John Oldcastle and his rebellion against the crown

The royal response to heresy: Wycliffes relationship with Henry V’s grandfather

John Wycliffe himself had received tacit support from Henry Vis grandfather, Sotin of Gaunt, who used Wycliffe's ideas to argue that England should not send money to the pope in Rome, something that had always been politically controverial.

The teaching that the pope was not all-powerful, and that kings therefore might not be bound by his decisions, was obviously also useful for monarchs in Europe from time to time.

The royal response to heresy: the controversy towards supporting Wycliffe: why it was controversial

• it was virtualy urbeard of for any late medieval monarch to support heretical groups openly and the key reasons for this were threefold

The royal response to heresy: the controversy towards supporting Wycliffe: vow to protect the church

English kings at this time took a vow at their coronation to protect the Church, and there was a strong contemporary expectation that the king should support the clergy and thow himself to be pious.

The royal response to heresy: the controversy towards supporting Wycliffe: the Pople

the pope in Rome had enormous moral authority in this period and for a king to openly ally himself with those condemned by the Church would be tantamount to political suicide, as the pope could impose an interdict that prevented people within the courry from receiving certain sacraments of the Church.

This made kings highly unpopular and also allowed would-be rebels to claim they were acting with God's blessing in attacking the monarch.

The royal response to heresy: the controversy towards supporting Wycliffe: religious links to the King

Thirdly, the role of the king was regarded in part as a religious one. The coronation ceremony was conducted in a Church and the king took his vows before God. He was anointed with holy oil and blessed by the clergy, who emphasised that this role was divinely ordained. The Church, therefore, though a powerful potential critic of a king, was also a very potent ally and rebel against God’s chosen king was depicted as sinful by Orthodox clerics

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Oldcastle’s background

Sir John Oldcastle had been a campaigner on the Lancastrian side during the rebellion of Glyndwr and had been militarily and politically active in the border area during the 1400s, serving under the future Henry V.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: his strategic marriage

In c1408, he made an advantageous marriage which gave him territorial interests in Norfolk, Wiltshire, Northamptonshire, London and Kent.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: origin of his unorthodox religious beliefs

unclear, but Herefordshire, the county where he grew up, as well as the Welsh Marches were noted for the prevalence of heresy.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: His strong unorthordox views in 1410

His strongly unorthodox views were evident in 1410, when he wrote congratulating two individuals in Bohemia who had launched strong opposition to the clergy there.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: his call to Parliament

He was called to parliament as a member of the Lords in 1410.

• Responsible for some of the anticlerical legislation proposed at this session

• Petitions at this parliament included a request to modify and limit the statute against heretics, making it much harder to prosecute them, and also a proposal to confiscate some Church property

• While neither bill was passed, these suggestions caused serious alarm to Archbishop Arundel

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Arundel’s role

As Archbishop of Canterbury, Arundel had responsibility for ensuring that Catholics within England remained faithful to the official teaching of the Church in Rome.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Arundel’s campaign

• campaign against heresy following the 1410 parliament

• 1 March he ordered the retrial of John Badby of Evesham, who had been imprisoned for extreme heretical views the previous year, and Badby was publicly burned four days later at Smithfield when he refused to recant

• Henry, then Prince of Wales, showed his support for the action by personally attending the execution, along with his brother, Prince John, and the duke of York. Soon afterwards, a number of Lollards in London were arrested

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Arundel’s dislike of Oldcastle

Arundel’s dislike of Oldcastle showed clearly in April 1410, when he filed a complaint against Oldcastle’s chaplain. He claimed the chaplain had been spreading heretical ideas in several churches around the Hoo Peninsula.

At first, Arundel ordered both the chaplain and the churches to be put under interdict, but he soon backed down. He may have eased off because Oldcastle had been a close friend and ally of the Prince of Wales for many years.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Henry trust in Oldcastle for military matters

Henry sent him to Burgundy to lead an expedition against the duke of Orléans' troops in 1411, and this may have been a deliberate tactic on the prince's part to ensure Oldcastle was absent from parliament that year and so could not get himself into further trouble.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Oldcastles sentence

another of his chaplains, John Lay, was questioned by the archbishop and in May a raid on the workshop of a London illuminator discovered a heretical book owned by Oldcastle himself.

By this time, Henry was king and initially seemed keen to protect him but by August he gave Arundel permission to prosecute. The ecclesiastical court found him guity.

Henry requested that he be given 40 days in the Tower as an opportunity to repent.

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: How did Oldcastle escape

Oldcastle, however, escaped from prison in October with the help of other Lollards

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Oldcastles plot against the king

In January 1414, he led a group of religious dissidents to St Giles Fields, just north of London. The plan appears to have centred on disguising a number of the conspirators as actors and thus entering Eltham Palace, where the royal family were celebrating the Epiphany

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: Oldcastles drive towards rebellion

• Henry rejection of Lollard-inspired petitions at the 1410 parliament

• Henry supported and witnessed the burning of the heretic John Badby of Evesham in 1410

John Oldcastle’s rebellion: The lollards aim

to be to kidnap the king and force him either to accept Lollard views or to murder him so that Oldcastle could rule in his place.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: concern for Henry V and his government

• rebellion was headed by a former close associate of the king

• occurred early in the reign before the king had time to consolidate his position.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: Henry's actions afterward

The king made careful use of spies and intelligence networks and on 5 January rewards were granted to two men for informing Henry of the plot. T

his advance notice ensured that the disguised actors were easily captured and the king then proceeded to St Giles' Fields, where the rebel troops were surrounded and overpowered quickly

This swift action improved Henry's reputation for omniscience and power

The short-term significance of the rebellion: rumours of the size of the rebellion

There were rumours of the involvement of 25,000 Lollards but it seems that this was an exaggeration, with only 220 people definitely being known to be involved.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: Those convicted of crimes

Sixty-nine insurgents were convicted of treason, of whom 31 were hanged the next day, with a further seven being both hanged (for treason) and simultaneously burned (for heresy).

The short-term significance of the rebellion: What happened to Oldcastle?

Oldcastle himself escaped and remained on the run for nearly four years.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: how the plot was not significant to Henry V

the plot was ill-conceived and Oldcastle was unlikely to ever receive widespread support.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: how the plot was significant to Henry V

There was growing concern at the time about the kingdom’s internal security, especially with Henry preparing to invade France.

This is shown in the records of the parliament held at Leicester in April 1414, which concentrated on tackling heresy and disorder. During this session, the “Statute of Lollards” was passed, expanding the involvement of secular authorities in investigating and prosecuting heresy.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: Key terms of the ‘Statute of Lollards’

• All the crown's officers of the judiciary, and especially local Justices of the Peace (JPs), were responsible for providing the Church with more active support in searching out and tackling Lollardy.

• All those convicted of heresy who were handed over to the secular judicial system for execution would also forfeit all their property and movable goods to the crown.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: states deeper involvement in prosecuting heresy

shows how strongly religious dissent was linked to treason

The seizure of a convicted heretic’s property not only offered the crown extra revenue but also served as a powerful warning to potential Lollards. A conviction could cost a family its social standing, or leave some completely destitute.

The short-term significance of the rebellion: purpose of strengthening the Statue of riots in 1411

This legislation was intended to give the chancellor and the King’s bench stronger authority to act against criminals who had avoided punishment due to the negligence of local sheriffs and justices of the peace.

It introduced a new commission of inquiry, allowing members of the King’s Bench to travel around the country and address the backlog of cases. Penalties for rioting were also increased.

The long-term significance of the rebellion: Oldcastles friends loyalty to him

several people assisted him during this period despite the serious risks to themselves.

The long-term significance of the rebellion: Southampton plot (1415) representing religious discontent: who was it led by?

led by Richard, earl of Cambridge, Henry Scrope, baron Scrope of Masham, and Sir Thomas Grey.

The long-term significance of the rebellion: Southampton plot (1415) representing religious discontent: why was it a threat?

ad support from Scottish and Welsh rebels, the earl of Northumberland and his men, and possibly also the French king, who was seeking to divert Henry's attention from the planned invasion of France

The long-term significance of the rebellion: Southampton plot (1415) representing religious discontent: impact of the plot

Henry defeated the plot and set sail for France as planned.

he long-term significance of the rebellion: increase in the kings popularity

Henry's personal authority and popularity was massively boosted after the successful French campaigns of 1415, meaning that any attempts to conspire against the king would be regarded very unsympathetically by most people.

After 1415, there was no further serious rebellion against Henry V, despite his frequent absences from England while fighting in the Hundred Years War.

The capture of Oldcastle: where and when was he captured?

in 1417 in Montgomeryshire,

The capture of Oldcastle: Oldcastles weakened position

Although he tried to work with England’s enemies, this actually weakened his support at home.

After his arrest, he was brought before a parliament that was strongly against him. Showing little caution, he preached to the lords, claiming Richard II was the true king and still alive in Scotland. This speech led directly to his conviction for treason.

he capture of Oldcastle: Oldcastles death

He was sentenced, taken back to the Tower, and then dragged through London to St Giles’ Fields. There he was chained, hanged, and burned at the same time. His final words, spoken to the knight who lit the fire, were that he would rise again on the third day—a reference to Christ’s Resurrection.