In the second room I place a couple of tumultuous affrays that chanced in the days of King Richard I.; the one upon the day of his coronation against the Jews, which, contrary to the king’s own proclamation, would needs enter the church to see him sacred, and were therefore cruelly handled by the common people. The other was caused by William with the long beard, who after that he had inflamed the poor people against the richer sort, and was called to answer for his fault, took Bow church for sanctuary, and kept it, castle-like, till he was fired out.
Here is place also for the stoning to death of a gentleman, servant to the half-brother of King Henry III., which had before provoked the citizens to fury by wounding divers of them without any cause, 1257; for the riotous fray between the servants of the goldsmiths and the tailors, 1268; for the hurly burly and bloodshed between the Londoners and the men of Westminster, moved by the young men upon an occasion of a wrestling on St. James’ day, 1221; and made worse by one Constantine, an ancient citizen, for the brawl and business that arose about a baker’s loaf at Salisbury place, 1391; for the which, and some other misdemeanours, King Richard II. was so incensed by evil counsel against the Londoners, that he determined to destroy them and raze their city: and for the fight that was between the citizens and sanctuary men of St. Martin’s, 1454, under King Henry VI.: and finally, for the misrule on evil May-day 1519, and for such other like, if there have been any.
To the third head may be referred the seizure of their liberties, for a false judgment given against a poor widow, called Margaret Viel, 1246; the two several seizures in one year, 1258, for false packing in collections of money and other enormities; and finally the seizure made by King Edward I. for taking of bribes of the bakers, 1285. But all this security in seizing and resuming of the liberties, which was in old time the only ordinary punishment, was at length mitigated by King Edward III. and King Henry IV., in their statutes before remembered.
In the last place stand those offences, which I repute rather taken than given, and do fall within the measure of the adage, “Ut canem cædas, cito invenias baculum:” for King John, in the 10th of his reign, deposed the bailiffs of London, because they had bought up the wheat in the market, so that there was not to serve his purveyors. King Henry III., his son, compelled the Londoners to pay him five thousand pounds, because they had lent to Lewis, the French king, the like sum, of a good mind to dispatch him out of their city and the realm, at such time as the protector and the whole nobility fell to composition with him for his departure. And the same king fined them at three thousand marks for the escape of a prisoner out of Newgate, of whom they took no charge; for he was a clerk, prisoner to the bishop of London, under the custody of his own servants; and as for the place, it was only borrowed of the Londoners to serve that turn. Hitherto of these things to this end, that whatsoever misdemeanour shall be objected out of history against London, the same may herein appear, both in its true place and proper colour.
FITZSTEPHEN’S DESCRIPTION OF LONDON
OF THE SITUATION OF THE SAME
Amongst the noble and celebrated cities of the world, that of London, the capital of the kingdom of England, is one of the most renowned, possessing above all others abundant wealth, extensive commerce, great grandeur and magnificence. It is happy in the salubrity of its climate, in the profession of the Christian religion, in the strength of its fortresses, the nature of its situation, the honour of its citizens, and the chastity of its matrons; in its sports too it is most pleasant, and in the production of illustrious men most fortunate. All which things I wish separately to consider.
OF THE MILDNESS OF THE CLIMATE
There then