems an unwarranted assumption, even allowing for mediaeval precocity; Gasquet, F. A., The Religious Life of Henry VI, London 1923, 95.Google Scholar

59. Baldwin, op. cit., 188–9; Radford, L. B., Henry Beaufort, Bishop, Chancellor, Cardinal, London 1908, 252.Google Scholar

60. St. Matthew, v. 28 (Knox version, London 1945); the Revised Standard Version has: “… everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

61. “… quem profecto ad virtutem, ad decus, ad honestatem, ad res preciaras domi forisque prudenter ae prospere obeundas natum esse cognosco, et quamquam teneram adhuc etatem agat vixque primam lanuginem posuerit, canum tamen sensum habet senilemque prodentiam et gravitatem. Quam natura sibi esse ingenitam magis quam rerum experientia quesitam quis non existimabit, cum ei per etatem multis in rebus vcrsari nequaquam licuerit. Est preterea mire cuiusdam humanitatis ct clementie, omnes ad se venientes benigne suscipiens, patienter audiens et sapienter respondens. Non asper, non rigidus, non severus, sed mitis mansuetus et placidus. Magna quoquc illi inest forme dignitas ct corporis proceritas omniumque membrorum pulcbritudo, ut si quis eum rusticann veste indutum regem nesciens viderit, regem tamen esse iudicabit. Est enim illi maicstas quedam in facie corporis magnitudini coniuncta, quam comitas ac mansuetudo ita illustrant, ut omnes ad se diligendum solo aspectu provocet et impellat. Preciara siquidem hcc sunt et in principe plurimum laudnnda. Verum que sequuntur longe clariora. Precipuam quandnm in Deum fidem as devotionem colit, singulis diebus horas canonicas cum sacerdote legit, missarum celebrationi quotidie devotissime adest, ieiuni-a observat, corpus abstintentia continentiaque castigat, mulierum aspectus et colloquia fugit, affirmans in talibus vicarium esse diaboli, illud quoquo cx evangeio repetens 'qui viderit mulierem ad concupis. cendum, mm mechatus est cam in corde suo.' Aiunt qui illius sccrctiora cognoscunt cum ad hanc usque etatem virginiitatem mentis ct corporis conscrvasse seque illud firmiter constituisse, nulli femine commisceri nisi quam matrimoniali copula sibi coniunxcrit. Scurriles ludos, verba obscena ct turpia, mimorum atque histrionum indecoros gestus horret ac detestatur, quo tamen genere hominum aule nostre aetatis principum maximc frequcntantur, cisquc interdum maior ad principes aditus patet quam honestis viris ac sapientibus. Adeo corrupti sunt mores nostri, adeo collapsa omnia, ut virtuti perrarus patent locus. Quid de eius in Romannm ccclesiam et pontificenc maximum reverentia ac obedientia singulari di- cam? Que profecto tanta est, ut earn intuentes admirentur in tarn iuvene prineipe tarn religiosum tamque devoturn esse anirnum. Hee eum mecum acitus considero, non hunc regem aut seculi prineipem esse arbitror, qui magna licentia et potentia freti magnarumque rernm copiam habentes, multis denique illecebrarum et voluptatum stimulis eireumsepti facile deteriores fieri consueverunt, sed monachum quendam aut religiosurn virum videre videor, immo quovis religioso religiosiorem, qui inter honores et turbas salntantium humilitatem, inter satellitas et eorporis eustodes facilem adeuntibus aditum, inter epulas abstinentiam, inter delicias continentiam, inter earnis stimulos eastkatem, modestiam in rebus prosperis, patientiam eustodiat in adversis; qui eum omnia possit, nequaquam vult omnia sibi lieere; qui nihil rapit, nihil aufert, nemini eum possit iniuriam facit, Deum colit amat, religionem observat, ecelesiam veneratur, saeerdotes quoque et pontifiees patres appellat. Ego id assequor eonieetura, hune excellentissimurn principem nobis divina prudentia a edo demissum, Ut ems favoribus et auetoritate corngantur errores, deformia reformentur, conservetur ecelesiastica unitas, pat toti populo ebristiano ems studio eura et vigilantia eomparetur. Erit siquidem magnus et magna faciet eiusque nomen insigne ac eelebre ad extremos usque terrarum fines perveniet.” Haller, op. cit., 43–5.

62. Henry the Sixth, a Reprint of Joha Blacman's Memoir, ed. M. H. James Cambridge, 1919;Google Scholar (see especially 27, 29, 36–7: in connection with da Monte's remark about rustic dress, it is interesting to see that Blacman describes Henry as commonly wearing a farmer's shoes and boots and a townsman's gown and hood); Capgrave, J., The Book of the Illustrious Henries, translated by Hingeston, F. C., London 1858,Google Scholar chap. 6 (especially 150–1); Joannis Rossi Aatiquarii Warwickensis Historia Regum Angliae, ed. T. Hearne, Oxford 1716, 210Google Scholar; two accounts, written in the next reign, may also be mentioned: Bernard, Andreas, De Vita Atque Gesta Henrici Septimi, Memorials of King Henry VII, ed. Gairdner, J., Rolls Series, London 1858, 20–3Google Scholar (about Henry VI); Three Books of Polydore Vergil's English History, ed. Sir H. Ellis, Camden Soc. xxix., London 1844, 70–1, 156–7.Google Scholar

63. Zanelli, op. cit., vii. 346; Zellfelder, op. cit., 165, n. 4; Haller, op. cit. *745.

64. “Henry Vi's influence was never entirely negligible, but it was essentially negative”; “…signs that be had a will of his owa are not lacking.” — Green, V. H. H., The Later Plantegenets, London 1952, 313–4.Google Scholar

65. In the summer of 1433, the royal letter of 17 July upbraided the Council for its language against the pope and royal letters were also sent to the Aragonese and German ambassadors at Basel exhorting them to cooperate with the English to avert a schism; Official Corresp. of Bekyaton. ii. 61–6Google Scholar; Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, ed. Mansi, xxx, 616–7Google Scholar; xxxi, Venice 1798, 180–1. But there is no comparison between this activity and the spate of royal letters in and after 1437.

66. Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 64.Google Scholar

67. Haller, op. cit., 40–2.

68. This was the Monitorium or Citatorium, of 31 July 1437, copies of which were sent to temporal rulers; Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 1010–3Google Scholar; Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, ed. Mansi, xxx. 1065–71.Google Scholar The records of the king's council refer to “a certain monitory against our holy father.” Da Monte in his letter to Eugenius on 14 November, wrote of “… tam fedum, tam turpem et ignominiosum libellum ad- versus sanetitatem vestrem…,” Haller, op. cit., 40, took this to be the Council's encyclical Ecclesiam suam Christus, of 19 October 1437, (Monumenta Conc. Gen. ii. 1049–60)Google Scholar but it was probably too soon for this to have reached England.

69. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 46–9.Google Scholar

70. Ibid. 37–45.

71. Ibid. 83–6 (to Sigismund who, however, died on 9 December 1437); 86–90 (to the archbishop of Cologne, probably one of these letters to the imperial electors).

72. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 80–2. This appears to have been the king's reply to da Monte's address of late 1437 (Haller, op. cit. 241–56). The royal letter of 14 November 1437 (Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 46–9)Google Scholar does not mention da Monte and was perhaps written before his address. De Cavaleantibus was back in London from Scotland in April 1438 and left the country on 15 May; Haller, op. cit., *50, n. 113; Calendar of entries in the Papal Registers, Papal Letters, viii. 292.Google Scholar The purpose of his mission remains a matter for conjecture; see Dunlop. op. cit., 23, n. 1 (but there was not a debate between da Monte and the abbot of Bonmont before the king's council on 5 May 1438); Burns, J. H., Scottish Churchmen and the Council of Baste, Glasgow 1962, 59, 61.Google Scholar

74. HaIler, op. cit., 213–5 (this is Eugen 90–3.

74. Haller, op. cit., 213–5 (this is Eugenius's reply, undated but probably written late in 1437 or early in 1438; Chichele's letter is not extant). British Museum Royal MS. 10 B ix, f. 258b is a copy of a letter from the pope to Chichele, dated 9 April 1438, in which he announces the arrival of the emperor and patriarch of Constantinople at Ferrara; he refers to another letter in which he had reported their approach to Ferrara; the latter might have been a companion to the one which he sent to the duke of Gloucester in February, 1438: British Museum Add. MS. 26784, f. 30b (see infra).

75. Register of Chichele, iii. 262–6, 269–70.Google Scholar

76. In 1415 arrears of the subsidy for the delegates to the Council of Pisa were used for those to the Council of Constance; in 1432 there were still arrears for the Council of PaviaSienna. There were also difficulties in collecting a subsidy for the delegates to Basel in 1432. Register of Chichele, iii. 7–8, 236–7, 238–40.Google Scholar

77. Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 87, 89.Google Scholar

78. Valois, op. cit., i. 132 (based on Rouen, Archives de la Seine Inféricure Ms. G.2128, f.107b); ii. 215; Loiseleur was on a mission to England at the time (see infra) and the chapter had to make other arrangements. Loiseleur (Aucupis) was also provost of Chartres. On Loiseleur, see Beaurepaire, op. cit., 75–82.

79. British Museum Add. MS. 26784, f.30b (fifteenth century copy). “Preterea quamquam sciamus carissimum in Christo filium nostrum Henricum regem Anglie illustrem ad incrementum f i d e i e t ecclesie romane et nostrum sincera voluntate dispositum et supervacuum esse suam Screnitatem hortntionibus incitare, tamen rei magnitudo postulat ut etiam a supervacuis hortationibus non desistamus. Propteria filialem tuam devotionem requirimus et hortamur in domino ut dictum regem ad hoc ardentem tuis suasionibus ardentiorem facere studeas ut in hac nascenti perturbatione ecclesie reminiscatur ut in ceteris se catholicum principem esset et ea efficere student ut secum in devotione et fide certet et se ipsum superare conetur.” This letter can be dated February 1438 from Eugenius's mention of the arrival of the Greeks, in Venice on the eighth of the month in which he was writing: they arrived there on 8 February 1438. Eugenius bad been in Ferrare since the end of January, the emperor John VIII came there on 4 March, and the patriarch of Constantinople on 8 March; Gill, op. cit., 96, 98, 104.

80. Vickers, K., Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, London 1907, 328.Google Scholar But the author is in error in attributing a letter from Gloucester to Basel (Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum, ed. E. Martene and U. Durand, Paris 1733, viii. 816–7)Google Scholar to 1437; the correct date is 4 July 1435 and the letter is no more than an acknowledgement of the mission of Beaupére and Stephen de Novaria to England at that time—Henry VI sent a similar letter on 14 June 1435 (ibid. 815). In 1432 Gloucester appeared very welldisposed to the Council's embassy; after that date it is very difficult to discover his opinions on the Council's actions; See Schofield, art. cit. 174–6. When da Monte was about to leave England in 1440 he had praise for Gloucester; Haller, op. cit., 181. Da Monte was a humanist and this was probably a cause of good relations between the two men (cf. Lambeth Palace MSS. 341, 354).

81. Concilium Basil. v. 147Google Scholar; vi. i. 107, 276; Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 60, 102–3Google Scholar; Zellfelder, op. cit., 190; Haller, op. cit., 274.

82. See Schofield, art. cit 186, 193. Proceedings and Ordinances, v 64–5.Google Scholar

83. HaIler, op. cit., 271–4; Zellfelder, 339–356.

84. Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 100Google Scholar; Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 53–5.Google Scholar Haller, Op. cit., 276, points to the different version of O'Heyne's reception in Basel contained in Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 102.Google Scholar On O'Heyne see also Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 82Google Scholar; Zellfelder, op. cit., 187–191, 200; Gwynn, A., “A Franciscan Bishop of Clonfert,” Journal of the Galway Archaeological and Historical Society xxix, 1958–1959, 5–11.Google Scholar

85. Loiseleur apparently remained in England a little longer; Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 103Google Scholar; Concilium Basil, v. 171.Google Scholar Zellfelder, op. cit. 203.

86. Hailer, op. cit., 62–70, 274–7; Zellfelder, op. cit., 356–60; on the authorship of the letter to the abbot of Vezelay, see also Haller, op. cit., 224, 274, n. 2; Valois, op. cit., ii. 133.

87. “… sed certi sumus quod rex pari passu ambulabit cum rege Romanorum et electoribus sacri imperii” Haller, op. cit., 276.

88. HaIler, op. cit., 274–7; Zellfelder, op. cit., 356–60.

89. Haller, op. cit., 62–70. The meeting of the York convocation to which da Monte referred was presumably that in April 1438; Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hibernicae, ed. P. Wilkins, London 1737, iii. 525, 533Google Scholar; Records of the Northern Convocation ed. G. W. Kitchin, Surtees Soc. cxiii. Durham 1907, 176.Google Scholar

90. Deutsche Reichstagsakten, Munich etc, 1867 onwards, xiii (Stuttgart and Gotha 1925), 216–9, 232–3Google Scholar; see also Ibid. 188–90.

91. Hailer, op. cit., 62–70.

92. Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xiii. 337–8.Google Scholar

93. See Crowder, C. M. D., “Henry V, Sigismund and the Council of Constance, a re-examination,” Historical Studies, IV. ed. HayesMcCoy, G. A., London 1963, 93–110.Google Scholar

94. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, I. 246–8Google Scholar; Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 86–7.Google Scholar

95. Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 96–8.Google Scholar

96. Ibid. 96–9. Zellfelder, op. cit., 188. 194–7, advanced an ingenious theory that, at the time of the abbot of Bonmont's visit, Beaufort was in the acendancy in England and, as a result of his acquaintance with German affairs, was inclined to follow the policy of the e lectors and Albert (like Beaufort an anti-Hussite Crusader); but, so the argument runs, he was too alarmed by da Monte's propaganda about Basel to persist. Apart from the difficulty of determining how much influence Beaufort wielded at this time, the theory is too farfetched. Cf. Haller, op. cit., *456, *512.

97. Official Correspondence of Bekynton, i. 77–80, 134–5Google Scholar; on the dates of these letters, see Zeilfelder, op. cit., 208, n 59.

98. Gill, op. cit., 141, 300–1; Henry VI sent envoys to Eugenius while he was at Ferrara and at Florence and this could perhaps explain the puzzling incident discussed by Gill (op. cit., 300): The Greek deacon, Philip when leaving Florence in the summer of 1439, met in Bologna an English embassy travelling to Florence. Cf. Official Correspondence of Bekynton, i. 57–64, 136, 238–9.Google Scholar

99. Official Correspondence of Bekynton, ii. 60–70; Zellfelder, op. cit., 214, n. 75; Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 235Google Scholar; Concilium Basil, vi. i. 328, 359, 399.Google Scholar

100. Thomas Bekynton's journal of the conference at Calais is printed in Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 334–407.Google Scholar (The bishop of Vich and Loiseleur had been at the diet of Mainz on behalf of the Council of Basel.) Cocilium Basil. v. 362–3Google Scholar; vi. i. 428, 618, 724; Monumenta Conc. Gen. iii. 270.Google Scholar For a general account of the conference, see de Beaucourt, G. du Fresne, Histoire de Charles VII, Paris 1885, iii.Google Scholar chap. 4: Judd, A., The Life of Thomas Bekynton, Chichester 1961, 58–63.Google Scholar

101. Haller, op. cit., 104–110; see also, 95–6, 114. Da Monte gave Eugenius an allegedly verbatim account of the archbishop of York's speech to the conciliar ambassadors Ibid. 112–3. He had not been present at Calais and presumably his information came from the archbishop himself with whom he had had a private discussion on or before 11 August 1439, ibid. 110–1. Haller was critical of da Monte's reporting, especiaily because of discrepancies between the above account and that by Bekynton, in Proceedings and Ordinances, v. 264–5Google Scholar; Haller, op. cit., *53, 113, n. 2.

102. Zellfelder, op. cit., 360–3 (a copy of Geneva MS. lat. 27, no. 77); Valois, op. cit., ii. 215 (partly copied from Paris, Archives nat. K. 1711, ff. 557b-559a).

103. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 1, 181, 21, 27, 31Google Scholar: Haller, op. cit., 60–1; Register of Chichele, iii. 268.Google Scholar

104. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 49–51.Google Scholar

105. Haller, op. cit., 111, 114–5, 116, 117, 120–1.

106. Register of Chichele, iii. 282.Google Scholar

107. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 51–3Google Scholar; Hailer, op. cit., 140; see also, in the former, i. 226–8, ii. 327; Incerti Scriptoris Chronicon Angliae, ed. Giles, 18, 19–30.Google Scholar

108. Zeilfelder, op. cit., 363–5; Haller, op. cit., 278–80. Kemp, together with Louis de Luxembourg, the archbishop of Rouen, had been promoted to the cardinalate late in 1438, Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 38, 39, 41, 48, 50; HaIler, op. cit., 133–5.

109. Haller, op. cit., 127–9, 138–41, et seq; Foedeva, v. i. 81.

110. Haller, op. cit., 146–7, 149–50 (a letter dated 13 April 1440, to the cardinalarchbishop of Tarento in which da Monte said he had spoken before the king against Felix), 158–9, 165–7.

111. Rouen, Archives de la Seine Inférieure, G. 2129, f. 125^a, summarised and partly quoted by Valois, op. cit., ii. 216; Gill, op. cit., 320. I am obliged to Dr. C. P. Allmand for providing me with a full transcript of this manuscript.

112. Zellfelder, op. cit., 366–70 (from a MS. in Oracow); Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 91–4; on these two different versions, see Zellfelder, op. cit., 366. In March 1442, Henry sent Adam Moleyus, the dean of Salisbury, to Eugenius with power to negotiate a treaty of friendship, Foedera, v. i. 111.Google Scholar Valois, op. cit., ii, 217, calls attention to the dispensation which Eugenius granted in 1444 for Henry to marry Margaret of Anjou within the prohibited times; however, it was not used. In 1446, Eugenius sent Henry, the “golden rose,” Conciliae Magnae Britanniae et Hibersicae, ed. Wilkins, , iii. 551Google Scholar; for the political background to this incident, see Jacob, , “Archbishop John Stafford,” Royal Historical Society, Transactions, 5th ser vol. xii. London 1962, 20–1.Google Scholar

113. Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xiv, Stuttgait 1935, 309–12.Google Scholar

114. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 188–9.Google Scholar On H. van Clux, see Crowder, art. cit. 98; on Swan, see Schofield, art. cit. 179.

115. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 96–8Google Scholar; cf. ibid. i. 98–9, 214; Foedera, v. i. 58, 78.Google Scholar

116. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 70–5Google Scholar; Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xv. Gotha 1914, 587–90.Google Scholar

117. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 56, ii. 96–7.Google Scholar

118. Ibid. ii. 97–8 (with date “1440”); Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xv. 593.Google Scholar

119. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, ii. 100–2, 238–9.Google Scholar Cardinal Kemp was intended, it seems, to go to Mainz in 1441, Haller, op. cit., 228–30; Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xv. 597–9.Google Scholar

120. Ibid. 98–100, 102–3; cf. Foedera, v. i. 103.

121. Official Corresp. of Bekynton, i. 87–8, 89–90Google Scholar; cf. 91, 117–8.

122. Deutsche Reichstagsakten, xvi, Gotha 1921, ii. 544–7, 557–67.Google Scholar The brief narrative above is not intended as an exhaustive treatment of English policy towards, or participation in, these developments in Germany.

123. Concilium Basil. vii. 333, 466, 473, 483, 485, 487.Google Scholar

124. Emden, A. B., A. Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A. D. 1500, Oxford 1958, ii 1365–66Google Scholar. Valois, op. cit. ii. 263, citing a MS. in the Vatican Archives (Reg. 375, ff. 172^b, 179^b, 264^a) says that some members of the mendicant orders in England, Scotland, and Normandy snpported Felix in this later period.

125. Calendar of entries in the Papal Registers, Papal Letters, X. London 1915, 28–9Google Scholar; Emden, op. cit., ii. 1187–8. Vincent Clement and Jean Selloct were also in this embassy.

126. Pérouse, op. cit., 434–60; Concilium Basil. viii. IV. 265–428Google Scholar (“Procésverbal des conférences Tenues en 1447 à Lyon et à Genève pour mettre fin au schisme de Bâle”, ed. G. Pérouse; see also his introduction, Ibid. 253–9.

127. Haller, op. cit. 255.