Camden, apparently, was led by the error in the claim of 1377 to assign the treatise on the office of Marshal to the time of Henry II.[636] Coke went further, and, as M. Bémont says, confused the ‘Modus’ with the treatise. It is the close connexion between the two that leads up to my theory.[637]
There is a transcript in Nero D. vi., with a beautifully illuminated initial, of the patent by which Richard II. created Thomas Mowbray earl of Nottingham Marshal of England and Earl Marshal (12th Jan., 1386), in tail male. Here again the confusion has been terrible. The Record Commission’s Catalogue of the Cottonian MSS. describes it as “Literæ R. Ricardi II. constituentes Tho. de Brotherton, com. Nottingham,[638] Marescallum Angliæ Ao. 1386,” and it is this doubtless, which has led several writers into grave error, down to M. Bémont, who enters the document as “les lettres patentes de Richard II. instituant Thomas de Brotherton maréchal d’Angleterre” (p. 472). But, for my purpose, the important point is that this is the first grant of the office of “Earl Marshal.” On the one hand, a high authority asserts in the ‘Dictionary of National Biography’ that Roger Bigod, earl of Norfolk, received “the office of Earl Marshal” in 1246; on the other, we read in the ‘Complete Peerage’ that an “Earl Marshal” was first created in 1397.[639] Neither statement is correct. On June 30, 1385, Richard bestowed on the earl of Nottingham “the office of Marshal of England,” which we have traced above.[640] Dugdale, citing the record below, wrongly states that Thomas was “constituted Earl Marshal of England” for life on this occasion, and is followed in this by Professor Tout.[641] Thomas certainly styled himself “Earl Marshal and of Nottingham” in the month following, but this was one of the assumptions of the time. He was only so created by the patent which follows. It is desirable, therefore, to give here the exact wording of the grant:
Sciatis quod cum nos nuper de gracia nostra speciali concesserimus dilecto consanguineo nostro Thome comiti Notyngh’ officium marescalli Anglie ad totam vitam suam, Nos jam de uberiori gratia nostra concessimus prefato consanguineo nostro officium predictum una cum nomine et honore comitis Marescalli habend’ sibi et heredibus suis masculis de corpore suo exeuntibus cum omnimodis feodis proficuis et pertinenciis quibuscunque dicto officio qualitercunque spectantibus.
This grant, which is dated at Westminster, 12th January, 1386 (9 Ric. II.), is, oddly enough, unknown even to experts. Dugdale had missed it, and it is consequently ignored in Wallon’s ‘Richard II.,’ in Professor Tout’s biography of Nottingham,[642] and in the ‘Complete Peerage.’ It illustrates not only the high favour in which Nottingham still stood, but the entourage of the king at the time, which included several of those about to lead the opposition.[643]
The above grant is duly referred to in the so-called creation of February 10, 1397. This is headed in the Rolls of Parliament:
Une chartre du Roy faite a le Conte Mareschall touchant son Office de Mareschall d’Engleterre....
Sciatis quod cum nuper per literas nostras patentes de gratia nostra speciali concesserimus dilecto consanguineo nostro Thome Comiti Notyngh’ Officium Marescalli Anglie, una cum nomine et honore Comitis Marescalli, habendum sibi et heredibus suis masculis, etc.... Nos.... volentes proinde pro statu et honore ipsius Comitis uberius providere, de gratia nostra speciali, in presenti Parliamento nostro concessimus pro Nobis et heredibus nostris eidem Comiti dictum officium ac nomen, titulum, et honorem Comitis Marescalli Anglie habendum sibi et heredibus suis masculis, etc. (Then follow additional concessions.)
The transition, in the marshal’s style, is interesting enough. First we have “the Marshal,” or rather “the Master Marshal”; then “the Marshal of England,” as a more high-sounding style; next a confusion due to the fact that the Marshals also held an earldom through the 13th century, and so became, in common parlance (though not in strictness), “Earls Marshall”; lastly, even so early, we have seen,[644] as 1344, there occurs the cumbrous and unmeaning phrase “officium comitis marescalli et mariscalciæ Angliæ.” Proving, though it does, the rapid accretion of error and confusion in the Middle Ages, the double style obtained recognition in the Patent of 1386.[645] It is singular that, even at the present day, the “Peerages” style the duke of Norfolk “Earl Marshal and hereditary marshal of England,” although he is simply “Earl Marshal” under the creation of 1672.[646]
An apology is hardly needed for introducing here a characteristic challenge, addressed by the young Earl Marshal in the chivalrous spirit of the time, “a noble et honnore Sr le conte de Soissons sire de Coucy.” This quaint epistle begins thus:
Honure Sr Pour ce que vous estez homme donneur approue de vaillance et de chevalerie et de grant renomee comme bien est cogneu es plusieurs lieux honnorables, et je suis joesne, etc.... Je envoie devers vous Notynghant mon heraut, etc.