Jolly Boatman


See The Boatsman and the Chest [Laws Q8] (File: LQ08)

Jolly Boatsman, The


See Blow the Candle Out [Laws P17] (File: LP17)

Jolly Boatswain, The


See The Boatsman and the Chest [Laws Q8] (File: LQ08)

Jolly Butchermen, The


See The Three Butchers (Dixon and Johnson) [Laws L4] (File: LL04)

Jolly Cowboy (I), The


DESCRIPTION: "My lover, he is a cowboy, he's brave and kind and true"; when he comes home, the two meet joyfully and the boy talks about his life on the trail. She says they will marry when he returns; he is quoted as promising to quit herding when he marries
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1910 (Lomax)
KEYWORDS: love cowboy work separation reunion promise marriage
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Saffel-CowboyP, p. 209-210, "The Jolly Cowboy" (1 text)
DT, JOLLCWBY*
Roud #4482
NOTES: In print, with quotation marks, this song makes sense, though even in print, the transitions seem abrupt. In song, without such helps, it strikes me as hard to comprehend. I wonder if it isn't composite -- after all, it was published by Lomax. - RBW
File: Saffe209

Jolly Cowboy (II), The


See Come All Ye Lonesome Cowboys (File: R189)

Jolly Cowboy (III), The


See I'm Bound to Follow the Longhorn Cows (File: LoF186)

Jolly Farmer, The


DESCRIPTION: The farmer sings about the joys of farming, even as a renter, and drinking with friends. "Here I am king so I'll dance, drink and sing, Let no man appear as a stranger, But show me the ass That refuses his glass And I'll order him hay in a manger"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1831 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 16(88a))
KEYWORDS: farming drink flowers food nonballad
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
OLochlainn 30, "The Jolly Farmer" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #3043
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 16(88a), "The Farmer" ("Come each jolly fellow"), R. Walker (Norwich), 1780-1830; also 2806 c.8(171), Harding B 25(622), Harding B 11(1150), Johnson Ballads 822 [illegible lines], "The Farmer[!]"
File: OLoc030

Jolly Farmer's Son, The


DESCRIPTION: Young farmer Armour inherits his wealthy father's farm. He lists his assets: money, "horses, kye and a'." He considers himself a prize. His wife would not have to buy anything: he has a cradle and perambulator. He asks a lass to "become young Mrs Armour"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1905 (GreigDuncan4)
KEYWORDS: courting bequest farming money humorous nonballad
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan4 822, "The Jolly Farmer's Son" (2 texts, 2 tunes)
Roud #6216
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Wha'll Be Mrs Armour
File: GrD4822

Jolly Fellows Who Follow the Plough, The


See All Jolly Fellows That Handles the Plough (File: K241)

Jolly Fisherman (I)


DESCRIPTION: With a storm coming up, Captain Williams of Veronia sends a dory after halibut. Oars are lost and a buoy line parts. To save the dory, they cast halibut oil on the water and bale with their sou'westers until they are picked up next morning by Veronia.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1932 (Creighton-NovaScotia)
KEYWORDS: rescue fishing sea ship storm sailor
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Creighton-NovaScotia 125, "Jolly Fisherman" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST CrNS125 (Partial)
Roud #1827
NOTES: This song is item dD47 in Laws's Appendix II. - BS
File: CrNS125

Jolly Fisherman (II), The


DESCRIPTION: The singer says he is a fisherman, and "Fish just like men I've often caught -- crabs, gudgeon, poor John Codfish." He compares various sorts of people to various fish --- e.g. "false friends to eels" and the lawyer like a pike striking
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1936 (Sam Henry collection)
KEYWORDS: work fishing nonballad
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H639, p. 59, "The Jolly Fisherman" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #13361
NOTES: Sam Henry claimed this was once a popular song around 1800, but gives no supporting evidence. - RBW
File: HHH639

Jolly Good Ale and Old (Back and Sides Go Bare)


DESCRIPTION: With chorus, "Back and sides go bare, go bare, Both hand and feet go cold...." The singer laments his sad state: "I cannot eat but little meat, My stomach is not good." He discusses his lack of clothing. But he, and his wife, revive for ale.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1575 (Gammer Gurton's Needle)
KEYWORDS: drink clothes hardtimes
FOUND IN: Britain
REFERENCES (3 citations):
HarvClass-EP1, pp. 190-192, "Jolly Good Ale and Old" (1 text)
DT BACK&SID*
ADDITIONAL: Norman Ault, _Elizabethan Lyrics From the Original Texts_, pp. 41-42, "Of Jolly Good Ale and Old" (1 text)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Let the Back and Sides Go Bare" (chorus)
NOTES: This has a literary look, and has been attributed to William Stevenson. But there appear to be variant forms. In the 1575 version in Gammer Gurton's Needle (found in Ault), there are only four stanzas, and the singer's wife is Tib. The version in the Harvard Classics has eight stanzas and gives the wife's name as Kit. Unfortunately, though the Harvard version occurs in a number of anthologies in my library, none of them state their source! (Maybe they stole it from each other.)
The Gammer Gurton version, if I read Ault correctly, was also found in a play, "Diccon of Bedlam." A play of this name was registered 1562-1563 -- though, if it was printed (not all things registered went to the press), no copies seem to have survived.
The "back and sides go bare" chorus seems to have been quite popular; in this index, see also "Let the Back and Sides Go Bare." Granger's Index to Poetry, if I read this right, cites six different poems with this first line. - RBW
File: DTbcksid

Jolly Gos-Hawk, The


See Jolly Old Hawk (File: K298)

Jolly Grinder, The


DESCRIPTION: "There was a jolly grinder Once lived by the river Don. He worked and sang from morn till night, And sometimes he worked none." The grinder rails against teetotalers, informing them, "Attend to your work if you've ought to do And don't interfere with me."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1985 (recording, Ian Robb)
KEYWORDS: drink work
FOUND IN: Britain
REFERENCES (1 citation):
DT, JOLLGRND*
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Miller of Dee" (tune)
cf. "These Temperance Folks" (theme)
SAME TUNE:
The Miller of Dee (File: K229A)
NOTES: This is quite obviously an answer to, and parody of, "The Miller of Dee," providing a somewhat sarcastic response to the (really rather tame) moralizing of that song. - RBW
File: DTjollgr

Jolly Harper, The


See The Lochmaben Harper [Child 192] (File: C192)

Jolly is the Miller (I)


See The Miller Boy (Jolly is the Miller I) (File: R518)

Jolly Jack


See Will You Wed with a Tarry Sailor? [Laws K37] (File: LK37)

Jolly Jack Tar


See Jack the Jolly Tar (I) (Tarry Sailor) [Laws K40] (File: LK40)

Jolly Jack the Sailor


DESCRIPTION: "It's Jolly Jack the sailor on board of a man-o'war" returns after seven years and takes the train to Lincolnshire to see his sweetheart. "Won't she jump for joy when she hears the news Jack has come home from sea" "We will set the bells a-ringing"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1975 (recording, George Ling)
KEYWORDS: love wedding war return reunion sailor
FOUND IN: Britain(England(Lond))
Roud #1785
RECORDINGS:
George Ling, "Jolly Jack the Sailor" (on Voice12)
File: RcJoJaSa

Jolly Lumbermen, The


See Canaday-I-O/Michigan-I-O/Colley's Run I-O [Laws C17] (File: LC17)

Jolly Miller (I), The


DESCRIPTION: Singer, a miller, says "I care for nobody, no not I, and nobody cares for me." His back is bent with work; his mill has strange new machinery, but he's content with a drop of whisky. He has engaged with Dr. Ramsey, the landlord, and does his bidding
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1905 (GreigDuncan3)
KEYWORDS: work drink nonballad miller worker technology
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber),England(North,Lond)) US(NE,So)
REFERENCES (8 citations):
Greig #41, p. 1, "The Miller o' Straloch" (1 text)
GreigDuncan3 452, "The Miller o' Straloch" (6 texts, 4 tunes)
Belden, p. 271, "The Jolly Miller" (1 text)
Linscott, pp. 220-221, "The Jolly Miller" (1 text, 1 tune)
Kennedy 229, "The Jolly Miller" (1 text, 1 tune)
Opie-Oxford2 352, "There was a jolly miller once" (1 text fragment)
Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #124, p. 103, "(There was a jolly miller once)"
DT, JOLMILLR
Roud #503
RECORDINGS:
John Strachan, "The Jolly Miller" (on FSB3)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 11(449), "Their [sic] was a jolly miller" [error in title, not in text], J.O. Bebbington (Manchester), c.1850; also Harding B 11(450), "Their [sic] was a jolly miller" [error in title, not in text]
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Miller of Dee" (refrain, subject)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Wee Millar
Willie Stroth
NOTES: The Baring-Goulds report that this song, "a favorite of Sir Walter Scott's," was included in Bickerstaffe's 1762 opera "Love in a Village." They also say that it may have been based on the owner of the Dee Mill in Chester, which dated back to around the Conquest but burned down in 1895.
All of these references, however, may be to "The Miller of Dee"; the Baring-Gould fragment is only a single stanza. See Ben Schwartz's note on "The Miller of Dee." - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: K229M

Jolly Miller (II), The


See The Miller Boy (Jolly is the Miller I) (File: R518)

Jolly Old Hawk


DESCRIPTION: "Jolly (old hawk/goshawk) and his wings were grey." Cumulative song: The singer asks who will win his love, and recites the animals he gave as gifts: One hawk, two birds, three cocks (or a three-thistle cock), four pigs (or a four-hoofed pig), etc.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1916 (Sharp)
KEYWORDS: cumulative love animal
FOUND IN: Britain(England(South))
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Kennedy 298, "The Jolly Gos-Hawk" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, JOLLHAWK
Roud #1048
File: K298

Jolly Old Roger


DESCRIPTION: "Oh there never was yet a boy or man Who better could mend a kettle or pan, A bucket, a dipper, a skillet or can, Than jolly old Roger the tinker man." Roger lives in New Amsterdam; the song describes the funny old man
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1931 (Flanders and Brown)
KEYWORDS: tinker work
FOUND IN: US(MW,NE,So)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Randolph 496, "Roger the Tinker Man" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
Brewster 74, "Johnnie O'Rogers" (1 text)
Flanders/Brown, pp. 171-173, "Jolly Old Roger" (1 text, 1 tune)
Linscott, pp. 222-224, "Jolly Old Roger" (1 text, 1 tune)
cf. Gardner/Chickering, p. 480, "Jolly Old Roger" (source notes only)
ST R496 (Partial)
Roud #3733
File: R496

Jolly Pedlar, The


DESCRIPTION: A pedlar meers a beggar wife and asks if she had a man. She suggests he get a job, or try "lasses on Cheapside." He says he had fine tools which she might try. She does. If you meet him "your maidenhead will go"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan8)
KEYWORDS: sex bragging bawdy
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan8 1778, "The Jolly Pedlar" (2 texts, 1 tune)
Roud #13002
File: GrD81778

Jolly Pinder of Wakefield, The [Child 124]


DESCRIPTION: "Robin Hood, Scarlet, and John" trespass on the fields guarded by the Jolly Pinder. The Pinder challenges them; they fight. The Pinder holds off all three. Robin offers the Pinder a place in his band. The Pinder agrees to come once his present job is done
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1663 (garland; there is a Stationer's Register entry for "Robin Hood and the Pinder of Wakefield" from 1558)
KEYWORDS: Robinhood fight
FOUND IN: Britain(England)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Child 124, "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield" (2 texts)
Bronson 124, "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield" (2 versions)
Leach, pp. 365-366, "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield" (1 text)
BBI, RZN16, "In Wakefield there lives a jolly pinder"
ADDITIONAL: Stephen Knight and Thomas Ohlgren, editors, _Robin Hood and Other Oudlaw Tales_, TEAMS (Consortium for the Teaching of the Middle Ages), Medieval Institute Publications, Western Michigan University, 2000, pp. 469-475, "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield" (1 text, conflated from the Garland and Percy versions)
Roud #3981
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Wood 402(42), "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield," F. Coles (London), 1658-1664; also Douce Ballads 3(118a), "Robin Hood and the jolly pinder of Wakefield"; Wood 401(61), "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield: with Robin Hood, Scarlet, and Iohn"
NOTES: A pinder was an official charged with preventing trespassing and gathering strayed/lost/stolen livestock. This was a particularly significant task in towns which had open rather than enclosed fields. The pinder would also be responsible for caring for the livestock while ownership was determined, so the job could become fairly complicated.
For background on the Robin Hood legend, see the notes on "A Gest of Robyn Hode" [Child 117].
Although Child has only one ballad of the Pinder, the content of the Forresters manuscript implies that there were two (Knight, p. 62). The two ballads have the same plot, but the texts are of dramatically different lengths; the Forresters text preserves both, with Child's version corresponding to the shorter. The two Forresters texts are so close in plot that they must derive from the same material, but it is clear that there was substantial rewriting involved; the longer Forresters text is probably a rewrite, almost from scratch, of the shorter.
There is also a play, "George-a-Greene the Pinner of Wakefield," about this incident; it was published in 1599, according to Kunitz/Haycraft, p. 236. Knight, p. 62, seems convinced that it was written by Robert Greene (1558-1592), but Kunitz/Haycraft, p. 236, note that several plays were falsely printed under Green's name and allow only a possibility that this is one of his works. Child, who mentions the play in his headnotes, does not even refer to an author. NewCentury, p. 514, says, "ascribed to Green but without much evidence [is] "George-a-Greene, the Pinner of Wakefield." Benet does not mention the "Pinner" at all in its entry on Greene.
To be sure, it hardly matters who wrote it; the key point is that the play -- and hence, presumably, this story -- was in existence before 1600 -- as was some ballad on the subject, as shown by the Stationer's Register entry, although we do not know whether it is this or another.
It is interesting to observe that the longer Forresters text of the "Pinder" calls the pinder "George a Green," as in the play (Knight, p. 63).
Fully half the Robin Hood ballads in the Child collection (numbers (121 -- the earliest and most basic example of the type), 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, (133), (134), (135), (136), (137), (150)) share all or part of the theme of a stranger meeting and defeating Robin, and being invited to join his band. Most of these are late, but it makes one wonder if Robin ever won a battle.
The connection of Robin Hood and a Pinder of Wakefield is proved to be early by the Stationer's Register entry, but we cannot prove that that entry refers to this song.
Bronson notes that his two tunes for this song are both associated with Rimbault, whose handling of other Robin Hood melodies was, at best, cavalier.
There are other mysteries associated with the piece, which survives only in very defective forms. Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #816, p. 304, notes a stanza which does not seem to appear in the canonical texts:
The hart he loves the high wood,
The hare she loves the hill;
The knight he loves his bright sword,
The lady loves her will. - RBW
Opie-Oxford2 206, "The hart he loves the high wood" (1 text) dates the song quoted above in Baring-Gould-Mother Goose to "a late-fifteenth century commonplace book from Broome Hall, Norfolk." - BS
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C124

Jolly Ploughboy, The


See The Jolly Plowboy (Little Plowing Boy; The Simple Plowboy) [Laws M24] (File: LM24)

Jolly Ploughman Lad, The


DESCRIPTION: "The jolly jolly ploughman lad goes whistling o'er the lea." He "whistles a' the day ... And he trysts his bonnie lassie Jean." They marry. He still whistles and "bairnies play at hide and seek." When old they live happily among their grown children
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan3)
KEYWORDS: age love marriage farming children
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan3 414, "The Jolly Ploughman Lad" (1 text)
Roud #5936
File: GrD3414

Jolly Plowboy, The (Little Plowing Boy; The Simple Plowboy) [Laws M24]


DESCRIPTION: A plowboy and a rich girl fall in love. When the girl's father finds out, he sends a press gang for the boy. The girl dresses in men's clothes and rows out to her lover's ship. She bribes the captain to return her lover
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1808 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 12(155))
KEYWORDS: love pressgang cross-dressing reprieve
FOUND IN: US(Ap,SE) Canada(Mar,Newf) Britain(Scotland,England(Lond,South,West)) Ireland
REFERENCES (17 citations):
Laws M24, "The Jolly Plowboy (Little Plowing Boy; The Simple Plowboy)"
Ford-Vagabond, pp. 284-286, "The Jolly Plowbow" (1 text, 1 tune)
Greig #117, pp. 1-2, "The Jolly Ploughboy" (1 text)
GreigDuncan1 170, "The Jolly Ploughboy" (14 texts, 13 tunes)
Leather, pp. 208-209, "The Pretty Ploughboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
BrownII 103, "Little Plowing Boy" (1 text plus a fragment)
Chappell-FSRA 71, "The Little Plowing Boy" (1 text)
SharpAp 59, "The Simple Ploughboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Ord, pp. 233-234, "The Jolly Plowboy" (1 text)
SHenry H105, pp. 331-332, "The Jolly Plowboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton/Senior, pp. 176-178, "The Jolly Ploughboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Peacock, pp. 224-225, "The Pretty Ploughboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Karpeles-Newfoundland 46, "The Simple Ploughboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Mackenzie 45, "The Jolly Ploughboy" (1 text)
OBB 167, "The Simple Ploughboy" (1 text)
DT 584, JOLLPLOW (BRSKLIVE -- listed as Laws A15, but this is impossible; it appears to be this song with some odd verses about the boy being wounded)
ADDITIONAL: Leslie Shepard, _The Broadside Ballad_, Legacy Books, 1962, 1978, p. 151, "The Pretty Plough Boy" (reproduction of a broadside page with "The Pretty Plough Boy," "The Spotted Cow," and "Canadian Boat Song")
Roud #186
RECORDINGS:
Harry Cox, "The Pretty Ploughboy" (on Voice02)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 12(155), "The Pretty Plough Boy," Burbage and Stretton (Nottingham), 1797-1807; also Harding B 11(3164), Firth c.12(288), Harding B 11(1400), 2806 c.17(335)[some words illegible], Firth b.25(108), Harding B 12(135), "The Pretty Plough Boy"; Harding B 25(1506)[almost entirely illegible], "Plough Boy"; Johnson Ballads 1403, Johnson Ballads 1450, "[The] Pretty Ploughboy"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Cawsand Bay" (plot)
cf. "Disguised Sailor (The Sailor's Misfortune and Happy Marriage; The Old Miser)" [Laws N6]
cf. "Jack Monroe (Jackie Frazer; The Wars of Germany)" [Laws N7]
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Poor Ploughboy
The Hills o' Traquair
NOTES: Bunting (Edward Bunting, The Ancient Music of Ireland (Mineola, 2000 (reprint of 1840 Dublin edition)), #23, "The Jolly Ploughman") only prints a first verse; it shares three lines with many versions of this song. - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: LM24

Jolly Poker


See Johnny Boker (I) (File: Doe009a)

Jolly Raftsman O, The


DESCRIPTION: "I am sixteen, I do confess, I'm sure I am no older O, I place my mind, it never shall move, It's on a jolly raftsman, O." She praises his work and calls him "brave as Alexander," though someone (her mother?) wants her to marry a freeholder
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1961 (Fowke)
KEYWORDS: love logger courting mother
FOUND IN: Canada(Ont)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Fowke-Lumbering #58, "The Jolly Raftsman O" (1 text, 1 tune)
Fowke/MacMillan 51, "The Jolly Raftsman O" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #2318
NOTES: No particular storyline here, a short (three verses) love song wherein the singer repeatedly states her conviction to wait for and marry her jolly raftsman. [Fowke's source was] Mrs. A. Fraser of Lancaster, Ontario, who said she learned it from her mother. - RBW
File: FowL58

Jolly Roving Tar (II), The


See Get Up, Jack! John, Sit Down! (File: Wa071)

Jolly Roving Tar [Laws O27]


DESCRIPTION: Susan fondly recalls her sailor love. She sets out to ensure that her father's ships are well equipped for his sake. Finally she bids farewell to the local ladies and sets out to follow her "jolly roving tar."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1839 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 16(119c))
KEYWORDS: sailor parting rambling reunion
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar) Ireland
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Laws O27, "Jolly Roving Tar"
SHenry H670, p. 293, "The Jolly Roving Tar" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton/Senior, p. 178, "Jolly Roving Tar" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-SNewBrunswick 12, "Jolly Roving Tar" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT 744, JOLROVTR
Roud #913
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 16(119c), "The Jolly Roving Tar," J. Catnach (London), 1813-1838; also Firth c.13(77), 2806 c.16(242), Harding B 11(859), Harding B 11(860), Harding B 26(302), Harding B 11(3444), Firth c.13(78), "The Jolly Roving Tar"
NOTES: Broadside Bodleian Harding B 26(302), "The Jolly Roving Tar ("As I roved out one evening in the pleasant month of May"), Haly (Cork), 19C, while undated, dates itself by its last add-on verse: "So now these lines are at an end the truth I will unfold Young Susan she got married to her young sailor bold With him she faced the Russians and feared no wound or scar, But now she lives contented with her jolly roving tar." - BS
[To clarify, the above verse probably implies a Crimean War date. But it could well be a late add-on -- note that there were few battles between British and Russian navies. - RBW]
File: LO27

Jolly Sailors Bold (I)


DESCRIPTION: The singer ridicules farmers on land and compares their easy life with the dangers faced by sailors. But "we'll sail into all parts of the world ... And we'll bring home all prizes ... We spend our money freely, And go to sea for moreÓ
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1928 (Mackenzie)
KEYWORDS: bragging farming sea ship ordeal nonballad sailor
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Mackenzie 95, "Jolly Sailors Bold" (1 text)
Roud #3289
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Maids of Simcoe (Ontario)" (theme)
cf. "Ye Gentlemen of England (I)" [Laws K2]
cf. "Dixie Brown" [Laws D7] (lyrics)
NOTES: Mackenzie: "The source of this song, and of a great many similar ones, is the famous broadside 'Ye Gentlemen of England, or When the Stormy Winds Do Blow,' composed by Martin Parker, and first issued about 1635."
This is a sailor's version of "Maids of Simcoe" (it has the same Roud number). It is also "Ye Gentlemen of England (I)" [Laws K2], but without a disaster of any kind.
See, for the Mackenzie "source," broadside Bodleian, Douce Ballads 2(167b), "Neptune's Raging Fury" or "The Gallant Seaman's Sufferings" ("You gentlemen of England, that live at home at ease"), C. Brown (London), 1695-1707, by Martin Parker. - BS
File: Mack095

Jolly Sailors Bold (II)


See Pretty Nancy of London (Jolly Sailors Bold) (File: R078)

Jolly Shanty Boy, The


DESCRIPTION: Singer boasts of being a jolly (and jauntily dressed, if ragged) shanty boy, to whom women are always attracted. He sings, "For I don't care for rich or poor/I'm not for strife and grief/I'm ragged, fat and lousy, and/As tough as Spanish beef."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1941 (Beck)
KEYWORDS: bragging lumbering work logger poverty nonballad
FOUND IN: US(MW) Canada(Ont)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Beck 21, "The Jolly Shanty Boy" (1 text)
Fowke-Lumbering #54, "The Gatineau Girls" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST Be021 (Partial)
Roud #4351
File: Be021

Jolly Soldier, The


See The Rambling Soldier (File: ShH43)

Jolly Sportsman, The


DESCRIPTION: A girl seduced by a sportsman names her baby Maidenhead. She puts the baby and some cherries in a hamper. She meets another sportsman who offers to buy her hamper and her maidenhead. She refuses to return his money when all he gets is the hamper.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1828 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 28(206))
KEYWORDS: sex bargaining trick humorous baby wordplay rake
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan2 306, "The Sportsboy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #5863
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 28(206), "The Jolly Sportsman" ("It's of a jolly sportsman was hunting o'er the lawn"), W. Wright (Birmingham), 1820-1827; also Harding B 11(4150), Harding B 25(1003), "The Jolly Sportsman"
File: Gr2306

Jolly Stage Driver, The


See The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen [Laws O13] (File: LO13)

Jolly Tester, The


See I Love Sixpence (File: OO2480)

Jolly Thrasher, The


See Jolly Thresher, The (Poor Man, Poor Man) (File: R127)

Jolly Thresher, The (Poor Man, Poor Man)


DESCRIPTION: The rich man asks the poor man how he can support such a large family with so many young children. The poor man answers, "I make my living by the sweat of my brow." In some texts the rich man gives him some sort of reward for all his hard work
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: c. 1685 (broadside); 1792 (Scots Musical Museum)
KEYWORDS: dialog work poverty
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,NE,SE,So) Britain(England(All),Scotland(Aber)) Ireland
REFERENCES (12 citations):
Randolph 127, "Poor Man, Poor Man" (1 text)
BrownIII 58, "The Thresherman" (1 text)
JHCoxIIA, #21A-B, pp. 85-88, "Poor Man, O Poor Man," "There Was a Rich Englishman" (2 texts, 1 tune)
Kennedy 253, "The Jolly Thresher" (1 text, 1 tune)
Stokoe/Reay, pp. 118-119, "The Nobleman and Thrasher" (1 text, 1 tune)
Warner 146, "The Jolly Thresher" (1 text, 1 tune)
FSCatskills 92, "The Jolly Thresher" (1 text, 1 tune)
Flanders/Brown, pp. 156-159, "Poor Man's Song," "The Labourer" (2 texts, the second being the Green Mountain Songster version)
SHenry H622, p. 44, "The Jolly Thresher"; H117, pp. 44-45, "As the King Went A-Hunting" (2 texts, 2 tunes)
GreigDuncan3 437, "The Thresherman" (6 texts, 4 tunes)
Ord, pp. 48-49, "The Hedger" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, POORMAN*
Roud #19
RECORDINGS:
Harry Holman, "There Was a Poor Thresherman" (on Voice20)
Eleazar Tillett, "The Jolly Thresher" (on USWarnerColl01)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 15(311b), "Squire and Thrasher" ("A nobleman liv'd in a village of late"), W. Jackson and Son (Birmingham), 1839-1855; also Harding B 15(312a), "The Squire and Thrasher"; Harding B 16(258b), "The Squire and Thrsherman" [sic]
NLScotland, Ry.III.a.10(040), "The Noble Man's Generous Kindness" or "The Country-Man's Unexpected Happiness," unknown, 1701
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Thresherman (and the Squire)
File: R127

Jolly Tinker (I), The


DESCRIPTION: The tinker comes to town to mend the pots. He observes that "A tinker never marries, has a girl in every town...." "I've never stored much gold, but I have a lot to spend." "My life is wild and free, and I do not seek renown. I'm just a jolly tinker..."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1940 (Warner)
KEYWORDS: work sex rambling
FOUND IN: US(NE)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Warner 72, "The Jolly Tinker" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, JOLITNK2*
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Tinker"
NOTES: Tinkers had a reputation for wantonness, and a large bawdy repertoire built up around them. It is often difficult to decide if the songs are related or not. Since this song is "clean" and "The Tinker" is dirty, I decided to separate them. But I'm not confident about it.
Warner for some reason links this with Laws F24, "The Peddlar and His Wife" -- but that is a song about a murder! - RBW
File: Wa072

Jolly Tinker (II), The


See The Tinker (File: EM029)

Jolly Tinker (III), The


DESCRIPTION: A London lady tells a tinker she has kettles to mend. He asks if there are holes that need blocking; they fall to work. She bangs a pan "to let the servants know that he was hard at work." Refrain: "And I'll be bound she had (he could, they did, etc.)"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (recorded from Billy Dickeson)
LONG DESCRIPTION: A London lady, desiring the company of a tinker, writes and tells him she has kettles to mend. He comes, asking if there are any rusty holes that need blocking; she leads him to the bedroom and they fall to work on the feather-bed. She picks up a pan and he bangs it "to let the servants know that he was hard at work"; she pays him, saying they'll have another round. Refrain: "And I'll be bound she had (he could, they did, etc.)"
KEYWORDS: sex work bawdy tinker
FOUND IN: Britain(England(South),Scotland),Ireland(South)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Kennedy 177, "The Jolly Tinker" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, JOLLTNK4* JOLLTNK3
Roud #863
RECORDINGS:
Thomas Moran, "The Jolly Tinker" (on FSB2)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Tinker" (plot)
File: K177

Jolly Union Boys, The


DESCRIPTION: "Come all you jolly Union boys. To you the truth I'll tell, Concerning Governor Jackson Who I know very well." A curious and compressed account of events in Missouri from the beginning of the Civil War to the Battle of Pea Ridge
AUTHOR: B. Locke?
EARLIEST DATE: 1934
KEYWORDS: Civilwar political
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
Aug 10, 1861 - Battle of Wilson's Creek
Mar 7-8, 1862 - Battle of Pea Ridge/Elkhorn Tavern
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 242, "The Jolly Union Boys" (1 text)
Roud #3598
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Joe Stiner" (concerning Battle of Wilson's Creek)
cf. "Root, Hog, or Die (Confederate Version)" (concerning Battle of Wilson's Creek)
cf. "Sterling Price" (concerning Battle of Wilson's Creek)
cf. "The War in Missouri in '61" (concerning Battle of Wilson's Creek)
NOTES: To try to explain the complicated events which took place in Missouri in the period under discussion is impossible in the space of any reasonable note. Suffice it to say that both Union and Confederacy sought to control Missouri (though Unionists were probably the majority in the state), but that the Union efforts were somewhat more efficient and succeeded in the end.
The key players mentioned in the song are:
Governor (Claiborne) Jackson -- The governor of Missouri in 1861, he tried to seize the Federal arsenal to bring the state into the Confederacy. He was thwarted primarily by the efforts of Captain (later General) Nathaniel Lyon. Jackson did, as noted, manage to walk off with a large part of the state's cash reserves.
Thomas Price -- A Missouri congressmen and Unionist, one of those who helped organize against Jackson.
Harney -- William S. Harney. A regular army Brigadier, he was the Federal officer in charge in St. Louis when the war broke out. Rather sympathetic to the Confederacy, his behavior was so lethargic that Congressman Frank Blair maneuvered his ouster and gave most of his powers to General Lyon.
"Billy" Frost -- Daniel M. Frost. Appointed by Governor Jackson to seize the Federal arsenal, he instead fell into Lyon's hands. He was later exchanged and served in the Confederate armies, but his failure badly hurt the Confederate cause in Missouri.
"A lion" -- Obviously a reference to General Lyon, the bulwark of the Federal forces until his death at Wilson's Creek.
"McCulla brought up artillery" -- refers to General Benjamin McCulloch, who was Confederate commander at Wilson's Creek (sort of; he led the Arkansas troops. The Missouri troops were under Sterling Price. Price actually had a higher rank -- he was a Major General, McCulloch only a Brigadier -- but McCulloch had a commission from Jefferson Davis, and finally Price decided to accept his orders rather than leave their armies to be defeated in detail. But the two never worked together well).
At Wilson's Creek, Lyon (outnumbered two to one) tried an enveloping attack, with Sigel's brigade arriving from a different direction. Sigel's troops fell apart after coming briefly under fire, and Lyon's remaining troops had to face a heavy assault from the Confederates. The Federals held on all morning -- the southerners had almost no training as soldiers -- but retreated when Lyon was killed.
Sigel -- Franz Sigel, who kept getting commands because German immigrants respected him, but who never did much with his troops. At Carthage (July 5, 1861) he fled without a fight; at Wilson's Creek his troops fell apart. Only at Pea Ridge was his performance respectable
"a little old Creek bottom" -- the battlefield at Wilson's Creek. Each side lost about 1200 men (of some 5500 Federals and 11,500 Confederates engaged)
Price #2 -- Sterling Price, Confederate commander of Missouri troops. Leader of half the troops at Wilson's Creek (see under McCulloch)
"It done for old Ben" -- Ben McCulloch was killed at Pea Ridge (Arkansas) in 1862. At this battle, a strong Confederate force under Earl Van Dorn was unable to dislodge a weaker Union force. This finally dashed Confederate hopes in Missouri.
For more on the Battle of Pea Ridge (one of the more important battles of the war, though it doesn't get much ink), see the notes to "The Battle of Elkhorn Tavern or The Pea Ridge Battle" [Laws A12]. - RBW
File: R242

Jolly Wagoner, The


DESCRIPTION: "When first I went a-wagonin', a-wagonin' I did go, I filled my parents' hearts full of sorrow, grief and woe." The singer recalls being rained on, seeing birds in summer, driving hard roads in the winter. He rejoices to reach home and wife
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (recorded from Fred Jordan by Peter Kennedy)
KEYWORDS: home travel wife hardtimes
FOUND IN: Britain(England(West))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Kennedy 230, "The Jolly Waggoner" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #1088
NOTES: Kennedy lists a number of earlier versions of this song -- but much of his text is floating-type material, and he is known to lump completely unrelated songs. So I have not listed any of the versions in his bibliography; most are probably this piece, but chances are that at least a few are not. And I don't know which. - RBW
File: K230

Jolly Wat


DESCRIPTION: Jolly Wat, a shepherd, sits on a hill and plays his pipes. He is awakened by an angel announcing the birth of Jesus. He finds the baby and offers him all he has. Mary and Joseph send him back to his flocks with their blessing
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE:
KEYWORDS: Jesus religious
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
OBB 103, "Jolly Wat" (1 text)
ST OBB103 (Partial)
NOTES: The tale of the shepherds is found in the Bible in Luke 2:8-20. - RBW
File: OBB103

Jolly Young Sailor and His Beautiful Queen, The


See The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen [Laws O13] (File: LO13)

Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen, The [Laws O13]


DESCRIPTION: A rich girl has turned down many suitors, but becomes entranced when a (sailor) wanders by. She urges him to stay (ashore) and marry a rich girl. He doesn't want to give up his rambling ways, but finally consents when she offers him her hand and wealth
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1929 (Karpeles-Newfoundland)
KEYWORDS: courting marriage rambling money sailor
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar,Newf) US(MA,NW) Ireland
REFERENCES (13 citations):
Laws O13, "The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen"
Doerflinger, pp. 298-299, "The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen" (1 text, 1 tune)
FSCatskills 30, "The Jolly Stage Driver" (1 text, 1 tune)
Meredith/Anderson, pp. 188-189, "The Journeyman Tailor" (1 text, 1 tune)
SHenry H620, p. 476, "The Journeyman Tailor" (1 text, 1 tune [text incorrectly states that this is Laws B6, but the notes give the correct Laws number])
Warner 66, "William the Sailor" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton/Senior, pp. 179-183, "Jovial Young Sailor" (5 texts, 3 tunes)
Peacock, pp. 582-583, "The Sailor and the Lady" (1 text, 1 tune)
Leach-Labrador 33, "The Jolly Young Sailor and His Beautiful Queen" (1 text, 1 tune)
Karpeles-Newfoundland 73, "Bound Down to Derry" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-NovaScotia 38, "It Is of a Rich Lady" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-Maritime, p. 53, "Jovial Young Sailor" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT 476, SAILQUEN
Roud #671
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Brisk Jolly Sailor
File: LO13

Jolly Young Sailor Boy


See The Bonny Sailor Boy [Laws M22] (File: LM22)

Jonah


See Hide Away (Jonah and the Whale) (File: R286)

Jonah and the Whale (II)


See Hide Away (Jonah and the Whale) (File: R286)

Jonah and the Whale (III)


See Jonah and the Whale (Living Humble) (File: FSWB386B)

Jonah and the Whale (Living Humble)


DESCRIPTION: The story of Jonah in song, recognized by the chorus, "Living humble, humble, humble, Living humble all your days" or "Humble, humble, humble my soul." Unlike most Jonah songs, this appears to be "straight"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1922 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: religious Bible whale
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII 346, "Jonah and the Whale" (6 text and/or fragments, but only the "A" and "B" texts, both short, are this piece; "C" is "Hide Away" and "D"-"F" are "Who Did Swallow Jonah?")
Roud #15215
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Hide Away (Jonah and the Whale)" (subject) and references there
File: Br3346

Jonah Fishing for a Whale


DESCRIPTION: "Cheer up, cheer up, my lively lads, Don't let your spirits fall; For Jonah's down in Sampson pond A-fishin' for a whale." "And when he ain't a-whaling, He's at some other fun, Down in the swamp a-cuttin' reeds To string his whales upon."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: fishing
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII 184, "Jonah Fishing for a Whale" (1 text)
NOTES: Needless to say, this has nothing to do with the Biblical account of Jonah and the fish. Frankly, it sounds like a bunch of kids making fun of a poor foolish kid who doesn't know what a whale is or how to catch one. - RBW
File: Br3184

Jonathan, Joseph, Jeremiah


See Too Much of a Name (File: GrMa170)

Jone o' Grinfield


See The Four-Loom Weaver (File: DTfourlo)

Jones Boys (I), The


DESCRIPTION: "Oh the Jones Boys! They built a mill on the side of a hill, And they worked all night and they worked all say But they couldn't make that gosh-darn sawmill pay."
AUTHOR: Probably Millet Salter
EARLIEST DATE: 1947 (Manny/Wilson)
KEYWORDS: technology logger commerce
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Manny/Wilson 27, "The Jones Boys - I" (1 fragment, 1 tune); cf. also the fragment on p. 15
Fowke/Mills/Blume, pp. 183-184, "The Jones Boys" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
Fowke/MacMillan 24, "The Jones Boys" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #4528
RECORDINGS:
Nick Underhill, "The Jones Boys" (on Miramichi1)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Jones Boys (II)" (lyrics, people)
NOTES: Manny/Wilson: "John Jones, father of the Jones boys, came out from Camborne, Cornwall, in 1840 .... [The] Jones family moved up to a brook flowing into the Nor'West Miramichi, which then took the name of Jones's Brook. There John Jones built a grist mill to serve the community, and raised a family of ten children. John Senior died in 1866, and his sons, James and John Junior took over the business, James managing the grist mill, and John a sawmill near by."
Are Manny/Wilson 27 [this song] and Manny/Wilson 28 [The Jones Boys - II] the same song? There is no question but that the entire Manny/Wilson 27 text is part of the Manny/Wilson 28 chorus. Wilson's comment on Manny/Wilson 27: "[The tune] slightly resembles the beginning of the chorus of Mr Underhill's complete version [Manny/Wilson 28]. However, this fragment has apparently been in circulation for several generations. The late Lord Beaverbrook knew it as a child in Miramichi. It is unusual to find a fragment assuming its own personality and coexisting with a complete version in the same area." - BS
File: FMB183

Jones Boys (II), The


DESCRIPTION: The two Jones Boys each "owned a mill in the side of a hill.... They worked all night and they worked all day But they couldn't make the gosh-darned saw-mill pay." The song goes through the seasons. The singer hopes to work for them again in the spring.
AUTHOR: probably James Barry of Derby Junction (Manny/Wilson)
EARLIEST DATE: 1959 (Manny/Wilson)
KEYWORDS: commerce lumbering hardtimes work
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Manny/Wilson 28, "The Jones Boys - II" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST MaWi028 (Partial)
RECORDINGS:
Nick Underhill, "The Jones Boys" (on Miramichi1)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Jones Boys (I)" (lyrics, people)
NOTES: Manny/Wilson: "John Jones, father of the Jones boys, came out from Camborne, Cornwall, in 1840 .... [The] Jones family moved up to a brook flowing into the Nor'West Miramichi, which then took the name of Jones's Brook. There John Jones built a grist mill to serve the community, and raised a family of ten children. John Senior died in 1866, and his sons, James and John Junior took over the business, James managing the grist mill, and John a sawmill near by."
Are Manny/Wilson 27 [The Jones Boys (I)] and Manny/Wilson 28 [this piece] the same song? There is no question but that the entire Manny/Wilson 27 text is part of the Manny/Wilson 28 chorus. Wilson's comment on Manny/Wilson 27: "[The tune] slightly resembles the beginning of the chorus of Mr Underhill's complete version [Manny/Wilson 28]. However, this fragment has apparently been in circulation for several generations. The late Lord Beaverbrook knew it as a child in Miramichi. It is unusual to find a fragment assuming its own personality and coexisting with a complete version in the same area." - BS
File: MaWi028

Jones's Ale


See When Jones's Ale Was New (File: Doe168)

Jones's Ghost


DESCRIPTION: "Come list ye doctors all to me, For Jones's ghost I truly be.... I am that slaughtered, mangled man." Murderer Jones accuses Doctors Thorp and French of violating their promises to care for his body and threatens them with punishment after death
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1958 (Burt); reportedly published c. 1880
KEYWORDS: murder execution punishment doctor corpse
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
August 1838 - Joshua Jones murders his wife
May 29, 1839 - Execution of Jones
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Burt, pp. 20-21, "Jones's Ghost" (1 text)
NOTES: According to Burt, after Joshua Jones was convicted of murder, he sold his body to Dr. Amos French, adding the stipulation that French care for his child and also try to bring him back to life.
The former condition was fulfilled. French naturally failed to revive Jones, and eventually stripped the flesh from his bones; he wanted a skeleton for his own use. This poem arose out of public protest at what appears, from the records in Burt, to have been a perfectly legal behavior on French's part. (The desire for a skeleton was natural for a doctor; see the notes to "The Black Cook.")
There is no evidence that the poem ever entered tradition; it was printed in a newspaper, and it's really very bad. - RBW
File: Burt020

Jordan Am a Hard Road to Travel


DESCRIPTION: About the difficulties of getting to heaven. Chorus: "(So) take off your overcoats and roll up your sleeves; Jordan am a hard road to travel (x2) I believe." The original contains assorted political references to the 1850s.
AUTHOR: Music: Daniel D. Emmett/Words: T. F. Briggs?
EARLIEST DATE: 1853 (sheet music)
KEYWORDS: religious travel nonsense political
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1842 - Webster-Ashburton Treaty settles the boundary between Britain (Canada) and the states of Massachussets and Maine
1846 - Oregon Treaty settles the boundary dispute between the U.S. and Britain (Canada). Minor uncertainties were settled by arbitration in 1872.
1852-1870 - Louis Napoleon (Napoleon III) Emperor of France
1853-1857 - Presidency of Franklin Pierce
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Randolph 305, "The Other Side of Jordan" (1 text)
DT, JRDNHRD*
Roud #2103
RECORDINGS:
Harry C. Browne, "Jordan Am A Hard Road to Travel" (Columbia A-2255, 1917; rec. 1916)
Harry "Mac" McClintock, "Jordan Am a Hard Road to Travel" (on McClintock01) (on McClintock02)
Riley Puckett, "On the Other Side of Jordan" (Columbia 15374-D, 1929)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Richmond Is a Hard Road to Travel"
cf. "Jordan is a Hard Road To Travel (II)" (words, music)
cf. "Ain't No Bugs on Me" (words)
cf. "Pull Off Your Old Coat" (lyrics)
SAME TUNE:
Richmond is a Hard Road to Travel (File: RcRIHRTT)
Jordan Is a Hard Road to Travel (II) (File: CSW188)
Rail-road Song (by Jacob P. Weaver) (Cohen-LSRail, p. 43)
NOTES: Napoleon III (1808-1873), the son of Napoleon Bonaparte's brother Louis, was chosen President of France in 1848, then in 1852 (the same year Franklin Pierce was elected President) upgraded himself to Emperor.
The "fish question" is slightly less clear; the settlement which ended the War of 1812 and the diplomacy which followed did not provide American fishermen with all the rights they wanted in Canadian waters -- but this was a perennial problem which was not solved until 1910. In addition, there were some disputes over the Columbia River (which in the complex logic of diplomacy gave the U.S. its claim to Oregon), and hence presumably its salmon. - RBW
File: R305

Jordan Is a Hard Road to Travel


See Jordan Am a Hard Road to Travel (I) (File: R305)

Jordan Is a Hard Road to Travel (II)


DESCRIPTION: Uncle Dave Macon gives his opinions about automobiles, evangelists, Henry Ford, and other matters. Chorus is "Haul [take] off your overcoat, roll up your sleeves/Jordan is a hard road to travel I believe"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (recording, Uncle Dave Macon)
KEYWORDS: technology humorous nonballad derivative
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Cohen/Seeger/Wood, pp. 188-189, "Other Side of Jordan" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 55, "The Other Side of Jordan" (1 text)
RECORDINGS:
Uncle Dave Macon, "Jordan is a Hard Road to Travel" (Vocalion 5153, 1927)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. ""Jordan Am a Hard Road to Travel" (words, music)
cf. "Richmond is a Hard Road to Travel"
NOTES: Uncle Dave Macon, who had little good to say about automobiles, ran a horse-and-wagon drayage business.
Although this song derives its chorus and structure from "Jordan am a Hard Road to Travel," in Uncle Dave's hands it becomes a completely different song from Dan Emmett's. - PJS
File: CSW188

Jordan's Mills


DESCRIPTION: "Jordan's (Jerdan's) mills a-grinding, Jordan's a-hay; Jordan's mills a-griding, Jordan's a-hay." "Built without nail or hammer." "Runs without water or wind."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1867 (Allen/Ware/Garrison)
KEYWORDS: nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Allen/Ware/Garrison, p. 68, "Jordan's Mills" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #12026
NOTES: There are no explicit religious references in this, except to Jordan (and even that might be to a town in the south named Jordan, or a miller named Jordan), but the fact that the mills were not built by hand, and don't need water or wind, imply a religious song. I've no idea what it's supposed to mean, though. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: AWG068B

Joseph Looney


DESCRIPTION: Joseph Looney, dying, tells his family not to grieve, for God has called him and he is prepared to go. He tells them to trust in and follow Jesus, so that they will meet him in heaven
AUTHOR: Elihu Gray
EARLIEST DATE: 1959 (recording, Ollie Gilbert)
KEYWORDS: death dying religious family
FOUND IN: US(SE)
Roud #12366
RECORDINGS:
Ollie Gilbert, "Joseph Looney" (on LomaxCD1704)
NOTES: This song was said to have been made by Elihu Gray from the deathbed speech of his neighbor. - PJS
And the result is actually traditional? Yikes. - RBW
File: RcJLoon

Joseph Mica (Mikel) (The Wreck of the Six-Wheel Driver) (Been on the Choly So Long) [Laws I16]


DESCRIPTION: Engineer Joseph Mikel is determined to remain on schedule. As a result, he runs too fast to avoid a collision with another train. The result was disastrous: "Some were crippled and some were lame, But the six-wheel driver had to bear the blame"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (Scarborough)
KEYWORDS: train wreck disaster crash
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1836-1892 - Life of Jay Gould. He made his fortune in railroads, largely by stock manipulation, and was worth an estimated $100,000,000 when he died
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (12 citations):
Laws I16, "Joseph Mica (Mikel) (The Wreck of the Six-Wheel Driver) (Been on the Choly So Long) [Laws I16]"
Cohen-LSRail, pp. 385-389, "Milwaukee Blues" (1 text, 1 tune)
Friedman, p. 317, "Joseph Mica" (1 text)
Sandburg, pp. 364-365, "Jay Gould's Daughter and On the Charlie So Long" (2 texts, 1 tune); 368-369, "Mama, Have You Heard the News" (1 text, 1 tune)
Lomax-ABFS, pp. 36-42, "Casey Jones," "The Wreck of the Six Wheel Driver," "Ol' John Brown," "Charley Snyder" (5 texts, 1 tune)
Scarborough-NegroFS, p. 238, (no title) (1 fragment, beginning "Jay Gooze said befo' he died); p. 247, (no title) (a fragment beginning "Great big tie an' little bitty man, Lay it on if it breaks him down"; the form appears to be a member of this family); p. 250, (no title) (1 short text, about "Joseph Mica")
Asch/Dunson/Raim, p. 64, "Kassie Jones" (1 text, 1 tune)
Arnett, pp. 114-115, "Jay Gould's Daughter" (1 text, 1 tune)
Botkin-RailFolklr, p. 456, "Been on the Cholly So Long" (1 text, 1 tune)
Darling-NAS, pp. 209-213, "Casey Jones"; "Casey Jones"; "Kassie Jones" (3 text, with the first two belonging here and the third being the full "Kassie Jones" text of Furry Lewis)
Silber-FSWB, p. 103 "Jay Gould's Daughter" (1 text)
DT 791, JOEMICA JGOULD1
Roud #3247
RECORDINGS:
Furry Lewis, "Kassie Jones, Parts 1 & 2" (Victor 21664A&B, 1928; on AAFM1; Part 1 is on BefBlues3)
Roy Harvey & the North Carolina Ramblers, "Milwaukee Blues" (Supertone 2626, early 1930s)
New Lost City Ramblers, "Milwaukee Blues" (on NLCREP1)
Charlie Poole and the North Carolina Ramblers, "Milwaukee Blues" (Columbia 15688-D, 1931, rec. 1930; on CPoole03, GoingDown)
Pete Seeger, "Jay Gould's Daughter" (on PeteSeeger16)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Casey Jones (I)" [Laws G1] (plot)
cf. "Ben Dewberry's Final Run" (lyrics)
cf. "Little John Henry"
cf. "On the Road Again" (floating verses)
cf. "Crow Wing Drive" (lyrics)
NOTES: Laws says of this piece, "I have included 'Joseph Mica' not so much to establish its identity as a distinct ballad [as opposed to being a relative of 'Casey Jones'] as to emphasize the extreme instability and confusion which are characteristic of Negro balladry."
To put this in simpler terms, Laws has broken "Casey Jones" up into two ballads. The full forms are filed with G1; the fragments file here. How one establishes the dividing line is not clear; the "hero" of "Joseph Mica" may well be Casey Jones.
To make matters worse, Laws has garbled the entry and the information about Lomax and Sandburg. I did the best I could, but one should check "Casey Jones (I)" for additional versions.
To top it all off, Laws distinguishes "Jay Gould's Daughter" as a separate song (dI25), but ALSO files it here; given the things Laws files under "Joseph Mica" and their fragmentary state, I consider his distinction hopeless, or at least incomprehensible, and file those texts here. - RBW
I don't think it's hopeless at all to separate out "Jay Gould's Daughter/Milwaukee Blues" from "Joseph Mica". If it has a wreck in it, it's Mica; if it doesn't, it's Gould. - PJS
It should be noted that Furry Lewis' "Kassie Jones" is a fragmentary stream-of-consciousness incorporating a single verse from "Casey Jones" and many floating verses, including a couple from "On the Road Again." (Which is why I filed it here - RBW.) - PJS
Note: I *still* think we should split off, "Jay Gould's Daughter" from the other songs. - PJS
The correct answer, ultimately, is to have some system for filing floating fragments -- somehow there needs to be a way to track everything with the "Pretty Little Foot" verses, and the "Jay Gould" fragment, and so forth. A suggestion for the next generation Ballad Index, I suppose. - RBW
File: LI16

Joseph Tuck


DESCRIPTION: Joseph Tuck, a tailor's son, a rover for 25 years, has decided to settle down. "I'm barber, blacksmith, parish clerk, man-midwife to the ladies" and many other occupations. Besides, he sells everything and hopes you "purchase at my shop"
AUTHOR: William Finlay (1792-1847) (source: Whistle-Binkie)
EARLIEST DATE: 1842 (_Whistle-Binkie_)
KEYWORDS: commerce nonballad
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (2 citations):
GreigDuncan8 1687, "Tammy Tuck" (3 fragments, 1 tune)
ADDITIONAL: Alexander Rodger, editor, Whistle-Binkie, Second Series (Glasgow, 1842), pp. 44-45, "Joseph Tuck"
Roud #13030
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 17(152a), "Joseph Tuck" ("I'm Joseph Tuck, the tailor's son"), The Poet's Box (Glasgow), 1850
LOCSinging, sb20251b, "Joseph Tuck" ("I am Joseph Tuck, the tailor's son, a poor but honest blade, sirs"), H. De Marsan (New York), 1859-1860
NLScotland, L.C.Fol.178.A.2(084), "Joseph Tuck" ("I'm Joseph Tuck, the tailor's son"), unknown, 19C
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "My Mither Ment My Auld Breeks" (tune, per broadside Bodleian Harding B 17(152a))
cf. "Bow Wow Wow" (tune, per broadside LOCSinging sb20251b)
NOTES: This is in counterpoint to "Dublin Jack of All Trades," who does everything in sequence. Joseph Tuck does it all, and sells everything, at the same time.
Re the tune attributed by broadside LOCSinging sb20251b: note that the GreigDuncan8 chorus of "Joseph Tuck" is "Bow wow wow Fal al di ral di radi Bow wow wow." Whistle-Binkie has it as "Bow, wow, wow, ri tum te edi." The broadsides hint at the chorus but do not print all of it, indicating -- I suppose -- that the chorus is already well known.
Broadside LOCSinging sb20251b: H. De Marsan dating per Studying Nineteenth-Century Popular Song by Paul Charosh in American Music, Winter 1997, Vol 15.4, Table 1, available at FindArticles site. - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: OpOx087

Joseph Was an Old Man


See The Cherry-Tree Carol [Child #54] (File: C054)

Joseph Watt


DESCRIPTION: At Christmas Joseph Watt shoots and wounds a moor hen; she becomes pregnant. At the poacher's court in a church he defends himself for only shooting one hen. The chick is born and killed. He pays fifteen shillings for the funeral.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1906 (GreigDuncan7)
KEYWORDS: sex poaching punishment childbirth bird
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan7 1426Ab, "The Bonnie Muirhen" (5 texts, 2 tunes, excluding 1426Ab which is a fragment of "The Muir Hen")
Roud #2944
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Muir Hen" (muir hen as sex symbol)
NOTES: The story of the poacher is a thin disguise for a story of seduction or rape and pregnancy. Note that at the "poacher's court" he stand's "before the holy band" and the minister, with ten elders, says, "Young man ye may think shame For meddlin wi forbidden game." - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: GrD71426

Josephus and Bohunkus


See Bohunkus (Old Father Grimes, Old Grimes Is Dead) (File: R428)

Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho


DESCRIPTION: Joshua comes to Jericho, orders the horns to blow, and sacks it after the walls fall down. Chorus: "Joshua (fit/fought) the battle of Jericho... And the walls came a-tumbling down"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (recording, Paul Robeson)
KEYWORDS: Bible religious battle
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Lomax-FSUSA 110, "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho" (1 text, 1 tune)
Courlander-NFM, pp. 45-46, "(Joshua)" (partial text)
PSeeger-AFB, p. 37, "Joshua Fought The Battle Of Jericho" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 303, "Joshua Fought The Battle Of Jericho" (1 text)
DT, BATJERCO
Roud #10074
RECORDINGS:
Cotton Pickers Quartet, "Joshua Fit de Battle of Jericho" (OKeh 8878, 1931)
Delta Rhythm Boys, "Joshua Fit de Battle of Jericho" (Decca 25019, c. 1950)
Dixie Jubilee Singers, "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho" (Columbia 14329-D, 1928)
Eureka Jubilee Singers, "Joshua Fit de Battle of Jericho" (Sharon X-507, n.d.)
Hall Johnson Choir, "Joshua Fit de Battle of Jericho" [medley with "Walk Together Chillun"] (Victor 4460, 1940)
Nazarene Congregational Church Choir, "Joshua Fit de Battle of Jericho" (Herschel Gold Seal 2016, c. 1927)
Paul Robeson w. Lawrence Brown, "Joshua Fit de Battle ob Jericho" (Victor 19743, 1925)
Pete Seeger, "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho" (on PeteSeeger04) (on PeteSeeger23)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Slavery Chain Done Broke at Last" (tune)
SAME TUNE:
Slavery Chain Done Broke at Last (File: SCW41)
NOTES: The siege of Jericho takes up most of the sixth chapter of Joshua, with the fall of the city's walls, and the city itself, being detailed in 6:15f. - RBW
File: LxU110

Joshua Fought the Battle of Jericho


See Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho (File: LxU110)

Joshua Stevens


DESCRIPTION: "From Squawky Hill two Indians came, To Bennett's Creek to hunt for game...." "Come, solemn muse, assist my song... To sing of Stephens, lately fell...." "The Indian shot him in the side." After his body is found, wife, children, neighbors mourn
AUTHOR: M. Tymeson?
EARLIEST DATE: 1958 (Burt)
KEYWORDS: murder family mourning Indians(Am.)
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Burt, pp. 131-133, "(Joshua Stevens)" (1 text)
File: Burt131

Josie


See Frankie and Albert [Laws I3] (File: LI03)

Journeyman Tailor, The


See The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen [Laws O13] (File: LO13)

Journeyman, The


See The Roving Gambler [Laws H4] (File: LH04)

Jovial Beggar, The


See A-Begging I Will Go (File: K217)

Jovial Hunter of Bromsgrove, The


See Sir Lionel [Child 18] (File: C018)

Jovial Tinker, The


See When Jones's Ale Was New (File: Doe168)

Jovial Young Sailor


See The Jolly Young Sailor and the Beautiful Queen [Laws O13] (File: LO13)

Joy to the World


DESCRIPTION: "Joy to the world, the Lord is come; Let earth receive her king...." The world is told to hymn to God to rejoice in the arrival of Jesus, who brings love, joy, wonder
AUTHOR: Words: Isaac Watts(1674-1748). Music: Lowell Mason (based partly on phrases from Handel's "Messiah")
EARLIEST DATE: 1719 (Watts, "The Psalms of David"; music published 1837)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad Christmas
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Silber-FSWB, p. 375, "Joy To The World" (1 text)
Fuld-WFM, p. 314, "Joy to the World"
DT, JOYWORLD
ADDITIONAL: Charles Johnson, One Hundred and One Famous Hymns (Hallberg, 1982), p. 37 (cf. also pp. 34-36), "Joy to the World" (1 text, 1 tune)
Ian Bradley, _The Penguin Book of Carols_ (1999), #43, "Joy to the World" (1 text)
NOTES: Alleged to be derived loosely from the final verses of Psalm 98. If so, it is a *very* free adaption. Apparently that is no one's fault in particular; it has been steadily adapted over the years, with each adaption making is less like the original source.
For more on Isaac Watts, see the notes to "O God, Our Help in Ages Past." - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: FSWB375A

Joys of Mary, The


See The Seven Joys of Mary (File: FO211)

Joys Seven


See The Seven Joys of Mary (File: FO211)

Ju Tang Ju (Utang)


DESCRIPTION: "Ring up four , ju tang ju (or "Jew string jew," etc.), Ring up four in a ju tang ju." "Right and left...." "Do se do...." "Once and a half...." "Swing that gal...." "Back to your partner..." "Circle four...."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1911 (Texas Folklore Society)
KEYWORDS: dancing nonballad
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 576, "Ju Tang Ju" (2 texts)
Roud #7665
File: R576

Juanita


DESCRIPTION: "Juanita, I must leave you, I have come to say farewell." She says that, if he loves her, he will never leave her. He claims he didn't think she would get so involved. The next morning, he is found dead with her dagger in his heart
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1966
KEYWORDS: love betrayal murder abandonment corpse
FOUND IN: US(SW)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Fife-Cowboy/West 51, "Juanita" (1 text, 1 tune)
Logsdon 35, pp. 195-199, "Juanita" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #11210
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "She Said She Was Only Flirting" (theme)
NOTES: "What we have here is a failure to communicate." - PJS
The middle stanzas of this piece are almost identical in meaning (except with genders reversed) to "She Said She Was Only Flirting," though the wording is somewhat different. The endings, however, are completely different.
Logsdon mentions the minor but interesting fact that Juanita Brooks, the great historian of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, was named after the heroine of this song. - RBW
File: FCW051

Juba


DESCRIPTION: A dance and patting song: "Juba, Juba, Juba up 'n' Juba down, Juba all aroun' the town." "Juba jump, Juba sing, Juba cut that pigeon wing. Juba kick off this old shoe, Juba dance that Jubilo." Variations, as one might expect, are extreme
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1855
KEYWORDS: dancing nonballad food
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (7 citations):
Randolph 263, "Dinky" (1 short text, 1 tune, which Randolph believes to be this piece; in any case, it's too short to really deserve a separate entry)
BrownIII 201, "Round It Up a Heap It Up" (a "Juba" fragment follows the main text)
Scarborough-NegroFS, pp. 98-99, "Juba" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
Botkin-SoFolklr, p. 708, "Juba" (1 text, 1 tune)
Courlander-NFM, p. 192, "(Juba)" (1 text)
Handy/Silverman-Blues, p. 53, "Juba" (1 text, 1 tune; notes on p. 204)
MWheeler, p. 96, [no title] (1 fragment, filed under "Uncle Bud")
Roud #5748
RECORDINGS:
Lee Wallin, "Juba" (on OldLove)
NOTES: Described in Frederick Douglass, My Bondage and My Freedom, 1855. (Pp.252-253 in the Dover Reprint edition of 1936). Also fully described in Step It Down (Bessie Jones and Bess Lomax Hawes,1971: Harper & Row. pp. 27-30.)
"Juba" often refers to the patting pattern rather than the words. The words may contain disguised complaints about the treatment of Black people.
Some of the words -- without the "patting" -- were used as a "dandling rhyme" in my family, in Oklahoma, at least as early as 1909. - SHi
According to SIng Out!, Volume 40, #3 (1995/1996), pp. 80-81, "juba" was slave food (apparently a corruption of "giblets"). A "yellow cat" is said to be a white. Bessie Smith's version, transcribed in that issue, was mostly about the bad food given to the slaves. The issue includes a detailed analysis of how Smith patted out the song. - RBW
File: BSoF708

Juberlane


DESCRIPTION: The singing of the birds reminds the singer of the days (s)he spent listening to the birds in Juberlane. She wishes she were home, "But miles and miles divide me, and duty here hath tied me/" She wishes she had wings to fly home
AUTHOR: Nellie Crowley (Corrigan)
EARLIEST DATE: 1933 (Sam Henry collection)
KEYWORDS: bird homesickness
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H507, pp. 213-214, "Juberlane" (1 text, 1 tune)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Scarborough Settler's Lament" (theme) and references there
File: HHH507

Jubilee


DESCRIPTION: "It's all out on the old railroad, All out on the sea... Swing and turn, jubilee, Live and learn, Jubilee." Unrelated stanzas about courting: "Hardest work I ever done was working on a farm, Easiest work I ever done was in my true love's arms." Etc.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1949
KEYWORDS: love courting work nonballad
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Ritchie-Southern, p. 11, "Jubilee" (1 text, 1 tune)
Scarborough-NegroFS, p. 231, (no title) (1 fragment, possibly of this)
Lomax-FSNA 122, "Jubilee" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 40, "Jubilee" (1 text)
DT, JUBLEE
Roud #7403
RECORDINGS:
Jean Ritchie, Doc Watson & Roger Sprung, "Jubilee" (on RitchieWatson1, RitchiteWatsonCD1)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Up and Down the Railroad Track" (floating lyrics)
cf. "Crow, Black Chicken" (words)
File: LoF122

Jubilee Guild, The


DESCRIPTION: Canadian McLellan and two other "girls from St John's ... go out to Burnt Islands and start our Jubilee Guild." They have elections, find a place "old felt hats, house slippers we will make."
AUTHOR: Arthur Keeping
EARLIEST DATE: 1960 (Peacock)
KEYWORDS: work clothes
FOUND IN: Canada(Newf)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Peacock, pp. 66-67, "The Jubilee Guild" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #9947
NOTES: [According to Peacock,] "The Jubilee Guild is a women's organization in St John's, formed in 1935 as a service club to give instruction in handicrafts, domestic science, home nursing, and so forth, to women of the outports."
Burnt Islands is about 12 miles east of Port aux Basques, at the southwest corner of Newfoundland. - BS
File: Pea066

Judas [Child 23]


DESCRIPTION: Judas is sent on an errand by Jesus. As he does so, he is cheated (by his sister!) of thirty pieces of silver. He therefore betrays Jesus to get his money back.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: c. 1300 (ms. Cambridge Trinity College B 14.39, f. 34a, also sometimes called ms. Trinity Cambridge 323)
KEYWORDS: Jesus betrayal
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
April 6, 30 C.E. - most likely date for the arrest of Jesus (the crucifixion took place the following day)
FOUND IN: Britain(England)
REFERENCES (8 citations):
Child 23, "Judas" (1 text)
Leach, pp. ,108-109 "Judas" ( text)
Friedman, p. 56, "Judas" (1 text plus interlinear modern English translation)
OBB 97, "Judas" (1 text)
Niles 16, "Judas" (3 texts, 2 tunes, of which only the first could possibly be this ballad, and even it looks suspicious)
ADDITIONAL: Kenneth Sisam, editor, _Fourteenth Century Verse & Prose_ Oxford, 1925_, pp. 168-169, "Judas" (with notes on pp. 256-258). This is now considered the best transcription of the original manuscript, replacing Skeat's transcription quoted by Child.
Brown/Robbins, _Index of Middle English Verse_, #1649
DT 23, JUDAS
Roud #3964
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Judas and Jesus" (listed by Niles as a version of this ballad)
cf. "Oh, Judy, My Judy" (listed by Niles as a version of this ballad)
NOTES: The betrayal of Jesus by Judas is told in Matt. 26:14-16, 47f.; Mark 14:10-11, 43f.; Luke 22:3-6, 47f.; compare also John 13:2, 27, 18:2f. The story of the thirty pieces of silver is found only in Matt. 26:15 and the sequel in 27:3-10 (it is based on Zech. 11:12-13). The notion of Judas as treasurer and thief occurs only in John 12:4-6, (13:29).
The manuscript containing this piece is known by two catalog numbers, Trinity College (Cambridge) 323 and Trinity College (Cambridge) B 14.39. The former is the number in the continuous manuscript catalog; the latter in the classified catalog; the prefix "B" places it among the theological manuscripts (as opposed to "R" for historical manuscripts or "O" for manuscripts from the Gale collection; James, p. vii).
Even though this piece exists only in the Trinity College manuscript, it should not be assumed that Child's transcription is authoritative. The text in volume 1 was printed without reference to the manuscript, which had been temporarily lost (according to James, p. 438, "It had been accidentally removed from Cambridge [in 1863] among the books belonging to a former Fellow who was ceasing to reside in College, and the box in which it had been packed remained unopened until his death." The book was returned in 1896).
As a result, Child's original publication, a reprint of a printed edition, contains many orthographic inaccuracies (e.g. concerning u/v, i/j, and the use of th rather than the runic thorn |> -- as well as seven conjectural emendations replacing s with h). It also omitted the duplicated lines at lines 8, 25, 30. Also, the manuscript was written without stanza divisions and with (at best) imperfect word divisions, all of which are editorial. In addition, the script is sometimes unclear. And finally, the copyist may not have been perfectly familiar with the dialect of the original.
Child later printed a corrected version, giving the readings of the manuscript verbatim (as read by Skeat). However, modern ballad scholars have almost always followed at least one of the imperfections of Child's original text (omitting duplicated lines, modifying the thorns, exchanging u and v, using Child's h instead of s, etc.)
Scholars should keep in mind that even Child's corrected text, so badly reproduced by later scholars, is open to reinterpretation. Sisam, pp. 168-169,, prints a text which differs in hundreds of particulars from Child's original version. It shows several differences even from Child and Skeat's manuscript collation:
* five places where the editors break words differently,
* Sisam also notes that in line 22 omits "Crist" was originally written by the scribe but then marked for erasure. This MAY indicate comparison of two texts of the ballad.
* Sisam also considers line 27 to be intact ; Child implies it is defective.
* two major variants (in line 6 Sisam reads "cunesman" for "tunesman"; in line 16, "top" for "cop")
(If you are wondering how anyone could confuse a "c" with a "t," recall that we are talking about a thirteenth or early fourteenth century manuscript. At that time, the letter "c" was written much as it is now -- but a "t" looked a bit like a lower-case Greek tau: It was a circular stroke, like a "c," with a horizontal line at the top. There were also forms of script in which both looked much like a modern cursive "a." For samples, see Thompson, pp. 474-479 and especially Moorman, pp. 27-29. Many other letters of the time have strong horizontal strokes as well, so it can be hard to tell, say, "ht" from "hc." In a manuscript with few word divisions, this can cause much difficulty. Unfortunately, as of this writing, there appear to be no quality online scans of the relevant part of the manuscript to let you look for yourself.)
Chambers, p. 151, observes that "Mr. Kenneth Sisam's transliteration... seems more precise than Child's." Chambers therefore reprints Sisam's text. Chambers also notes that the "piece seems to be written in a mixture of septenar and Alexandrine [16-syllable] lines, of which there are other thirteenth century examples." There are indeed quite a few romances which can't seem to decide how many syllables belong in a line, but it's obviously a rare thing in a ballad. (Of course, some of that may be textual corruption. Or, as one of the web pages I read while searching for a facsimile suggested, "Judas" as we have it may be an abridgement of a longer version, which might have had a more regular meter.)
Sisam's notes (pp. 256-258) are twice as long as the ballad itself; they are well worth consulting, as they give much more background information than Child.
Chambers, p. 153, thinks the ending so abrupt that he suspects the last part of the poem may have been lost. He also questions whether "it can properly be regarded as a ballad"; he strongly questions its "popular" nature. (As do I.)
Chambers notes that there is another piece of a similar style in the manuscript concerning Twelfth Night, which was roughed out by the scribe before being written; he speculates that the scribe may have been the author of the Twelfth Night item -- and hence perhaps of "Judas" as well.
I mention this possibility, but it strikes me as unlikely. There are several reasons for this. According to a passage I found in the Google Books edition of Elaine M. Treharne, Old and Middle English c.890-c.1400: an anthology (p. 406?), perhaps as many as five scribes worked on the manuscript, which contains works in Latin and Anglo-Norman French as well as Middle English. James himself indicates clearly that multiple hands were involved, although he does not say how many; certainly there were many. The number of lines per page varies substantially, and there are even a few cases of different numbers of columns per page! Many of the pieces in the manuscript cannot have been composed by the scribe, since the 40 or so English items include the well-known "Say Me, Wight in the Broom," which exists in another copy, and "When the Turuf Is Thy Tour" ["When the turf is your tower"], a translation of a Latin poem on death. What are the odds that four scribes would copy older works while the fifth added his own poems?
Trehame also says that the language of the book "may point to an origin in West Worcestershire," which strikes me as a little too strong a localization. It also seems to contradict Skeat's opinion (James, p. 439) that the scribe was a Norman, although Normans of course were found in various places in England. The manuscript itself is a vellum codex, rather small (7.125"x5.375"), which has been bound with a later (XIV/XV century) manuscript, MS Trinity 324 (or B.14.40). The second manuscript seems far less significant. The small size may indicate a volume intended for private use.
James, p. 443, notes that "Judas" (his item #17 in the manuscript) is in the same hand as his item #4, "The Life of St. Margaret." The items which precede and follow are in different hands. The Judas scribe also wrote the following:
James's #5, a poem in French and English, "Ihesu crist le fi3 marie cil ke tut le munde fist,.
James's #6, a poem in French and Latin, with some of the Latin in red, "Seinte mari moder milde mater saluatoris."
James's #13, in part, about two dozen short notes, mostly English poems of three to twelve lines although portions are in Latin. "Say Me, Wight in the Broom" is one of these, but apparently not by the "Judas" scribe.
The contents of the book are very much a jumble. If there is an overall plan, it is not evident. Perhaps it is just a collection of loose sheets from a monastery. Although some of the other pieces might be "folk," they do not look to be truly ballad-like.
As for the content of the poem itself -- the Bible gives very little family information about Judas (or any of the apostles). Matthew, Mark, and Luke have nothing at all about Judas. John, however, sometimes times refers to him as "Judas of Simon Iscariot" (i.e. Judas [son] of Simon Iscariot); so John 6:71, 13:12 (13:26 seems to have "Judas, [son] of Simon, Iscariot", although there is great variation in the manuscripts at this point).
The meaning of "Iscariot" is unknown. The best conjecture (Brown, p. 298) is that it is a transliteration of Hebrew "ish Q(e)riyyot," "man of Kerioth." Indeed, we find some manuscripts calling him so -- in John 6:71, although the vast majority of manuscripts, including the great Vatican codex and the two early manuscripts P66 and P75, call him "Iskariot," the Codex Sinaiticus and the Koridethi Codex call him "Judas from Kerioth." Even more interesting is the reading of the Codex Bezae, which calls him "Judas Skarioth." In John 12:4, it is Bezae which calls him Judas from Kerioth; so also in 13:2, 13:26; in 14:22 Bezae has "Judas, not the [one] from Kerioth" where other manuscripts read "Judas not (the) Iscariot." In Mark 3:19, for "Iscarioth," Bezae has "Skarioth"; in the parallels in Matthew 3:4 and 6:16, Bezae again has "Skarioth." And so forth (data from Aland). Moffatt actually went so far as to translate "from Kerioth" in the early editions of his "New Translation" (so, e.g. John 6:71; Moffatt, p. 511), although he later revised this.
Even if Judas Iscariot is Judas from Kerioth, it is not certain where that town is; Brown (following many earlier commentators) thinks the town is Kerioth in Judah, but Westcott, p. 112, suggests that it should be Kerioth-Hezron.
Because Judas, according to John, is the son of Simon, and Mark 14:3 says that the feast where the sinful woman washed Jesus's feet with her hair was at the home of Simon the Leper, and John 12:3 makes the woman involved Mary sister of Lazarus, one scholar speculated that Judas was the older brother of Lazarus, Mary, and Martha (Brown, p. 448). This would presumably mean that it was either Mary or Martha who stole the cash Judas had earlier stolen!
None of this is particularly useful, but it shows that speculation about Judas began quite early -- Sinaiticus is from the fourth century, Bezae probably from the fifth, and some of these variants are supported by translations which may have been made earlier still. Later legends are common; see the list on pp. 201-202 of Simpson/Roud. So it is little surprise to see a piece such as this arise. But there seems to be no other source for this tale of Judas and his sister.
Niles claims that his informant ("Mayberry Thomas," of Tennessee) had seen this piece in broadsheets, but there is no evidence of this, and many scholars hold that Niles made up his text 16A based on the old British text. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C023

Judas and Jesus


DESCRIPTION: "Judas 'trayed Jesus, and Jesus hung the cross, Yes, Judas 'trayed Jesus, what a loss, what a loss!" On the night of the last supper, Jesus tells Judas he will betray him for money; Peter will betray him, but not for money
AUTHOR: unknown ("collected" by John Jacob Niles)
EARLIEST DATE: 1961
KEYWORDS: Jesus betrayal death money
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Niles 16B, "Judas and Jesus" (1 text, 1 tune, which Niles considers part of Child 23, but this is clearly not the case)
NOTES: All the gospels agree that Judas betrayed Jesus, but only Matthew (16:14f.) states directly that money was the reason (although John 12:6 calls Judas a thief, and implies that this was the motive for his treachery).
All four gospels agree that Peter betrayed Jesus out of fear (cf. Mark 14:66-72, etc.). They also agree that Jesus foretold his death repeatedly, although only in John do we find Jesus implicating his betrayer (John 13:21-30) - RBW
File: Niles16B

Judge and Jury, The


See The Prisoner at the Bar (The Judge and Jury) (File: R828)

Judgment Day Is Comin'


DESCRIPTION: "Judgment day is comin', Time is drawin' near. Don't you hear God callin' you?" God calls with thunder and lightning. The singer is on his way to heaven.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII Judgment Day Is Comin', "" (1 text)
Roud #11916
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Judgment Day is Rolling Around" (theme)
File: Br3606

Judgment Day is Rolling Around


DESCRIPTION: "Got a good old mother in the heaven, my Lord, how I long to go there too (x2)." "King Jesus a-settin' in the heaven, my Lord." "Big camp meetin' in the heaven, my Lord." Chorus: "Judgment, judgment, judgment day is rollin' around... How I long to go."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1930 (Randolph)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 598, "Judgment Day is Rolling Around" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #7551
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Judgment Day Is Comin'" (theme)
File: R598

Judgment, The (Invitation Song)


DESCRIPTION: Dialog: "Come. think on death and judgment; Your time is almost spent; You've been a sinner; 'Tis time that you repent." The other answers that he'll repent when he's old. The first singer points out that death might come tonight
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1934 (Henry, from John Oliver)
KEYWORDS: dialog warning Hell death sin
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
MHenry-Appalachians, pp. 206-209, "The Judgment" (1 text)
Roud #17091
NOTES: This song seems to be inspired by the parable of the Rich Fool (Luke12:16-20), though the only words that are actually Biblical seem to be "Remember thy Creator while in the bloom of youth" (Ecclesiastes 12:1), and even that is slightly paraphrased. There might be a little of "Wicked Polly" in there, too. - RBW
File: MHAp206

Judie My Whiskey Tickler


DESCRIPTION: "Judie, my whiskey tickler, Judie, you debbil, you bother me so. Woe! Woe! Woe! Like a red-hot potato you are all aglow." "By faith, you are elegant in form and face, You walk with such stately magnificent grace...."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: drink nonballad
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII 35, "Judie My Whiskey Tickler" (1 text)
Roud #7857
NOTES: Described in the notes to Brown as a college drinking song from the 1830s. Which just shows that some things don't change. - RBW
File: Br3035

Judy MacCarthy of Fishamble Lane


DESCRIPTION: The singer goes to Fishamble Lane in search of sausages when he is stopped by the sight of "a fair one ... Judy MacCarthy ... "one eye was a swivel, Her nose it was smutty, her hands not too clean." She is broiling a devil which he detests. He leaves.
AUTHOR: Toleken (source: Croker-PopularSongs)
EARLIEST DATE: 1839 (Croker-PopularSongs)
KEYWORDS: food humorous parody cook
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Croker-PopularSongs, pp. 159-160, "Judy MacCarthy of Fishamble Lane" (1 text)
NOTES: Fishamble Lane (Liberty Street) is in Cork "where salmon, drisheens, and beefsteaks are cooked best" (quoted from "Cork's Own Town" by Croker-PopularSongs). In this case, I assume a "devil" to be some highly seasoned meat. - BS
Partridge's A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (fifth edition, 1961) offers as the #5 meaning of "devil" "A grilled chop or steak seasoned with mustard and occ. with cayenne.... Grose, 2nd ed., defines it as a broiled turkey-gizzard duly seasoned and adds, ÔFrom being hot in the mouth'."
Mr. Toleken (which seems to be the only name recorded for him) is also co-author of the somewhat better-known "Saint Patrick Was a Gentleman."
I must say that it sounds as if the singer here might be intended to be English: he evidently looks down on the Irish and doesn't like spicy food. If that isn't a nineteenth century Englishman, what is? - RBW
File: CrPS159

Judy McCarty


DESCRIPTION: The singer meets Judy McCarty at Donnybrook fair , asks her to dance, falls in love and she agrees to marry. They go to a party that night, sleep together, marry next day; 12 months later have "a pair of twins as like their dad As ever soup's like broth"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1884 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 11(1696))
KEYWORDS: courting marriage sex childbirth humorous twins
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
O'Conor, p. 18, "Judy McCarty" (1 text)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 11(1696), "Judy M'Carty", H. Disley (London), 1860-1883; also Harding B 11(1946), 2806 b.11(34), Firth c.26(37), Firth c.14(219), "Judy Mc.Carty"
File: OCon018

Jug of Punch, The


DESCRIPTION: The singer (hears a thrush singing "A jug of punch"; he too) describes the pleasures of drink: "What more pleasure could a boy desire Than to sit him down by a roaring fire, And on his knee a tidy wench And in his hand a jug of punch."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1897
KEYWORDS: drink nonballad
FOUND IN: Ireland Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Kennedy 278, "The Jug of Punch" (1 text+ 1 in appendix, 1 tune)
SHenry H490, p. 48, "The Jug of Punch" (1 text, 1 tune)
O'Conor, p. 154, "Jug of Punch" (1 text)
Creighton-NovaScotia 95, "Mush a Doody" (1 short text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 230, "The Jug Of Punch" (1 text)
DT, JUGPUNCH* JUGPUN2
Roud #1808
RECORDINGS:
The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem, "A Jug of Punch" (on IRClancyMakem01); "The Jug of Punch" (on IRClancyMakem02)
Margaret Loughram & Edward Quinn, "The Jug of Punch" (on FSB3)
Pete Seeger, "Jug of Punch" (on PeteSeeger27)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Firth b.27(162), "The Jug of Punch" ("As I was sated in my room"), unknown, n.d.; also Harding B 11(1949), Harding B 25(1013), "Jug of Punch" ("'Twas on the 24th of June")
NOTES: Creighton-NovaScotia['s] first verse seems like a floater but I know no other source
There was an old woman, she had na bairns,
She took the punch jug in her arms,
And she sang, "Mush-a-lula boo,
Will you ne'er be empty till I be fu'. - BS
I don't recognize it earlier, but I wonder if it might not be a separate song which has picked up a single "Jug of Punch" verse. Unless another version surfaces, we probably will never know. - RBW
File: K278

Jug of This, A


See Ye Mariners All (File: VWL103)

Juggler, The


DESCRIPTION: The singer tells her father and mother that her juggler "is an angel" and she goes with him. They ride on his "gold steed" made of stone. In the morning she sees her lover he has one eye. She decides to go home and take his magic horse but finds it gone.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan7)
KEYWORDS: seduction return trick horse
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan7 1401, "The Juggler" (1 text)
Roud #7255
NOTES: GreigDuncan7 quoting Bell Robertson [1841-1922]: "This one I got from Janet Taylor when a child learning to read. I never could get any more of it or find anyone who had ever heard it or off it. It is very old."
In this story nothing is what it seems. This "angel"/juggler/beggar [see the note below], at least, seems to have "the power to cloud men's minds." Is there magic or fairy business here? A suspicious verse, considering the numbers and the horse, runs "There were four-and-twenty jugglers Led the lady to the ha', And as many bonnie boys Led his steed to the sta'"
Bruce Olson on his site, at "Some Old Songs, A Personal Choice," makes the GreigDuncan7 text a sequel to "The Jolly Beggar" [Child 279]. In that ballad, to repeat its description in this index, "A beggar asks lodging. He is admitted to the house, but wants more than his beggar's fare. Receiving much of what he asks, he at last receives the daughter of the house into his cloak. He then reveals that he is a nobleman; (perhaps he marries the girl)." Here is Bruce Olson's commentary on "The Juggler": "A sequel to this ballad I've seen only in 'The Greig-Duncan Folk Song Collection', VII, #1401, 'The Juggler' (Gaberlunzie from ghibarlain). In the sequel, the young woman decides to go with him, but four-and-twenty jugglers (ghiberlain = beggar/ gaberlunzie) lead her back to the house. But by the time she gets back to the stable there's just a piece of pea-straw tied to the wa'," - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: GrD71401

Juice of the Forbidden Fruit, The


DESCRIPTION: A story of all the people who drank: "And ever since then all manner of men... Will drink the juice of the forbidden fruit." Henry Ward Beecher is among those accused of tippling, and the drinking habits of many notorious figures are outlined
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1906 (Belden)
KEYWORDS: drink political
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Belden, p. 441, "The Juice of the Forbidden Fruit" (1 text)
Randolph 403, "The Juice of the Forbidden Fruit" (2 texts, 2 tunes)
Randolph/Cohen, pp. 340-342, "The Juice of the Forbidden Fruit" (1 text, 1 tune -- Randolph's 403B)
Roud #3533
RECORDINGS:
Neil Morris, "The Juice of the Forbidden Fruit" (on LomaxCD1706)
NOTES: Among the various figures accused in this song of drinking are:
* Henry Ward Beecher - Congregational minister who campaigned against slavery
* Cleveland and Blaine - The Democratic and Republican presidential candidates of 1884. It was not an attractive campaign; Blaine was (regarded as) corrupt and Cleveland had an illegitimate child
* Ben Butler - Politician turned Civil War general turned politician again. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives for most of the period 1866-1879, and became Governor of Massachusetts in 1883. In 1884 he ran, unsuccessfully, for a presidential nomination
* Frank James - The brother of Jesse
* Charles and Bob Ford - Friends, relatives, and betrayers of Jesse James
* Oscar Wilde - the author/playwright
* Grant - Ulysses S. Grant, widely accused of being a drunkard although he apparently did not drink during the Civil War itself or during his presidency.
On the evidence, it would appear that Randolph's "B" version, at least, was crafted during the 1884 Presidential election. - RBW
File: R403

Juley


See Walkalong, Miss Susiana Brown (File: Hugi391)

Julia


DESCRIPTION: Norwegian shanty. Chorus: "Julia! Julia! hop-ra-sa!" Hugill gives only one verse, which translates "A sailor's greatest pleasure, is Julia! Julia! Beloved of girls so dear..."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1888 (L. A. Smith, _Music of the Waters_)
KEYWORDS: shanty foreignlanguage love
FOUND IN: Norway
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Hugill, pp. 392-393, "Julia" (2 texts-Norwegian & English, 1 tune)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Upidee, Upidah" (similar tune)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Julia Hopsasa
File: Hugi392

Julia Grover (Miss Julie Ann Glover)


DESCRIPTION: "As I was goin' to the mill one day, I met Miss Julia on the way, She 'spressed a wish that she might ride.... Sit down there, Miss Julia Grover, Play on your banjo, I'm your lover....." She gets in; the oxen start; the cart tips; she attacks him
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1939 (Linscott)
KEYWORDS: courting travel
FOUND IN: US(NE,SE)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
BrownIII 410, "Miss Julie Ann Glover" (1 short text)
Linscott, pp. 224-225, "Julia Grover" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #3734
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Julie Ann Grover
File: Lins224

Julian's Death


DESCRIPTION: Julian, an Indian slave who ran away and killed John Rogers when Rogers tried to stop him, makes his confession: "The prisoner owns his bloody act, And saith the sentence... Was passed on him impartially." He narrates his sins
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1958 (Burt)
KEYWORDS: Indians(Am.) slave escape murder punishment gallows-confession
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1732 - "Julian" tries to escape from his owner, Major Quincy of Brigewater, Massachusetts. Tracked by John Rogers, Julian finally killed his pursuer, but was captured and executed
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Burt, pp. 150-152, (no titles) (excerpts from two pieces about Julian)
NOTES: Reading this account, I find my sympathies all with Julian. I have to think this is even more removed from the slave's last words than the usual goodnight. - RBW
File: Burt150

Julie


DESCRIPTION: "Julie, hear me whan I call you, Julie won't hear me." "B'lieve I'll go to Dallas, Got to see my Julie, Oh my Lordy." " Raise 'em up together." "Better get the sergeant." "My feet is gettin' itchy." "Child's gettin' hungry." "Rattler can't hold me."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1965 (collected from W. D. Alexander by Jackson)
KEYWORDS: prison love separation
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Jackson-DeadMan, pp. 231-233, "Julie" (1 text, 1 tune)
NOTES: Jackson believes that singer W. D. Alexander adapted this to his own situation, and it seems likely enough. However, most of the verses here are singles lines repeated three times, with no need for a rhyme, so any convict could have made it his own. We thus cannot really say whether Alexander originated the song. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: JDM231

Julie Ann Grover


See Julia Grover (Miss Julie Ann Glover) (File: Lins224)

Julie Ann Johnson


DESCRIPTION: "O Julie Ann Johnson, oho! (x2)." "Gwineter catch dat train, boys, oho! (x2)" "Gwineter fin' Julie, oho! (x2)" "She gone to Dallas, oho! (x2)" "Gwineter hug my Julie, oho! (x2)"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (Scarborough)
KEYWORDS: love separation courting travel
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Lomax-ABFS, pp. 244-245, "Julie Ann Johnson" (1 text, 1 tune)
Scarborough-NegroFS, p. 9, "July Ann Johnson" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
ST LxA244 (Full)
Roud #11604
NOTES: The Lomaxes note that "Lead Belly... made it doubtful whether this was a dance tune or a work chant." Whether and to what extent Leadbelly reworked this is unclear.
Knowing the Lomaxes, I initially lumped this with "Julia Grover (Miss Julie Ann Glover)." I still wonder if there isn't some cross-fertilization. But that has rather more narrative than this. - RBW
File: LxA244

Julie Plante, The


See The Wreck of the Julie Plante (File: FJ174)

July Ann Johnson


See Julie Ann Johnson (File: LxA244)

Jumbo (Mama Sent Me to the Spring)


DESCRIPTION: "Mama sent me to the spring, Told me not to stay. I fell in love with a pretty little boy And stayed till Christmas day."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1922 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: courting nonsense
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownII 142, "Mama Sent Me to the Spring" (1 text)
Roud #4245
NOTES: The notes in Brown say that the fragment cited is part of a Kentucky song called "Jumbo." I suspect it's part of a singing game -- but since "Jumbo" apparently is not in any accessible collection, I can't do anything with my suspicions except complain that the editors should have given more details.
The Carter Family text of "Fond of Chewing Gum" contains a stanza very like this one, but that text is full of other intrusions, so it's not clear that they should be identified; none of the other texts of "Chewing Gum" (e.g. those in Randolph) include the stanza. - RBW
File: BrII142

Jump Her, Juberju


See The Bigler's Crew [Laws D8] (File: LD08)

Jump Jim Crow


DESCRIPTION: Disconnected verses about a rambler's exploits, held together by the chorus "I wheel about I twist about I do just so, Every time I turn about I jump Jim Crow."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1835 (pubished by E. Riley)
KEYWORDS: nonballad dancing dancetune floatingverses
FOUND IN: US(So) Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (4 citations):
GreigDuncan8 1627, "Jim Crow" (1 text)
Scarborough-NegroFS, pp. 126-127, "Jim Crow", (no title), "Jump Jim Crow" (1 text plus two fragments, 1 tune; the full text lacks the chorus, while the fragments consist mostly of the chorus)
Gilbert, p. 18, "Jim Crow" (1 text)
Opie-Oxford2 274, "Twist about, turn about, jump Jim Crow" (2 texts)
ST Gilb018 (Partial)
Roud #12442
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Johnson Ballads fol. 115, "Jim Crow," J. Pitts (London), 1819-1844; also Harding B 15(149a), Firth b.34(154), Harding B 11(1472), Harding B 11(1877), "Jim Crow"
LOCSinging, as106690, "Jim Crow," L. Deming (Boston), 19C; also as106700, "Jim Crow complete in 150 verses"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Hop High Ladies (Uncle Joe)" (floating lyrics)
NOTES: Said to have been originated by Thomas D. Rice, who allegedly watched a negro sing and dance the refrain and imitated it. This proved so successful that Rice spent the rest of his life as "Jim Crow" Rice, using the song as his primary attraction.
The Opies believe that it was through Rice's performances that "Jim Crow" came to be a name (usually derogatory) for Blacks. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: Gilb018

Jump Jim Crow (II)


See Hop High Ladies (Uncle Joe) (File: R252)

Jumpin' Judy


DESCRIPTION: "Jumpin Judy, Jumpin Judy (x3) Was a mighty fine gal (or: All over this world)" The singer describes prison life, and the hope for escape. He hopes the guards will stop abusing him.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1933
KEYWORDS: prison hardtimes
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Lomax-FSNA 289, "Jumpin' Judy" (1 text, 1 tune)
Lomax-ABFS, pp. 82-84, "Jumpin' Judy" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, JUMPJUDY*
Roud #6712
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Midnight Special"
cf. "Take This Hammer"
NOTES: The version of this song in Folk Songs of North America looks like a version of "The Midnight Special"; that in American Ballads and Folk Songs rather resembles "Take This Hammer." Lead Belly sang a version which seems unrelated to either. I leave it to the reader to draw conclusions about the Lomax texts. - RBW
File: LoF289

Jungle Mammy Song


DESCRIPTION: "Ah yah, tair um bam, boo wah, Kee lay zee day, Nic o lay, mah lun dee. Nic o lay ah poot a way, Nic o lay ah wah mee-- Ah yah, tair um bam, boo wah, Kee lay zee day, Nic o lay, mah lun dee."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (Sandburg)
KEYWORDS: nonsense nonballad lullaby
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Sandburg, p. 455, "Jungle Mammy Song" (1 short text, 1 tune)
File: San455

Juniper Tree, The


DESCRIPTION: "Oh sister Phoebe, how merry we were The night we sat under the juniper tree...." "So put this hat on, it will keep your head warm, And take a sweet kiss, it will do you no harm." Phoebe and/or the boy are encouraged to get married
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1903 (Newell)
KEYWORDS: playparty courting clothes
FOUND IN: US(Ap,So)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Randolph 540, "The Juniper Tree" (5 texts, 1 tune; the "D" text may be a parody)
Hudson 151, pp. 298-299, "Under the Juniper Tree" (1 text)
Ritchie-Southern, p. 9, "Sister Phoebe" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #4507
NOTES: A kising game, according to Ritchie, though a few texts are slightly fuller.
It is interesting to note that the two sit courting under a *juniper* tree. According to Peter MacInnis, Poisons (originally published as The Killer Bean of Calabar and Other Stories), 2004 (I use the 2005 Arcade paperback), p. 97, the oil of the Juniperus sabina is an abortifacient, the juniper berries were sometimes thought to end pregnancies. So making out while under a juniper might be thought to prevent pregnancy -- although apparently not all junipers make the particular chemical involved. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: R540

Juniper Tree, The (The Wicked Stepmother, The Rose Tree)


DESCRIPTION: A boy is murdered by his stepmother. She feeds the body to his father and (half-)sister. The boy comes back to life as a bird, and gains revenge on his stepmother (giving gifts to his family in the process). He is restored to humanity
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1956
KEYWORDS: stepmother murder death bird revenge recitation
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Chase, pp. 47-50, "The Wicked Stepmother" (1 text, 1 tune)
NOTES: This tale is widely known -- reported by Chase to be known in England, Ireland, Australia, northwestern Europe, and the southern U.S. As "Von dem Machandelboom" it is #47 in the Grimm collection (from Philipp Otto Runge, printed 1812; it is in Pomeranian dialect). As, however, the bird's accusation against his stepmother is generally sung, it perhaps deserves a place in this Index. - RBW
File: Cha047

Just a Closer Walk with Thee


DESCRIPTION: "Just a closer walk with thee, Grant it, Jesus, if you please." The singer prays to be closer to Jesus, to be strengthened in the face of work and trouble, and to be taken home upon dying
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1941 (recording, Selah Jubilee Quartet)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Silber-FSWB, p. 357, "Just A Closer Walk With Thee" (1 text)
DT, CLOSEWLK*
ADDITIONAL: Charles Johnson, One Hundred and One Famous Hymns (Hallberg, 1982), p. 167, "Just a Closer Walk with Thee" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #15986
RECORDINGS:
Eureka Brass Band, "Just a Closer Walk with Thee" [instrumental version] (on MuSouth10)
Red Foley, "Just A Closer Walk With Thee" (Decca 14505, 1949)
Lacy Colored Gospel Singers, "Just a Closer Walk With Thee" (Sacred 296, n.d.)
Selah Jubilee Quartet, "Just a Closer Walk with Thee" (Decca 7872, 1941)
Smith's Jubilee Singers, "Just a Closer Walk With Thee" (Sterling 1503, n.d.)
File: FSWB357A

Just a Poor Lumberjack


DESCRIPTION: Recitation. A youth pushes a drunken lumberjack into the gutter. Another lumberjack saves a child from a fire, but dies in the process. A third dies in the woods. All are mourned with the chorus, "'Twas only a poor old lumberjack"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1941 (Beck)
LONG DESCRIPTION: Recitation. A drunken lumberjack is pushed into the gutter by a posh youth; a stranger warns the youth not to make wisecracks, or he'll get the same treatment. Another lumberjack saves a child from a fire, but dies in the process. A third, unknown, dies in the woods. All are mourned with the chorus, "'Twas only a poor old lumberjack."
KEYWORDS: lumbering logger warning fight rescue death work recitation
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Beck 64, "Just a Poor Lumberjack" (1 text)
Roud #8846
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Only a Miner (The Hard-Working Miner)" [Laws G33] (theme)
NOTES: Pieces like this are easy to deride as mawkish melodrama, but they contain a spine of self-respect among men who were often ill-treated by the "respectable" society whose needs they supplied. - PJS
File: Be064

Just As I Was Going Away


See Braes of Strathblane (File: McCST053)

Just As the Tide Was Flowing


DESCRIPTION: A sailor and girl stop "Beneath the shade and branches round, What they done there will never be known So long as the tides are flowing." She gives him gold. He goes to the alehouse and drinks "to the girl that never said no" or spent it on other girls.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1839 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 11(3634))
KEYWORDS: courting lover sailor gold
FOUND IN: Britain(England(Lond)) Canada(Newf)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Greenleaf/Mansfield 66, "Down Where the Tide Was Flowing" (3 texts, 1 tune)
Roud #1105
RECORDINGS:
Harry Cox, "Just As the Tide Was A-Flowing" (on Voice12)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 11(3634), "Just As the Tide Was Flowing," J. Catnach (London), 1813-1838; also Harding B 11(1951), Harding B 11(1952), "Just As the Tide Was Flowing"; Johnson Ballads 1837, "Tide is Flowing"; Firth c.12(274), "Just As the Tide is Flowing"
File: GrMa066

Just Before the Battle, Mother


DESCRIPTION: "Just before the battle, Mother, I am thinking most of you.... Farewell, mother, you may never Press me to your heart again But O, you'll not forget me, Mother, If I'm numbered with the slain." The singer will be true to the cause despite missing Mother
AUTHOR: George F. Root
EARLIEST DATE: 1862 (copyright)
KEYWORDS: war battle Civilwar mother nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (7 citations):
RJackson-19CPop, pp. 102-105, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-CivWar, pp. 12-13, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (1 text, 1 tune)
Hill-CivWar, pp. 230-231, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (1 text)
JHCox 74, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (1 text)
JHJohnson, p. 118, "Just Behind the Battle, Mother" (1 text, a parody)
Silber-FSWB, p. 280, "Just Before The Battle, Mother" (1 text)
DT, JSTBATTL* (JSTBATT2)
ST RJ19102 (Full)
Roud #4263
RECORDINGS:
James Doherty, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (Edison 51109, 1923)
Liberty Quartet, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (Emerson 943, 1912)
Monroe Quartet, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (OKeh 45133, 1927)
J. W. Myers, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (CYL: Columbia 32433, c. 1904)
Will Oakland, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (CYL: Edison 297, c. 1897) (CYL: Edison [BA] 1516, 1912)
Charlie Oaks, "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (Vocalion 15345, 1926) (Vocalion 5112, 1927)
Unidentified tenor, "Just Before the Battle Mother" (Busy Bee A-55, c. 1906)
Wheeler & Ballard "Just Before the Battle, Mother" (Resona 75074, 1920)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Farewell, Mother" (tune)
File: RJ19102

Just from Dawson (Deadwood on the Hills)


DESCRIPTION: "A Dawson City miner lay dying in the ice." The miner tells his comrade to send him back to "Deadwood in the hills" (of South Dakota), where there is as much gold (i.e. not much) and it is warmer. He dies and freezes solid; they send his body home
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1922 (Dean)
KEYWORDS: death mining gold humorous
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1898 - Yukon gold rush
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Dean, pp. 132-133, "The Klondike Miner" (1 text)
Lomax-ABFS, pp. 440-441, "Just from Dawson" (1 text)
Roud #9585
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Cremation of Sam McGee" (theme)
cf. "Bingen on the Rhine" (tune)
NOTES: As usual, the Lomax version of this presents problems. They actually attribute it (to F. A. and Edith H. Brewer), but there is no information about these two. And the Lomaxes did not scruple to rewrite pieces in this book. So we can hardly know the relationship between the Lomax text (set in Dawson and with the miner coming from Deadwood) and the Dean text (set in the Klondike and with the miner wishing to go to Gibbons on the Platte). There seem to be no other traditional texts. All we can say with certainty is that Dean's text is older. Plus it mentions a less-famous place. (Gibbon, Nebraska is indeed near the Platte, about halfway between Kearney and Grand Isle, but its population is numbered in the low thousands even today; Deadwood, though only slightly more populous, was famous as the site of an 1870s gold rush). - RBW
File: LxA440

Just Kick the Dust over my Coffin


DESCRIPTION: "Just kick the dust over my coffin, Say, 'There lies a jovial young lad'; Pile the earth upon my carcass, Then carve on the stone at my head, Oh ain't it a wonderful story That love will kill a man dead." Singer says not to bawl; tell his love he is dead
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1952 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: death burial love humorous
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII 40, "Just Kick the Dust over my Coffin" (1 text)
Roud #7861
NOTES: I can't recall many humorous first-person died-for-live songs -- but this, if the two-stanza fragment in Brown is an indication, is one. - RBW
File: Br3040

Just Now


DESCRIPTION: "Sanctify me (x5), Just now (x3), Sanctify me." "Good religion...." "Come to Jesus...." Presumably any reigious sentiment that is four syllables long can be used.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1867 (Allen/Ware/Garrison), where it is said to have been recorded 25 years earlier
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN: US(MA)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Allen/Ware/Garrison, p. 67, "Just Now" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #12023
File: AWG067A

Just One Girl


DESCRIPTION: "I'm in love with a sweet little girlie, only one, only one...." "Just one girl (x2), There are others, I know, but they're not my Pearl... I'll be happy forever with just one girl." He says that, though poor, they are of age to marry and will be happy
AUTHOR: Words: Karl Kennett / Music: Lyn Udall
EARLIEST DATE: 1898 (copyright)
KEYWORDS: love marriage
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Randolph 789, "Just One Girl" (1 text)
Spaeth-ReadWeep, pp. 146-147, "Just One Girl" (1 text, 1 tune)
Spaeth-WeepMore, pp. 256-257, "Just One Girl" (1 text, 1 tune)
Meredith/Covell/Brown, p. 252, "Just One Girl Waltz" (1 tune)
Roud #7419
File: R789

Just Plain Folks


DESCRIPTION: "To a mansion in the city came a couple old and gray To meet their son who left them long ago." The son, now rich, greets them coldly; the father says, "We're just plain folks, your mother and me." They leave him to his life; they are too ordinary for him
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1931 (recording, Arkansas Woodchopper)
KEYWORDS: family age separation reunion
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 862, "Just Plain Folks" (1 text)
Roud #7533
RECORDINGS:
Arkansas Woodchopper [pseud. for Luther Ossenbrink], "Just Plain Folks" (Conqueror 7881, 1931)
File: R862

Just Remember Pearl Harbor


DESCRIPTION: "Wasn't that an awful time at Pearl Harbor? What a time, what a time... When the Japs came passing by, Three thousand lost their lives." The bombings of the ships are mentioned, and the singer says, like Moses, the Americans won't give up
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1944 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: battle war death
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
December 7, 1941 - Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor damages most of the battleships of the U. S. Pacific Fleet
December 8, 1941 - Japanese attack the Philippines and other Pacific targets
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownII 241, "Just Remember Pearl Harbor" (1 text)
Roud #6624
NOTES: This is a very strange piece, in that nearly every line is reminiscent of some traditional song or other (notably "Wasn't That a Mighty Time," but also "The Titanic (I - It Was Sad When That Great Ship Went Down)" [Laws D24] and "Oh Mary Don't You Weep" and others). But it doesn't seem to scan to any of them, or much of anything else for that matter.
The song was collected from schoolchildren apparently in 1943; is it possible that they or one of their teachers assembled it? It might explain the style of the piece.
It's hard to say how much after Pearl Harbor this song was written; there are no real dated items except the attack itself. The only person mentioned is MacArthur, and this is confusing. It does not mention his successful Pacific campaign. But neither does it mention his badly mismanaged defense of the Philippines, in which he let his entire air force be destroyed on the ground, and instead of retiring his inadequate garrison to Bataan at first opportunity, at first tried to slug it out with the Japanese, leaving him with neither the troops nor the supplies to defend himself. - RBW
File: BrII241

Just Tell Them That You Saw Me


DESCRIPTION: "While strolling down the street one even, alone on pleasure bent," the singer sees a girl he knew at home. He offers to take a message home. She begs him to merely "tell them that you saw me"; she hopes to improve her pitiful condition before going home
AUTHOR: Paul Dresser (1857-1906)
EARLIEST DATE: 1895 (sheet music)
KEYWORDS: home hardtimes
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Dean, p, 124, "Just Tell Them That You Saw Me" (1 text)
Spaeth-ReadWeep, pp. 201-202, "Just Tell Them You Saw Me" (1 tune, partial text)
Roud #3528
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "I Told Them That I Saw You" (characters)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Madge
The Wayward Girl
NOTES: For the story of Paul Dresser, see the notes to "On the Banks of the Wabash, Far Away." - RBW
File: Dean124

Just Tread on the Tail of Me Coat


DESCRIPTION: "I've licked all the Murphys an' Finnegans, And all the McCarthys afloat, If you're wanting a fight and a fraction, Just tread on the tail of me coat."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1913 (Randolph)
KEYWORDS: fight
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 474, "Just Tread on the Tail of Me Coat" (2 fragments, 1 tune)
Roud #4879
NOTES: The tune given by Randolph is quite close to (the verse of) "Rosin the Beau"; one suspects this is a fragment of one of the myriad parodies based on that song. - RBW
File: R474

Jut Gannon


DESCRIPTION: Jut Gannon is told to drive a mule team, so he does. The rest of the song consists of descriptions of other lumber-woods characters and short anecdotes about them
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1941 (Beck)
KEYWORDS: lumbering work animal moniker humorous
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Beck 71, "Jut Gannon" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #6497
NOTES: The "moniker song" consists mostly of listing the names of one's compatriots, and perhaps telling humorous vignettes about each; it's common among lumberjacks, hoboes, and probably other groups. - PJS
File: Be071

K.C. Moan


DESCRIPTION: Song fragment, with two floating verses: "I thought I heard that K.C. when she blowed/She blowed like my woman's on board" and "When I get back on that K.C. road/Gonna love my baby like I never loved before"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (recording, Andrew and Jim Baxter)
KEYWORDS: separation railroading nonballad floatingverses
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Cohen-LSRail, pp. 406-412, "KC Railroad/KC Moan" (3 texts plus a mass of fragments, 1 tune)
Asch/Dunson/Raim, p. 102, "K.C. Moan" (1 text, 1 tune)
Scarborough-NegroFS, p. 242, (no title) (1 short text)
Roud #4958
RECORDINGS:
Andrew and Jim Baxter, "Kansas City Railroad Blues" (Victor 20962, 1927)
Memphis Jug Band, "K. C. Moan" (Victor 38558A, 1929; on AAFM3, BefBlues2)
Riley Puckett, "Kansas City Railroad" (Bluebird B5471, 1934/Montgomery Ward M-7042 [probably as "K. C. Railroad"]
George Walburn and Emmett Hethcox, "K.C. Railroad" (OKeh 45004); probably also "Kansas City Railroad Blues" (OKeh 45178)
[Jess] Young's Tenesee Band, "The Old K.C." (Columbia 15431-D, 1929)
NOTES: The verses are vocal interludes in what is basically a slow dance tune, although they sound like they might well have originated in a work song. And, although it's located in Tennessee, Memphis is hardly part of Appalachia. Its music is more closely connected with the Mississippi delta region. - PJS
This sng shows, better than almost anything, the loose form of blues songs. Cohen's three versions all have roughly the same first verse: "Thought I/ought to hear that (old/lovin') KC blow... Blowed like she never blowed before/no more." But one of his versions goes on to include much of "Goin' down this road feelin' bad," plus the "Chilly winds" verse, a second is about a man rejected by a woman, and the third has verses about the KC train straining every nerve. It's one of those cases where there simply is no way to tell just where one song stops and another starts.
Cohen's three texts are at least held together by a common melody, but he notes that the Walburn/Hethcox recording has a different tune. - RBW
File: ADR102

Kafoozalem (I)


DESCRIPTION: Kafoozalem is the daughter of a Turk "who did the Prophet's holy work." A westerner, Sam, loves her and tries to steal her away. The father discovers the plot and has them strangled
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan5)
KEYWORDS: love foreigner death murder
FOUND IN: US Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (2 citations):
GreigDuncan5 1008, "Kafoozelum" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
Spaeth-ReadWeep, pp. 131-132, "Kafoozalem" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST SRW131 (Full)
Roud #10135
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Kathusalem (Kafoozelum) (I)"
cf. "Laidy Maisry' [Child 65] (plot)
NOTES: GreigDuncan5: "It is unclear from the verse collected whether this is the broadside/music-hall song about the attempted elopement with the Daughter of the Babo or a version nearer to the bawdy song of the harlot of Jerusalem." I have to go by the chorus: "Oh oh Kafoozelum, the daughter of the Babo." - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: SRW131

Kafoozelum (I)


See Kathusalem (Kafoozelum) (II) (File: EM204)

Kail


DESCRIPTION: We get cold kail [cabbage], then hot kail, then kail with kail, then "we got kail after that again"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan8)
KEYWORDS: food humorous nonballad
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan8 1715, "Kail" (1 text)
Roud #13139
File: GrD81715

Kangaroo, The


See Carrion Crow (File: LoF072)

Kansas


See In Kansas (File: EM049)

Kansas Boys


See Come All You Virginia Girls (Arkansas Boys; Texian Boys; Cousin Emmy's Blues; etc.) (File: R342)

Kansas City Blues


DESCRIPTION: "River is deep and the river is wide, Gal I love is on the other side. I'm gonna move to Kansas City... Move, honey babe, where they don't 'low you." Miscellaneous verses about women, prostitution (?), drugs, loneliness, the girl the singer loves....
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1950 (recording, "Red" Willie Smith)
KEYWORDS: drugs love whore travel home
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Silber-FSWB, p. 77, "Kansas City Blues" (1 text)
DT, KCBLES*
RECORDINGS:
"Red" Willie Smith, "Kansas City Blues" (on NFMAla1)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Ohio River, She's So Deep and Wide" (floating lyrics)
NOTES: This song also became popular in jazz circles, after being popularized by Joe Turner and others. - PJS
File: FSWB077C

Kansas City Railroad


See K.C. Moan (File: ADR102)

Kansas Cyclone


DESCRIPTION: Singer used to own a ranch but he's now working as a cowboy; a "twisting cyclone" (tornado) has destroyed his farm and killed his family and herd. He's now punching cows to pay off the mortgage and "payin' for the cattle that the cyclone blew away"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1932 (Henry, from Grif Crawford)
KEYWORDS: home death farming work disaster storm animal children wife family cowboy worker
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MW)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
MHenry-Appalachians, p. 90, "Cyclone Blues" (1 short text, with no mention of Kansas but the same plot)
RECORDINGS:
Art Thieme, "The Kansas Cyclone" (on Thieme02)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Shady Grove" (tune)
File: RcKansCy

Kansas Line, The


See A Soldier from Missouri [Laws A16] (File: LA16)

Karo Song


DESCRIPTION: Floating-verse song, with chorus "Oh, hear my true love weeping, Oh, hear my true love sigh, I was gwinging down to Karo town, Down there to live and die." Verses about Old Master's habits, the possum up the 'simmon tree, and courting Miss Sallie
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (Scarborough)
KEYWORDS: courting floatingverses love
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Scarborough-NegroFS, pp. 170-171, "Karo Town" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #3444
NOTES: Roud lumps this with the "Lynchburg Town" family, based on little more that I can see than a line in the chorus. There is hardly a word in the piece that isn't paralleled elsewhere, but the chorus seems relatively unique.
Scarborough thinks the Karo of the title is Cuero ("Cwaro"), Texas, but given the composite nature of the piece, I think the reference -- as in most folk songs -- is to Cairo, Illinois. - RBW
File: ScaNF170

Kassie Jones


See Joseph Mica (Mikel) (The Wreck of the Six-Wheel Driver) (Been on the Choly So Long) [Laws I16] (File: LI16)

Kate Adams, The


See notes under I'm Going Down the River (File: MWhee050)

Kate and Her Horns [Laws N22]


DESCRIPTION: Kate's intended husband suddenly jilts her for a rich girl. Kate obtains a cow's hide and horns, and meets her lover disguised as the devil. This "devil" threatens him if he does not return to Kate. He does; she reveals the truth as their child is born
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1903 (Belden; a broadside exists from c. 1690)
KEYWORDS: courting trick marriage Devil childbirth
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,MW,NE,So) Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (10 citations):
Laws N22, "Kate and Her Horns"
Belden, pp. 231-232, "Kate and her Horns" (1 text)
FSCatskills 125, "Kate and Her Horns" (1 text, 1 tune)
SharpAp 70, "The Clothier" (1 text, 1 tune)
Gardner/Chickering 159, "Kate and the Cowhide" (2 texts plus mention of 1 more, 1 tune)
Combs/Wilgus 101, pp. 137-138, "Kate and the Clothier" (1 text)
Creighton/Senior, pp. 184-186, "Kate" (1 text, 1 tune)
Mackenzie 132, "Kate and Her Horns" (1 text)
BBI, ZN3130, "You that in merriment delight"
DT 452, KATEHORN* KATEHRN2*
Roud #555
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Douce Ballads 3(15b), "Crafty Kate of Colchester" or "The False-Hearted Clothier Frighted into Good Manners" ("You that in merriment delight") [almost entirely illegible], J. White (Newcastle), 1711-1769
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Jealous Husband Outwitted" (plot)
cf. "The Lawyer and Nell" (plot)
cf. "Maurice Kelly" (gimmick)
File: LN22

Kate and the Clothier


See Kate and Her Horns [Laws N22] (File: LN22)

Kate and the Cowhide


See Kate and Her Horns [Laws N22] (File: LN22)

Kate from Branch, The


DESCRIPTION: Kate out of Branch, at anchor five miles out, is run down at night by Royalist, "an English man-o'-war that's bound for St John's town" The crew is lost and one body is found drifting, and the news and body taken to his parents at Salmonier
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1977 (Lehr/Best)
KEYWORDS: burial death sea ship crash
FOUND IN: Canada(Newf)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Lehr/Best 64, "The Kate from Branch" (1 text, 1 tune)
NOTES: The outports named, Branch, St Mary's, and Salmonier, are around St Mary's Bay on the south shore of the Avalon Peninsula of Newfoundland. I cannot find any record of the sinking.
The following information is quoted by permission from Michael Phillips (see the Maritime History site by Michael Phillips and Jane Phillips): "I include the career and list of captains for the first three Royalists in my sailing ship history and none of them visited Canada. The most likely candidate is number four which was a wooden, single screw, steam sloop, with sails, which was launched in December 1861 and broken up in 1875. She spent 1863-67 and 1868-72 on the North American and West Indies station with Cdr. Nelson '65-'66 and Cdr. Jones '68-'69.... [According to the Navy Lists] no officer named Butler ever served in Royalist, the only name that could sound vaguely similar is Cdr. Bateman who commanded her in the 1870s after Jones.... The fifth Royalist, 1883-1923, served in Africa and Australia." - BS
File: LeBe064

Kate Kearney


DESCRIPTION: Kate Kearney lives on the banks of Killarney. "Fatal's the glance of Kate Kearney; For that eye is so modestly beaming... Beware of her smile... And who dares inhale her sigh's spicy gale, must die by the breath of Kate Kearney"
AUTHOR: Charles Lever (1806-1872)
EARLIEST DATE: before 1843 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 11(431))
KEYWORDS: courting beauty nonballad
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
O'Conor, p. 17, "Kate Kearney" (1 text)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 11(431), "Kate Kearney", W. & T. Fordyce (Newcastle), 1832-1842; also Harding B 11(1960), Harding B 11(1966), 2806 b.11(173), Harding B 28(150), Harding B 11(2067), Harding B 11(430), Firth b.25(142), Harding B 11(1961), Harding B 11(1963) [torn], Harding B 11(1958), Johnson Ballads fol. 113, "Kate Kearney"
NOTES: O'Conor makes the attribution [to Charles Lever]. Kate Kearney is a character in Lever's Lord Kilgobbin published as a serial in 1870-1872 (source: The University of Adelaide ebooks site). That would mean he created the character in song no later than 1842, 28 years before the serial was published. - BS
Hazel Felleman's The Best Loved Poems of the American People, p. 12, attributes this to Sady Morgan. I have found no other references to this author. The Amsco publication The Library of Irish Music lists the words as by "Lady Morgan" (which obviously is a variant of the same thing), with "The Beardless Boy" as tune. Still, the attribution to Lever seems much stronger.
There is another broadside heroine named Kate Kearney (see broadside Murray, Mu23-y1:156, "Kate Kearney with the Silver Eye," James Lindsay (Glasgow), 19C); the song is not the same, but whether it inspired Lever, or was inspired by him, I cannot tell. Maybe *that* was written by Lady Sady Morgan? - RBW
File: OCon017

Kate Murray


DESCRIPTION: The singer is in love with Kate Murray, "a warm lively girl with the love in her eye." He describes her as beautiful with a heart "as pure as the heart of a saint; Oh, you'll not find a colyeen so lovely as she From Ballinacargy to Donaghadee"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (Hayward-Ulster)
KEYWORDS: love beauty nonballad
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Hayward-Ulster, p. 79, "Kate Murray" (1 text)
Roud #6539
NOTES: Ballinacargy is in County Westmeath, Leinster. Donaghadee is in County Down, Ulster. - BS.
File: HayU079

Kate O'Donahue


See Let Mr. McGuire Sit Down (File: RcLMMSD)

Kate of Ballinamore


DESCRIPTION: Kate's father threatens to kill the singer rather than have him marry Kate. Kate recommends he enlist to escape; besides, "I'd like to be a brave young soldier's bride." He joins the Ninety-Eights and gets a letter that she has married a farmer's son.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1977 (recording, Geordie Hanna)
KEYWORDS: courting infidelity soldier father
FOUND IN: Ireland
Roud #5172
RECORDINGS:
Geordie Hanna, "Kate of Ballinamore" (on Voice06)
File: RcKOBall

Kate of Glenkeen


DESCRIPTION: "By the banks of the Barrow residing Are girls of dark raven hair," but the queen of them all is Kate of Glenkeen. The singer describes her purity, her beauty, her fleetness of foot. He will meet her by the light of the starts
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1924 (Sam Henry collection)
KEYWORDS: love courting beauty
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H41, pp. 231-232, "Kate of Glenkeen" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #7984
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Erin's Green Shore" [Laws Q27] (tune)
NOTES: Sam Henry had no tune for this piece, so he set it to a traditional item he calls "Captain Black." This is equated with "She's a Daughter of Daniel O'Connell," i.e. presumably "Erin's Green Shore."
The tune, however, is curious, ending on the second rather than the tonic (or else it is in Dorian, and starts on the minor seventh, but it sounds as major to me). I've encountered three tunes for "Erin's Green Shore," only one of which (Connie Dover's; she doesn't list her source) has any real similarity to Henry's tune -- and they are by no means identical. - RBW
File: HHH041

Kate's Big Shirt


DESCRIPTION: Saturday night "Kate stopped up to iron her clothes" and "Tom stopped up for company." He asks "Kate does that big shirt belong to you?" It does. They strip and climb in the shirt together, but can't get out when they try.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan2)
KEYWORDS: clothes bawdy humorous wordplay
FOUND IN: Canada(Newf) Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (2 citations):
GreigDuncan2 313, "The Shirt" (1 text)
Peacock, pp. 69-70, "Kate's Big Shirt" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #5866 and 9948
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "A Great Big Sea Hove in Long Beach" (tune)
NOTES: Perhaps GreigDuncan2 and Peacock should be split. Peacock's informant said his song, recorded in 1959, was local to Fortune (Newfoundland) and the tune makes that plausible. Given the GreigDuncan2 text, which shares a story but few lines with Peacock, it seems to me more likely that Peacock is a badly remembered version recast into a familiar musical format. GreigDuncan2 records no tune but the format would not fit "A Great Big Sea Hove in Long Beach." - BS
Last updated in version 2.4
File: Pea069

Katey of Lochgoil


DESCRIPTION: "'Twas on the year Eleventy-nine, And March the fortieth day, That Katey of Lochgoil, my boys, To sea she'll bore away." The singer vows he will not sail again after strange voyage with "Tonald More an' Tugald More, Shon Tamson an' Shon Roy."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1901 (Ford)
KEYWORDS: sailor ship talltale humorous
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ford-Vagabond, pp. 241-243, "Katey of Lochgoil" (1 text)
Roud #13088
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Irish Rover" (theme)
NOTES: Sort of a Scottish version of "The Irish Rover." There are no lyrics in common, but the feeling is identical. - RBW
File: FVS241

Kathaleen Ny-Houlahan


See Caitilin Ni Uallachain (Cathaleen Ni Houlihan) (File: SBoA094)

Katharine Jaffray [Child 221]


DESCRIPTION: Squire courts farmer's daughter; father forbids her to see him. She is to be wed to another. He invades the wedding. The bride's brother challenges him; he says he comes in friendship and asks to kiss the bride. He takes her away from the hall
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1802
KEYWORDS: wedding nobility trick elopement disguise clothes
FOUND IN: Britain(England,Scotland(Aber)) Canada(Mar,Newf) Ireland US(SE)
REFERENCES (17 citations):
Child 221, "Katharine Jaffray" (12 texts)
Bronson 221, "Katharine Jaffray" (11 versions)
Greig #104, pp. 1-2, "Katherine Jaffray"; Greig #105, p. 3, "Katherine Jaffray" ; Greig #156, pp. 1-2, "Katherine Jaffray" (4 texts)
GreigDuncan5 1024, "Katherine Jaffray" (4 texts plus 2 fragments on pp. 622-623, 1 tune)
BarryEckstormSmyth pp. 400-406, "The Squire of Edinburgh Town" (2 texts, 1 tune) {Bronson's #8}
Flanders-Ancient3, pp. 261-268, "The Squire of Eninboroughtown" (3 texts, 1 tune) {Bronson's #9}
BrownII 39, "Katharine Jaffray" (1 text)
Creighton/Senior, pp. 79-83, "Katharine Jaffray" (2 texts plus 1 fragment, 1 tune) {Bronson's #4}
Creighton-NovaScotia 11, "Katharine Jaffray" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #3}
Peacock, pp. 200-201, "Hembrick Town" (1 text, 1 tune)
Karpeles-Newfoundland 20, "The Green Wedding" (1 text, 1 tune)
Leach, pp. 578-579, "Katherine Jaffray" (1 text)
Friedman, p. 271, "Katharine Jaffray" (2 texts)
OBB 88, "Katharine Johnstone" (1 text)
Sharp-100E 16, "The Green Wedding" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #6}
Gummere, pp. 263-264+357-358, "Katharine Jaffray" (1 text)
DT 221, LOCHNGAR* LOCHNGR2* (the latter listed in some versions as Child 211)
ST C221 (Full)
Roud #93
RECORDINGS:
Nora Cleary, "The Green Wedding" (on Voice06)
Cecilia Costello, "The Green Wedding (Catharine Jaffray)" (on FSBBAL2)
Thomas Moran, "The Green Wedding (Catharine Jaffray)" (on FSBBAL2) {Bronson's #11}
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 11(2364), "The Squire of Edinburgh!," H. Such (London), 1849-1862; also 2806 c.11(72), "The Squire of Edinburgh!"; 2806 c.15(151), 2806 b.9(233), "The Squire of Edinburgh Town"
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Lochingar
Lochnagar
Katherine Jeffreys
NOTES: This is the inspiration for Walter Scott's poem "Young Lochinvar." - PJS, RBW
For the latter poem widely-reprinted poem (24 citations in Granger's Index to Poetry -- though most of the anthologies are the type which never contain anything else with folk roots), see e.g. Iona & Peter Opie, The Oxford Book of Narrative Verse, pp. 160-161. The poem, according to the Opies, was rewritten to fit into the book Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field, where he needed the hero to carry his bride north.
Barry, Eckstorm, and Smyth place "The Squire of Edinburgh Town" among the secondary ballads -- those derived from but not identical to the Child Ballads. Child himself seems to have thought that "Squire" was a rewrite of "Katherine Jaffray." But Bronson (and Roud) lump them, and given the amount of common material and the lack of individual identity in "Squire," it seems to me proper to do the same. - RBW
GreigDuncan5 quoting Duncan: "Child printed twelve versions of this; yet our two chief ones have no close correspondence with any of them. [B] is on the whole nearest to Buchan's version; yet not only does it omit a good many of his stanzas and put things differently, but it includes details that he does not have.... [A], though briefer, is quite an independent form, complete in itself. Though it frequently recalls other versions, it does not coincide throughout, even in a general way, with any one, many of its points being quite distinct, even in whole stanzas...." - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C221

Katharine Johns(t)on(e)


See Katharine Jaffray [Child 221] (File: C221)

Kathleen Casey


DESCRIPTION: Kathleen Casey is buried in county Clare. Her lover had promised to be true but did not go to the wedding. No one knows where he went. She died before six months passed.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1988 (McBride)
KEYWORDS: wedding betrayal death Ireland
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
McBride 45, "Kathleen Casey" (1 text, 1 tune)
File: McB1045

Kathleen Mavourneen


DESCRIPTION: "Kathleen Mavourneen! The gray dawn is breaking, The horn of the hunter is heard on the hill." The singer bids Kathleen to awake, as they must soon part. "It may be for years and it may be forever" before he can return to her and Ireland
AUTHOR: Words: Anne Barry Crawford / Music: Frederick William Nicholls Crouch
EARLIEST DATE: 1840 (original publication)
KEYWORDS: love separation parting exile
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Silber-FSWB, p. 253, "Kathleen Mavourneen" (1 text)
DSB2, p. 26, "Kathleen Mavourneen" (1 text)
DT, KMAVOURN*
ST FSWB253C (Full)
Roud #13858
BROADSIDES:
Murray, Mu23-y1:069, "Kathleen Mavourneen," James Lindsay (Glasgow), 19C
NLScotland, L.C.1269(178a), "Kathleen Mavourneen," Robert M'Intosh (Glasgow), 1849
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Dermot Astore" (characters)
SAME TUNE:
The birth-place of wit, and the home of hospitality, Ireland (per broadside Murray, Mu23-y1:069)
File: FSWB253C

Kathusalem (Kafoozelum) (II)


DESCRIPTION: Kathusalem, the harlot of Jerusalem, has anal sex with a priest, and expels him in explosive fashion.
AUTHOR: "S. Oxon"
EARLIEST DATE: 1866, when it was published by Frederick Blume in New York City as the satirical "Kafoozelum," and credited to "S. Oxon."
KEYWORDS: bawdy parody clergy sex whore
FOUND IN: Australia Canada Britain(England) US(MA,SW)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Cray, pp. 204-210, "Kathusalem" (3 texts, 1 tune)
DT, KAFOOZLM*
Roud #10135
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Kafoozelum (I)"
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Daughter of the Rabbi
NOTES: This approximate plot also shows up in a "Strawberry Roam" variant, but I'm not sure it is traditional; see the notes to "The Castration of the Strawberry Roan." - RBW
File: EM204

Kathy Fiscus


DESCRIPTION: "On April the eighth, the year forty-nine, Death claimed a little child so pure and so kind." Kathy Fiscus falls down a dry well. Workers try to dig her out, but she is dead when found. The singer "know[s] Kathy is happy up there with God now."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1956 (collected by Paul Clayton)
KEYWORDS: death children
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1949 - Death of Kathy Fiscus
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Darling-NAS, pp. 224-225, "Kathy Fiscus" (1 text)
RECORDINGS:
Possibly related recordings: Jimmie Osborne, "The Death of Little Kathy Fiscus" (King 788, 1949)
NOTES: This is a case where tradition is muddy. Kathy Fiscus died in 1949, and several songs were recorded about the event. This one, well-known in bluegrass circles, seems to have been the most popular. It seems likely that Paul Clayton's informant, Lily Maggard, learned the song from radio play or a phonograph recording. Does that qualify as traditional?
There is a sidelight on this tragedy: According to National Public Radio's "On the Media" program, broadcast October 2010, the Kathy Fiscus story was the first significance of widespread television news coverage of one of these Human Interest Tragedies. Obviously they have now become a staple substitute for real news and analysis. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: DarNS224

Katie an' the Jim Lee Had a Little Race


See Katie and the Jim Lee Had a Race (File: MWhee018)

Katie and the Jim Lee Had a Race


DESCRIPTION: "Katie and the Jim Lee had a little race, Katie throwed water in the Jim Lee's face, (Oh babe)." The singer describes boats on the river and wishes he had a better life (or income, or woman, or whatever else seems worth complaining about)
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1944 (Wheeler)
KEYWORDS: racing ship river gambling floatingverses
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
MWheeler, pp. 19-20, "Katie an' the Jim Lee Had a Little Race" (1 text, 1 tune); pp. 55-56, "Katie an' the Jim Lee Had a Race" (1 text, 1 tune); also perhaps p. 22, "Vicksburg Round the Bend" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #9996 and 10018
NOTES: Wheeler does not give an exact date for this race, but most of the boats involved were active around 1890. The "Katie" is probably the Kate Adams (second of that name), built in 1873. The Kate Adams set a record for the trip from Helena, Arkansas to Memphis, so it is reasonable to see her taking part in (and winning) a race.
The key verse about their race seems to float (though I've only seen it in Wheeler); her "Vicksburg Round the Bend" is a mish-mash: The first stanza is generic, with different cities being used; the second is standard blues, the third is found also in "What Does the Deep Sea Say," the fourth is from "Captain Jim Rees and the Katie," and the fifth is from this song. - RBW
File: MWhee018

Katie Bairdie


DESCRIPTION: "Katie Bairdie had a coo, Black and white about the mou, Wasna that a dainty coo, Dance, Katie Bairdie." "Katie Bairdie had a hen, cackled but and cakled ben...." "Katie Bairdie had a cock...." "Katie Bairdie had a grice...."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1824 (Mactaggart, under the title "Dolly Beardie," according to the Opies)
KEYWORDS: animal dancing nonballad
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (6 citations):
GreigDuncan8 1657, "Katie Bairdie" (3 texts, 1 tune)
Greig #154, p. 2, ("Dolly Bairdie hid a coo") (1 text)
Opie-Oxford2 98, "Charley Warlie had a cow" (3 texts)
Montgomerie-ScottishNR 92, "(Katie Beardie had a cow)" (1 text)
DT, KITBEARD
ADDITIONAL: Robert Chambers, The Popular Rhymes of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1870 ("Digitized by Google")), p. 35, "Katie Beardie"
Roud #8945
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Whistle Owre the Lave O't" (tune, per GreigDuncan8)
NOTES: The Opies note various references in pre-nineteenth century sources to a rhyme about "Kette Bairdie" or "Katherine Bairdie," but none of these seem to have an associated text, so I have not cited them. It is possible that they refer to other songs than this. - RBW
Chambers: "There is tolerable proof that this song dates from at least the beginning of the seventeenth century. 'Katherine Beardie' is the name affixed to an air in a manuscript musical collection which belonged to the Scottish poet, Sir William Mure of Rowallan, and which, there is good reason to believe, was written by him between the years 1612 and 1628." - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: MSNR092

Katie Beardie Had a Coo


See Katie Bairdie (File: MSNR092)

Katie Cruel (The Leeboy's Lassie; I Know Where I'm Going)


DESCRIPTION: "When first I came to the town, They called me the roving jewel; Now they've changed my name; They call me Katie Cruel." The ending varies; the girl sets her heart on someone, but she may or may not get him and he may or may not rule over her
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1611 (quoted by Beaumont & Fletcher)
KEYWORDS: love courting
FOUND IN: US(NE) Britain(Scotland)
REFERENCES (9 citations):
Greig #138, pp. 1-2, "The Leaboy's Lassie"; Greig #140, pp. 2-3, "The Leaboy's Lassie"; Greig #143, p. 3, "The Lea-boy's Lassie"; Greig #145, p. 2, "The Leaboy's Lassie (4 texts)
GreigDuncan4 725, "The Leaboy's Lassie," GreigDuncan8 Addenda, "The Leaboy's Lassie" (10 texts plus a fragment, 7 tunes)
Flanders/Brown, pp. 123-124, "Regimental Song," "Katie Cruel" (2 short texts, the first one having lost all references to Katie, the Leeboy, or any other proper noun)
Linscott, pp. 225-227, "Katy Cruel" (1 text, 1 tune)
Scott-BoA, pp. 50-52, "Katie Cruel" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 153, "I Know Where I'm Going" (1 text); p. 194 ,"Katy Cruel" (1 text)
DT, KATYCRUL KNOWHERE* LEABOYSL* LICHTBOB
ADDITIONAL: Kathleen Hoagland, editor, One Thousand Years of Irish Poetry (New York, 1947), p. 267, "I Know Where I'm Going" (1 text)
Roy Palmer, _The Folklore of Warwickshire_, Rowman and Littlefield, 1976, pp. 148-149, "(Aye for Saturday night, Sunday is a-coming)" (1 text)
Roud #5701
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 25(610), "Fancy Lad" ("When first I came to town"), C. Croshaw (York), 1814-1850; also 2806 c.17(123), "Fancy Lad"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Hexhamshire Lass" (lyrics)
cf. "Aye Wauking, O" (some verses)
cf. " I'm A'Deen, Johnnie" (lyrics, theme)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Lichtbob's Lassie
The Ploughboy's Lassie
Lingboo's Lammie
Rob's Lassie
NOTES: The forms and endings of this song are extremely diverse, although I've only heard three tunes, two of them clearly related. I might be tempted to break the piece up into separate entries, except that there is simply no way to draw the boundaries.
Paul Stamler observes, "I think ['I Know Where I'm Going'] may need its own entry, being as how it's only overlap with 'Katie Cruel' is the 'I know where I'm going' verse. On the other hand, it's a distinct nonballad, so maybe not." As usual, there is truth in this; the two basic families are "Katie Cruel" and "Leaboy's Lassie" (the latter clearly the forerunner of "I Know Where I'm Going"). However, there is much more in common between these two than just the "I know where...." verse.
My guess is that the original is Scottish, but I could well be wrong. Don Duncan points out a broadside, "A New Song, Called Harry Newell," which is clearly a form of the same thing and printed probably in the eighteenth or early nineteenth century. It is English or Irish, not Scottish.
Child alluded to this piece in his appendix of fragments, quoting a stanza from Beaumont and Fletcher's "Knight of the Burning Pestle," Act II, Scene viiii:
She cares not for her daddy,
Nor she cares not for her mammy;
For she is, she is, she is, she is
My lord of Lowgrave's lassy.
(This, incidentally, is the part of the play densest in traditional song; in my edition -- p. 335 of M. L. Wine's Drama of the English Renaissance -- five songs are quoted in the space of thirty lines.)
Based on the date, this may well be very close to the original of this piece.
Linscott claims it "is a marching song used by the American troops in the Revolutionary War" (compare the Flanders/Brown title). But she was ignorant of most of the other versions.
Ritson printed the chorus, "O that I was where I would be, Then would I be where I am not, But where I am I must be, And where I would be I cannot," in Gammer Gurton's Garland, 1784 (see Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #80, p. 82; see also Ben Schwartz's note below) .
One chorus is the same as Opie-Oxford2 246, "Oh that I were I would be" (earliest date in Opie-Oxford2 is 1784).
GreigDuncan4: "Light Bobs were light infantrymen formerly part of the fighting establishment of all foot regiments but in the mid-nineteenth century re-grouped to form light infantry regiments. - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: SBoA050

Katie Dear


See The Silver Dagger (I) [Laws G21] (File: LG21)

Katie Dorey


See Katie Morey [Laws N24] (File: LN24)

Katie Lee and Willie Gray


DESCRIPTION: "Two brown heads with glossy curls... Little boy and girl were they, Katie Lee and Willie Gray." The pretty boy and girl are described. As they grew up, they fell/stayed in love and married; now she rocks a cradle where once she carried a basket
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1942 (Randolph)
KEYWORDS: love marriage family
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 773, "Katie Lee and Willie Gray" (1 text)
ST R773 (Partial)
Roud #5255
NOTES: Randolph's informant reported that this comes from the Hutchinson family. Felleman's The Best Loved Poems of the American People lists attributions to Josie R. Hunt and J. H. Pixley. - RBW
File: R773

Katie Monie


DESCRIPTION: "Ho, ho, ho, Charming Katie Monie; Ho, ho, ho, For charming Katie Monie"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan4)
KEYWORDS:
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan4 739, "Katie Monie" (1 fragment)
Roud #6171
NOTES: The current description is all of the GreigDuncan4 fragment. - BS
Perhaps a fragment of "Katie Morey" [Laws N24]? Pure speculation, I hasten to add, given the impossibly short GreigDuncan text. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: GrD4739

Katie Morey [Laws N24]


DESCRIPTION: The singer tries to seduce Katie. He lures her into the woods and threatens to kill her if she will not submit. She seems to consent, but warns the youth to climb a tree until her father passes. She then insults him and runs away, leaving him far behind
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1916 (Cecil Sharp collection)
KEYWORDS: seduction bargaining trick escape rape
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,MW,SE)
REFERENCES (10 citations):
Laws N24, "Katie Morey"
Bronson 112, "The Baffled Knight" (40 versions) -- but #26-33 (his Appendix A) are "The New-Mown Hay," which may be separate, and #34-#39 (his Appendix B) are "Katie Morey" [Laws N24] which is certainly separate
Eddy 19, "The Baffled Knight" (1 text, 1 tune, listed as Child #112 but clearly this piece) {Bronson's #39}
Flanders-Ancient3, pp. 89-99, "The Baffled Knight" (5 texts, but the "A" text is from "The Charms of Melody" rather than tradition and "B-I" through "B-IV" are "Katie Morey" rather than "The Baffled Knight" [Child 112])
SharpAp 115, "Katie Morey" (2 texts plus a fragment, 3 tunes) {Bronson's #34, #37, #35}
Gardner/Chickering 161, "Kitty O'Noory" (1expurgated text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #36}
Randolph-Legman II, pp. 594-597, "Katey Morey" (5 texts)
FSCatskills 129, "Katey Morey" (1 text, 1 tune)
Sharp/Karpeles-80E 52, "Katie Morey" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #34}
DT (112), KATYMORY*
Roud #674
RECORDINGS:
Betty Garland, "Katy Dory" (on BGarland01)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Baffled Knight" [Child 112]
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Katie Dorie
Miss Kitty O'Horey
The Shrewd Maiden
NOTES: Authorities differ on whether this ballad, in either its polite or bawdy versions, is related to "The Baffled Knight" (Child 112). - EC
As the notes to Bronson show, though, it is sometimes lumped with that ballad (e.g. by Eddy). As always, readers are advised to check entries under Child #112 for completeness. I unhesitatingly agree with Laws in considering them separate. - RBW
File: LN24

Katie's Secret


DESCRIPTION: "Last night I was weeping along, mother...." "Then Willie came down to the gate." "So out in the moonlight we wandered." Willie "called me his darling, his bride." Now she rejoices, gathering sweet roses and wondering "if ever Any were so happy as we."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1913 (Belden)
KEYWORDS: love courting family
FOUND IN: US(MW,So)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Belden, p. 215, "Katie's Secret" (1 text plus reference to 1 more)
Randolph 778, "Katie's Secret" (2 texts, 1 tune)
LPound-ABS, 92, pp. 198-199, "Katie's Secret"; pp. 199-200, "The Hawthorne Tree" (2 texts)
BrownII 174, "Katie's Secret" (1 text)
cf. Gardner/Chickering, p. 480, "Katie's Secret" (source notes only)
Roud #4381
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Weeping Katie
File: R778

Katty Avourneen


See Barney and Katie (File: LO21)

Katy Cline


DESCRIPTION: "Oh, who has not seen (Katy Cline/Kitty Clyde)? She lives at the foot of the hill In a shy little nook by the babbling brook That carries her father's old mill." He wishes he were a fish to be caught on her hook, a bee who could take honey from her, etc.
AUTHOR: probably L.V.H. Crosby (source: broadside LOCSheet sm1853 700580)
EARLIEST DATE: before 1853 (broadside, LOCSheet sm1853 700580)
KEYWORDS: love courting bird floatingverses fishing
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,SE)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
BrownII 198, "Kitty Clyde" (1 text)
Silber-FSWB 149, "Katy Cline" (1 text)
Roud #3768
RECORDINGS:
Cranford & Thompson, "Katy Cline" (Champion 45061/Supertone 2594, c. 1935)
R. C. Hedrich, "Kitty Kline" (AAFS 3763 B2)
Horace Helms, "Katy Kline (Katie Kline)" (on HandMeDown1)
Grandpa Jones, "Kitty Clyde" (King 772, 1949)
Vester Jones, "Katy Cline" (on GraysonCarroll1)
Monroe Brothers, "Katy Cline" (Bluebird B-6960, 1937)
Piper's Gap Ramblers, "Katie Kline" (OKeh, unissued, 1927)
Skyland Scotty, "Sweet Kitty Clyde" (Conqueror 8307, 1934)
Ernest Stoneman, "Katy Cline" (Gennett 3381, 1926/Challenge 151, 1927/Herwin 75528), "Katie Kline" (OKeh 45065, 1926)
Fields Ward & Bogtrotter Band, "Katy Kline" (AAFS 1360 B1)
Alice Williams, "Kitty Kline" (AAFS 1012 A3)
Ganos Williams & Ben Platt, "Kitty Kline" (AAFS 1014 B1)
BROADSIDES:
LOCSheet, sm1853 700580, "Kitty Clyde," T. Hough (New York), 1853; also sm1853 531340, sm1853 540350, sm1853 710030, sm1883 24133, "Kitty Clyde" (tune)
LOCSinging, sb20258b, "Kitty Clyde," H. De Marsan (New York), 1861-1864; also as107290, as107300, "Kitty Clyde"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Free Little Bird" (floating verses)
cf. "Take Me Home, Poor Julia" (floating verses)
NOTES: "Kitty Clyde" should not be confused with "Sweet Kitty of the Clyde."
Here are two "answers" in broadside form (at least one by the same author):
Bodleian, Harding B 18(491), "Willie Gray" or "Answer to Kitty Clyde" ("Oh! who has not seen Willie Gray "), H. De Marsan (New York) , 1864-1878
LOCSinging, as204070, "Willie Gray" or "Answer to Kitty Clyde," H. De Marsan (New York), 1864-1878
Bodleian, Harding B 11(1715), "Minnie Clyde" ("Oh, long I've sung of sweet Kitty Clyde"), H. Disley (London), 1860-1883; also Harding B 11(2431), "Minnie, Kitty Clyde's Sister"
LOCSheet, sm1857 610600, "Minnie Clyde," Oliver Ditson (Boston), 1857; also sm1885 04360, "Minnie Clyde" (tune) (words and music by L.V.H. Crosby)
Broadsides LOCSinging as204070 and Bodleian Harding B 18(491) are duplicates.
Broadsides Harding B 18(491), LOCSinging as204070 and LOCSinging sb20258b : H. De Marsan dating per Studying Nineteenth-Century Popular Song by Paul Charosh in American Music, Winter 1997, Vol 15.4, Table 1, available at FindArticles site. - BS
Silber's version of this song is mysterious: Is it a collection of floating verses (from "Free Little Bird" and other courting songs), or is it a love ballad that has been so chopped down as to lose all meaning? I can't tell. Some of the verses remind me of some vague memories, so I suspect the latter -- but until I can remember details, I can't really say. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: FSWB149

Katy Cruel


See Katie Cruel (The Leeboy's Lassie; I Know Where I'm Going) (File: SBoA050)

Katy Wells


See Kitty Wells (File: MN2166)

KC Moan


See K.C. Moan (File: ADR102)

KC Railroad


See K.C. Moan (File: ADR102)

Keach i the Creel, The [Child 281]


DESCRIPTION: A clerk and a girl wish to keep company, but she cannot escape her parents' home. He plans to to meet her by going down the chimney in a creel The suspicious mother enters the room and is pulled up in the creel, then dropped by the startled rope-puller
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1827 (Kinloch)
KEYWORDS: courting father mother elopement nightvisit humorous
FOUND IN: Britain(England(North),Scotland(Aber,Bord)) Ireland US(MA,NE) Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (12 citations):
Child 281, "The Keach i the Creel" (4 texts, 1 tune) {Bronson's #12}
Bronson 281, "The Keach i the Creel" (38 versions)
GreigDuncan2 317, "The Wee Toon Clerk" (20 texts, 15 tunes) {C=Bronson's #7, E=#38, F=#11, G=#10, H=#9, I=#18, J=#32, M=#2, N=#3, O=#31, P=#33}
BarryEckstormSmyth pp. 336-339, "The Keach i' the Creel" (1 text plus a fragment, 2 tunes) {Bronson's #5, #6}
Flanders-Ancient4, pp. 136-138, "The Keach i' the Creel" (1 fragment, 1 tune)
Ford-Vagabond, pp. 277-280, "The Wee Toun Clerk" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #13}
Stokoe/Reay, pp. 22-23, "The Keach i' the Creel" (1 text, 1 tune) {cf. Bronson's #4}
FSCatskills 133, "The Little Scotch Girl" (1 text, 1 tune)
SHenry H201, pp. 265-266, "The Ride in the Creel" (1 text, 1 tune)
Tunney-StoneFiddle, pp. 92-93, "The Cetch in the Creel" (1 text)
Kinloch-BBook XVII, pp. 61-63, "The Covering Blue" (1 text)
DT 281, KEACHCRL*
Roud #120
RECORDINGS:
Michael Gallagher, "The Keach in the Creel" (on FSB5, FSBBAL2) {Bronson's #36, with the title "Hurroo-Ri-Ah"}
Jamsie McCarthy, "Coochie Coochie Coo Go Way" (on Voice15)
SAME TUNE:
Moody to the Rescue (File: FowM005)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Cunning Clerk
The Wife and the Creel
The Rock in the Same Auld Creel
NOTES: Kinloch's "The Covering Blue" omit the ride in the creel, but is obviously the same song (and Child included it as his "D" text). Thus, though most of the humor of the piece comes when the clerk hauls the auld woman up the chimney, the key point is the nightvisiting theme. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: C281

Kearney's Glen


DESCRIPTION: The singer alludes to poets who have praised other places; he will praise Kearney's Glen. He urges visitors to come in spring, to see the flowers, hear the birds, watch the young people. There is also a holy old altar. The singer asks God's blessing
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1937 (Sam Henry collection)
KEYWORDS: home nonballad
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H715, pp. 166-167, "Kearney's Glen" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #13478
File: HHH715

Keel Row, The


DESCRIPTION: "As I came through Sandgate, through Sandgate, through Sandgate, As I came through Sandgate... I heard a lassie sing, 'Weel may the keel row... That my laddi'es in.'" The singer wishes good luck to the boat and success to handsome Johnnie aboard it
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1810 (Cromek)
KEYWORDS: love ship sailor
FOUND IN: Britain(England(North),Scotland)
REFERENCES (7 citations):
Hogg2 29, "Merry May the Keel Row" (1 text, 1 tune)
Stokoe/Reay, pp. 41-42, "The Keel Row" (1 short text plus a modern rewrite, 1 tune)
GreigDuncan4 771, "The Keel Rowe" (1 text)
DT, KEELROW*
ADDITIONAL: Robert Chambers (Edited by Norah and William Montgomerie), Traditional Scottish Nursery Rhymes (1990 selected from Popular Rhymes) #99, p.62, "Weel May the Keel Row"
Robert Chambers, The Scottish Songs (Edinburgh, 1829), Vol I, pp. 10-11, "Merry May the Keel Rowe"
R. H. Cromek, Remains of Nithsdale and Galloway Song, (London, 1810), pp. 154-155, "Merrie May the Keel Rowe"
Roud #3059
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 25(878), Harding B 11(1978), "The Keel Row" ("As I came through the Cannon-gate"), T. Birt (London), 1828-1829; also Harding B 11(1355), Johnson Ballads 1093, Johnson Ballads fol. 12 [some illegible words], 2806 c.14(42), "The Keel Row"; Firth b.27(10), "Weel May the Keel Row"
LOCSheet, sm1882 03470, "Weel May the Keel Row," Carl Prufer (Boston), 1882; also sm1883 19633, "The Keel Row" (tune)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Song of the Keelman Lass
NOTES: The Bodleian note to most of the broadsides states "Subject: Newcastle (England)."
Hogg2: "It is a well known song and air. The verses given here are copied from Cromek's Remains." The first line is "As I came down the Cano'gate" which agrees substantially with the Bodleian broadsides (though the broadsides vary somewhat from both Hogg2 and the description above in the rest of their lines).
The LOCSheet references refer to Sandgate rather than Cannon-gate.
Like the LOCSheet text, GreigDuncan4 refers to Sandgate rather than Cannon-gate. GreigDuncan4, quoting Bell Robertson, Greig's informant, says "'Keels' are boats; 'Keelmen' lads who work them on the river; 'Sandgate' a road by Tyneside." The first line of broadside Bodleian Harding B 25(1019), "The Keelman's Complaint" ("Come, all ye brave fellows that belong the coal trade"), J. Marshall (Newcastle), 1810-1831, by Jeremiah Knox, explains a bit more.
Chambers: "This seems, from the allusions, to have been the ditty of some one of the Jacobite ladies of Canongate of Edinburgh, regarding either Prince Charles Stuart himself, or one of his adherants."
"Cromek died [1812] shortly after the issue [1810] of Remains of Nithsdale and Galloway Song, which was mostly written by Cunningham, though palmed upon Cromek as recovered antiques." (source: J. Ross, The Book of Scottish Poems: Ancient and Modern, (Edinburgh, Edinburgh Publishing Co, 1878), "Allan Cunningham 1784-1842," p. 738; other sources agree). Hogg's comments make it seem as though his specific text -- and Chambers's -- being from Cromek may be suspect but the song itself is traditional. - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: StoR041

Keemo Kimo


See Kemo Kimo (File: R282)

Keemo-Kimo


See Kemo Kimo (File: R282)

Keep A-Inchin' Along


DESCRIPTION: "Keep a-inchin' along... Jesus will come by 'n by." "'Twas inch by inch I saved my soul." The singer makes plans for heaven, and for the festivities that will attend the arrival. "Ever since my Lord set me free, This old world's been a hell to me."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1960
KEYWORDS: religious freedom nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Lomax-FSNA 239, "Keep A-Inchin' Along" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #11947
File: LoF239

Keep in de Middle Ob de Road


DESCRIPTION: "I hear the angels calling .... the road is rough and it's hard to walk.... Keep in de middle ob de road, den, chil'ren.... Don't you look to de right, Don't you look to de left, But keep in de middle ob de road"
AUTHOR: William S. Hays (1837-1907)
EARLIEST DATE: 1878 (broadside, LOCSheet sm1878 11057)
KEYWORDS: religious worksong nonballad
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Smith/Hatt, p. 32, "Walking in de Middle of de Road" (1 text)
Roud #9413
BROADSIDES:
LOCSheet, sm1878 11057, "Keep in de Middle ob de Road," Geo. D. Newhall & Co. (Cincinnati), 1878 (tune)
NOTES: Smith/Hatt: The fragment is part of the chorus and part of a verse. "'Heard this song sung by darkies at Philadelphia, digging pitch ... from the Brigintine Hamelin.' ... It is hardly a shanty but still a work song heard on ships." - BS
File: SmHa032

Keep It Dark


DESCRIPTION: "I am gwine to tell you some very queer news, But keep it dark, keep it dark." The singer describes various things which happened secretly: A fight between him and his wife, a fight with the Indians, the illumination supplied by the electric light
AUTHOR: Words: Fred Wilson / Music: E. M. Hall ?
EARLIEST DATE: 1942 (Randolph)
KEYWORDS: Indians(Am.) technology
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 504, "Keep It Dark" (1 text)
Roud #7590
NOTES: Randolph says this is printed in "Sam MacFlinn's Great Clown Songster." I suspect the version there must make more sense than Randolph's version. Anyone have a copy? - RBW
File: R504

Keep My Skillet Good and Greasy


DESCRIPTION: Non-ballad, in which the singer displays his interest in food and drink and his lack of interest in work. Verses vary widely; the song is recognized primarily by the line "(Gonna) keep my skillet (good and) greasy all the time."
AUTHOR: (Credited to Uncle Dave Macon on the Henry Whitter recording)
EARLIEST DATE: 1924 (recording, Uncle Dave Macon)
KEYWORDS: nonballad drink food
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Warner 122, "Gonna Keep My Skillet Greasy" (1 text, 1 tune, plus assorted excerpts not collected by the Warners)
Silber-FSWB, p. 157 "Keep My Skillet Good And Greasy" (1 text)
DT, SKILLTGR SKILLTG2*
Roud #7479
RECORDINGS:
Doc Watson & Ralph Rinzler, "Skillet Good and Greasy" (on Ashley02, WatsonAshley01)
John Henry Howard, "Gonna Keep My Skillet Good & Greasy" (Gennett 3124, 1925)
Uncle Dave Macon "I'll Keep My Skillet Good and Greasy" (Vocalion 14848, 1924) (Bluebird B-5873, 1935)
Pete Seeger, "Skillet Good and Greasy" (on PeteSeeger02, PeteSeegerCD01)
Henry Whitter, "Keep My Skillet Good and Greasy" (OKeh 40296, 1925; rec. 1924)
File: Wa122

Keep On a-Walking (Ain't Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Round)


DESCRIPTION: "Ain't gonna let nobody, Lordy, Turn me 'round (x3)... Keep on a-walking, Keep on a-talking, Marchin' on to freedom land." Similarly "Ain't gonna let no jailhouse... Turn me round," etc. Versions may refer to local events
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1962 (source tune recorded by Jimmy Davis in 1936)
KEYWORDS: discrimination political nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Scott-BoA, pp. 374-375, "Keep On a-Walkin'" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 303, "Ain't Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Round" (1 text)
cf. Greenway-AFP, p. 234, "Don't Turn Around" (1 text, probably a union adaption of this song)
RECORDINGS:
Pete Seeger, "Ain't Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me 'Round" (on Selma)
SAME TUNE:
Jimmie Davis "I Ain't Gonna Let Ol' Satan Turn Me Round" (Decca 5235, 1936)
NOTES: This song, an activist hymn from the civil rights and labor movements, was clearly adapted from "I Ain't Gonna Let Ol' Satan Turn Me Round." Jimmie Davis recorded that song; in view of the later adaptation, it's ironic that his second successful run for governor was on a racist platform, pledging resistance to integration. - PJS
File: SBoA374

Keep Your Garden Clean (I)


See In My Garden Grew Plenty of Thyme (File: R090)

Keep Your Garden Clean (II)


See Garners Gay (Rue; The Sprig of Thyme) (File: FSWB163)

Keep Your Hand on the Plow


DESCRIPTION: Various events from scripture intended to encourage the troubled: Paul and Silas in jail, Jesus washing the disciples feet, Mary's chain. Chorus: "Hold on, hold on, Keep your hand on the plow, hold on."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1917 (Cecil Sharp collection)
KEYWORDS: Bible religious prison
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Lomax-FSUSA 111, "Keep Your Hand on the Plow" (1 text, 1 tune, plus the modern parody "United Nations Make a Chain")
SharpAp 209, "Hold On" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 362, "Hold On" (1 text)
DT, HANDPLOW*
Roud #10075
RECORDINGS:
Hall Johnson Negro Choir, "Keep Yo' Hand on the Plow, Hold On" (Victor 36020, 1930)
Pete Seeger with Memphis Slim, Willie Dixon, Big Bill Broonzy, Bill McAdoo, "Hold On" (on PeteSeeger15)
Pete Seeger, "Hold On" (on Selma) (on PeteSeeger44) (on PeteSeeger48) (on PeteSeeger27)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Oh, Mary, Don't You Weep" (floating lyrics)
cf. "Keep Your Hand upon the Chariot"
cf. "Keep Your Eyes on the Prize" (song from the civil rights movement, adapted from "Keep Your Hand on the Plow")
NOTES: Paul and Silas's stay in prison is related in Acts 16:19-40. The footwashing is described in John 13:1-11. Mary's chain is apocryphal, perhaps a free extrapolation on Luke 2:35. - RBW
File: LxU111

Keep Your Hand upon the Chariot


DESCRIPTION: "Oh, you better run (x3), 'for the train done gone, Oh, keep your hand upon the chariot And your eyes upon the prize." "For the preacher's comin' an' he preach so bold, For her preach salvation from out of his soul, Oh, keep your hand upon the chariot"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1925 (Scarborough)
KEYWORDS: religious train nonballad clergy
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Scarborough-NegroFS, p. 256, "Keep Yore Hand upon the Chariot" (1 text)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Keep Your Hand on the Plow"
File: ScNF256A

Keep Your Lamps Trimmed and Burning


DESCRIPTION: "Keep your lamp trimmed and burning (x3) For this world is almost gone" "Brother, don't you get (a-)worried (x3) For this world is almost gone." "Sister, don't stop prayin'..." "Preacher, don't stop preachin'..."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: Late 1928 (recording, Blind Willie Johnson & Angeline Johnson)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Silber-FSWB, p. 361, "Keep Your Lamps Trimmed and Burning" (1 text)
Roud #10433
RECORDINGS:
Blind Willie Johnson & Angeline Johnson, "Keep Your Lamp Trimmed and Burning" (Columbia 14425-D, 1929; rec. 1928; on BWJ01, BWJ02)
Fred McDowell, "Keep Your Lamps Trimmed and Burning" (on LomaxCD1703)
NOTES: A reference to the Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids, Matt. 25:1-13. - RBW
File: FSWB361

Keep Your Saddle Tight


DESCRIPTION: The singer advises the mustang rider, "Don't step into that saddle Till you know that it's good and tight." He also notes, "Of all the crazy critters... A woman is the worst one." He therefore gives the same advice about women....
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1926 (recording, Carl T. Sprague)
KEYWORDS: cowboy horse nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ohrlin-HBT 88, "Keep Your Saddle Tight" (1 text, 1 tune)
File: Ohr088

Keeper of the Eddystone Light, The


DESCRIPTION: The singer's father, the keeper of the Eddystone Light, had three children by a mermaid. Now he is gone (deserted? eaten by cannibals?). The boy meets his mother, who asks of her children; they live the troubled lives of half-humans
AUTHOR: J. London (source: 1866 sheet music)
EARLIEST DATE: 1866 (sheet music; said to have been performed by Arthur Lloyd)
KEYWORDS: humorous father mother mermaid/man animal reunion
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (3 citations):
PBB 120, "The Keeper of the Eddystone Light" (1 text)
Silber-FSWB, p. 27, "Eddystone Light" (1 text)
DT, EDDYSTON* EDDYNORE* (ASTERLT*)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Caviar Comes from Virgin Sturgeon" (theme)
NOTES: The Eddystone Light is famous for representing a revolutionary design. It was the first lighthouse designed as a smooth cylinder -- important because it would help the lighthouse survive heavy seas and storms. Most later lighthouses, of course, have followed this design.
The song seems to have had a curious history. The earliest version I know apart from the sheet music is in a Harvard songbook from 1889, and it closely resembles "The Man at the Nore" as learned by Cyril Tawney from fellow sailors (the chorus runs "A jolly story lightly told, How the winds they blew and the waves they rolled, Down at the bottom of the deep blue sea You'll find the proof of my veracity." This fits the "Man at the Nore" tune but cannot be sung to the "Yo Ho Ho" melody. The verses also match "The Man at the Nore").
[Credit to Malcolm Douglas and John Patrick for digging up the sheet music and Harvard songster.]
But "The Man at the Nore" is now very rare, despite an excellent tune. Most people know the "Yo ho ho!" version, perhaps because it was popularized by Burl Ives. This version is among the most-parodied songs of all time. I know of "The Keeper of the London Zoo," "The Keeper of the Asteroid Light," and I've heard hints of others.
Is it possible that one of these is a deliberate rewrite of the other? Collections in tradition are few (apart from Tawney's), making it a bit unlikely that such drastic changes came about due simply to oral transmission.
Richard Dyer-Bennet has been credited with creating the final verse of the common version ("The phosphorus flashed in her seaweed hair..." -- bad science, incidentally, since there is almost no free phosphorus in the ocean; it's a necessary chemical for life, but not very common; every atom finds a home in some creature's DNA. Many ocean creatures are, of course, phosphorescent -- but not due to phosphorus). - RBW
File: PBB120

Keeper of the Game, The


See Captain Wedderburn's Courtship [Child 46] (File: C046)

Keeper Would A-Hunting Go, The


See The Keeper (File: ShH79)

Keeper, The


DESCRIPTION: Keeper goes hunting for a doe. In some versions he chases several unsuccessfully.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1916
KEYWORDS: hunting animal dialog
FOUND IN: Britain(England)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Sharp-100E 79, "The Keeper" (1 text, 1 tune)
PSeeger-AFB, p. 59, "The Keeper" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 338, "The Keeper" (1 text)
DT, KEEPERGO*
ADDITIONAL: Roy Palmer, _The Folklore of Warwickshire_, Rowman and Littlefield, 1976, p.147, "(The Keeper)" (1 text)
Roud #1519
RECORDINGS:
Pete Seeger, "The Keeper and the Doe" (on PeteSeeger09, PeteSeegerCD02) (on PeteSeeger18)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "En Jaeger Gik At Jage (A Hunter Went Out Hunting)" (general feeling)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Keeper Would A-Hunting Go
NOTES: Most of the song consists of back-and-forth singing of the chorus between two singers. B.J. Orton thinks there is a sexual or magical subtext to this song. I doubt it, myself. -PJS
I have to disagree with Paul; at least one text refers to the Keeper kissing a doe, and another doe "[running] away in a young man's heart." There is surely some sort of hidden meaning. The real question is, how far did Sharp bowdlerize what he found? Based on Palmer, the original was basically clean, but highly suggestive. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: ShH79

Keepers and Poachers


DESCRIPTION: Singer and others are poaching when 12 keepers are seen. They decide to fight; in the course of battle, young William Taylor is taken. In court, he's told his life will be spared if he names his companions; he refuses, vowing to "die for them all."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (collected by Cecil Sharp)
KEYWORDS: fight bargaining crime execution poaching punishment trial hunting bird
FOUND IN: Britain(England(Lond,South))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Kennedy 254, "Keepers and Poachers" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #851
RECORDINGS:
George Maynard, "William Taylor" (on Maynard1, Voice18)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Poacher's Fate" [Laws L14] (subject)
cf. "The Bold Poachers" (plot)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Bold William Taylor
NOTES: This should not be confused with the "Bold William Taylor" whose girlfriend dresses as a man and shoots him (in "William Taylor" [Laws N11]). - PJS
File: K254

Keepit sheep, keepit swine


See Blawin' Willie Buck's Horn (File: GrD81640)

Kelley's Irish Brigade


DESCRIPTION: "Come all you that hold communion With southern Confederates bold." The singer tells how Union soldiers came to Missouri, but were routed by Kelley's brigade. He recalls their troubles in Ireland, and hopes for states rights
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1912 (Belden)
KEYWORDS: Civilwar political
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Belden, pp. 355-356, "Kelley's Irish Brigade" (1 text)
DT, KELLBRIG (Belden's text, mistakenly said to come from Randolph)
Roud #7768
NOTES: This is a really, really strange piece. Belden notes that there are Union broadsides of Kelley's Irish Brigade. And the Union *did* have an Irish Brigade commanded by Col. Patrick Kelly; this unit, organized by General Meagher, was in fact, one of the most famous units in the Army of the Potomac. (For some background on this unit, see the notes to "By the Hush.")
If the spelling "Kelley" be accepted, there was also a union general Benjamin Franklin Kelley, who commanded troops (though seemingly not an Irish Brigade) in West Virginia.
But why adapt it to the Confederacy (which is what Belden suggests happened, and I can see no grounds for argument)? And why to Missouri?
The only general officer in the Confederacy named Kelly was John Herbert Kelly (1840-1864), and he *did* serve in Missouri in 1861 -- but he was only a captain at the time. By the time he achieved a brigadier's star in late 1863, he was in Braxton Bragg's army, and he commanded cavalry, not infantry, so he couldn't have led an Irish brigade. The song simply doesn't make sense. - RBW
File: Beld355B

Kelligrews Soiree, The


DESCRIPTION: "You may talk of... anything you choose, But it couldn't hold a snuff-box to the spree at Kelligrews." A thoroughly exaggerated account: "There was birch rine, tar twine, cherry wine, and turpentine," and so forth, ad nauseum.
AUTHOR: John Burke
EARLIEST DATE: 1938
KEYWORDS: humorous nonballad party dancing
FOUND IN: Canada(Newf)
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Fowke/Johnston, pp. 110-112, "The Kelligrews Soiree" (1 text, 1 tune)
Fowke/MacMillan 35, "The Kelligrews Soiree" (1 text, 1 tune)
Blondahl, pp. 25-26, "The Kelligrews Soiree" (1 text, 1 tune)
Doyle2, pp. 16-17, "The Kelligrew's Soiree" (1 text, 1 tune)
Doyle3, pp. 36-37, "The Kelligrew's Soiree" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, KSOIREE
Roud #4430
RECORDINGS:
Omar Blondahl, "The Kelligrews Soiree" (on NFOBlondahl01)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Irish Jubilee"
cf. "Finnegan's Wake" [Laws Q17]
SAME TUNE:
The Teapots at the Fire (File: Blon027)
NOTES: Kelligrews is a small village southwest of St. John's, Newfoundland. - RBW
Is this a cleaned-up version of "The Ball at Kerrimuir"? -PJS
Based on form, it is not. (It's not all that cleaned up, either; while there are no explicit sexual references, there are all sorts of hints, plus references to drunkenness, sodden clergy, and the like.) Fowke and Johnston believe it to be based on "The Irish Jubilee," and the stanzaic form implies they are right. Of course, there are all sorts of songs on the theme of the Ultimate Uproarious Party. - RBW
While Doyle3 reports the song was sung in New York in 1938, GEST Songs of Newfoundland and Labrador site shows that the author died in 1930. - BS
File: FJ110

Kellswater


See The Lover's Curse (Kellswater) (File: HHH442)

Kelly and the Ghost


See Maurice Kelly (File: GrMa078)

Kelly Gang Were Strong, The


DESCRIPTION: "Oh, the Kelly gang were strong, And bent on doing wrong, In spite of Captain Standish and his men... And when they cross the border, They'll find bobbies all in order To beat them at the same old game."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1982
KEYWORDS: outlaw Australia police
FOUND IN: Australia
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Meredith/Covell/Brown, p. 28, "The Kelly Gang Were Strong" (1 text, 1 tune)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Ye Sons of Australia" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Song (Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly)" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Was Their Captain" (subject)
cf. "Ballad of the Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Stringybark Creek" (subject)
cf. "My Name is Edward Kelly" (subject)
NOTES: This uses a tune reportedly similar to the music hall piece, "Strolling Down the Old Kent Road." - RBW
File: MCH028

Kelly Gang, The


DESCRIPTION: "Come, all young men with feeling! With regret I must unfold, I have a tale to tell of men Whose hearts are stout and bold." The song praises the Kelly gang for their stand against odds of fifty to one. Kate Kelly is praised for warning the gang
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1968
KEYWORDS: outlaw Australia
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1855 - Birth of Ned Kelly
1880 - Execution of Kelly. His last words are reported to have been "Such is life."
FOUND IN: Australia
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Meredith/Anderson, pp. 248-249, "The Kelly Gang" (1 text, 1 tune)
RECORDINGS:
A. L. Lloyd, "The Kelly Gang" (on Lloyd2, Lloyd4)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Ye Sons of Australia" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Song (Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly)" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Was Their Captain" (subject)
cf. "My Name is Edward Kelly" (subject)
cf. "Ballad of the Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Stringybark Creek" (subject)
cf. "The Kelly Gang Were Strong" (subject)
File: MA248

Kelly of Killann


See Kelly, the Boy from Killane (File: PGa033)

Kelly Song (Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly)


DESCRIPTION: Fragment of a ballad about the Kelly gang: "Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly, Farewell Hart and Steve Byrne too, With the poor your memory liveth; Those who blame you are but few."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1953
KEYWORDS: outlaw Australia
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1855 - Birth of Ned Kelly
1880 - Execution of Kelly. His last words are reported to have been "Such is life."
FOUND IN: Australia
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Meredith/Anderson, p. 28, "Kelly Song" (1 text, 1 tune)
Paterson/Fahey/Seal, pp. 93-94, "(Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly" (1 text, apparently collected as a sort of appendix to "My Name is Edward Kelly")
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Ye Sons of Australia" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Was Their Captain" (subject)
cf. "My Name is Edward Kelly" (subject)
cf. "Ballad of the Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Stringybark Creek" (subject)
cf. "The Kelly Gang Were Strong" (subject)
NOTES: Edward "Ned" Kelly and his gang are perhaps the most famous of all Australian bushrangers. - RBW
File: MA028

Kelly the Pirate (I) [Laws K31]


DESCRIPTION: (Captain Cooper's ship Stag) meets Kelly's pirate ship. Kelly reminds the pirates that defeat means hanging, but this is not enough. The British ship sinks the pirate
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1825 (broadsides, Bodleian Harding B 28(162), Harding B 25(1022))
KEYWORDS: pirate fight death
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar,Newf,Ont) Britain(England(South))
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Laws K31, "Kelly the Pirate I"
Greenleaf/Mansfield 43, "Kelly the Pirate" (1 text)
Mackenzie 81A, "Kelly the Pirate" (1 text)
Creighton-Maritime, p. 151, "Kelly the Pirate" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT 565, KELLPIR
Roud #529
RECORDINGS:
O. J. Abbott, "Kelly the Pirate" (on Abbott1)
David Slaunwhite, "Kelly the Pirate" (on MRHCreighton)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 28(162), "Kelly the Pirate," W. Armstrong (Liverpool), 1820-1824; also Harding B 25(1022), "Kelly the Pirate" ("Come listen awhile and give ear to my song"), W. Armstrong (Liverpool) , 1820-1824
NOTES: Several pirates named Kelly/Kelley are known from the late seventeenth century, notably James Kelley, an associate of Captain Kidd hanged in 1701. But their circumstances do not seem to match this song.
There is also a significant problem in the form of the "Kelly the Pirate" version sung by David Slaunwhite and printed in Creighton-Maritime. It is an open question whether it is the same as Laws K31.
Bennett Schwartz writes,"Creighton-Maritime: 'Novia Scotia place names have been substituted for those in the old English song.... it has undergone many changes in the course of oral transmission.' It is barely recognizable as the same ballad as Greenleaf/Mansfield 43."
But Paul Stamler writes independently, "The plot of this song [the Slaunwhite version] is extremely confused, and the point of view seems to shift in the last verse, but it's clear enough that I'm pretty sure it isn't one of the two 'Kelly the Pirate' songs listed elsewhere in the Index."
Laws does not seem to have known of Slaunwhite's recording. Roud lumps them. It may well be that Slaunwhite's version is composite, mixing "Kelly the Pirate (I)" with something else. I'm sticking it here, for now, since it seems to be a one-shot. That could easily change if more versions show up. - RBW
File: LK31

Kelly the Pirate (II) [Laws K32]


DESCRIPTION: A British warship is commanded to guard merchant vessels. The warship meets Bold Kelly, who refuses to surrender. The pirate ship is taken and Kelly sent to prison
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan1)
KEYWORDS: pirate sea battle prison
FOUND IN: US(MA) Canada(Mar,Newf) Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Laws K32, "Kelly the Pirate II"
GreigDuncan1 46, "Kelly the Pirate" (1 text)
Peacock, pp. 846-847, "Kelly the Pirate" (1 text, 1 tune)
Mackenzie 81B, 81C, "Kelly the Pirate" (2 texts, 1 tune)
DT 566, KELPIR2 KELPIR3
Roud #1625
NOTES: Several pirates named Kelly/Kelley are known from the late seventeenth century, notably James Kelley, an associate of Captain Kidd hanged in 1701. But their circumstances do not seem to match this song. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: LK32

Kelly Was Their Captain


DESCRIPTION: The singer tells of the "famous outlaw band that roamed this country round. Ned Kelly was their captain...." Ordered arrested by the governor of Victoria, Kelly took to the bush. After long eluding the police, he was betrayed by Aaron Sherritt and taken
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1968
KEYWORDS: outlaw Australia betrayal
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1855 - Birth of Ned Kelly
1880 - Execution of Kelly. His last words are reported to have been "Such is life."
FOUND IN: Australia
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Meredith/Anderson, pp. 203-204, "Kelly Was Their Captain" (1 text)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Ye Sons of Australia" (subject)
cf. "Kelly Song (Farewell Dan and Edward Kelly)" (subject)
cf. "My Name is Edward Kelly" (subject)
cf. "Ballad of the Kelly Gang" (subject)
cf. "Stringybark Creek" (subject)
cf. "The Kelly Gang Were Strong" (subject)
NOTES: Edward "Ned" Kelly and his gang are perhaps the most famous of all Australian bushrangers. - RBW
File: MA203

Kelly, the Boy from Killane


DESCRIPTION: "What's the news? What's the news? O my bold Shelmalier...." The singer is told how the rebels of Wexford, led by Kelly and others, at first triumphed over the British -- but at last were defeated and Wexford "stript naked, hung high on a cross."
AUTHOR: Words: P. J. McCall
EARLIEST DATE: 1959 (IRClancyMakem03)
KEYWORDS: rebellion Ireland death
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
June 5, 1798 - Battle of New Ross, in which a large force of United Irishmen overwhelm General Johnson's defenders but abandon the burning town, converting victory to defeat
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (3 citations):
PGalvin, pp. 33-34, "Kelly, the Boy from Killane" (1 text, 1 tune)
Moylan 72, "Kelly of Killann" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, KELLYKIL*
Roud #16908
RECORDINGS:
The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem, "Kelly the Boy from Killane" (on IRClancyMakem03)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Father Murphy (I)" (subject of Father Murphy) and references there
cf. "Bagenal Harvey's Farewell" (subject of Bagenal Harvey) and references there
NOTES: This is one of those songs that sadly ignores the inept handling of the Wexford rebel army.
By early June, with Enniscorthy and Wexford in Rebel hands (the former captured by Father John Murphy's forces on May 28, the latter abandoned by loyalists on May 30 after the Battle of Three Rocks, for which see "Sweet County Wexford"), the rebels were moving generally from Wexford north toward County Wicklow; could they capture Arklow and Wicklow in that county, the road to Dublin would be wide open (hence the line that they marched "from the south toward the north").
Other rebel forces, though, were trying to expand from Wexford into Kilkenny to the west and Waterford to the southwest.
The thing stopping them was the garrison of Major General Henry Johnson at New Ross. The Irish commander, Bagenal Harvey -- who was Protestant despite being a United Irishman -- determined to clear out the garrison.
Unfortunately, Harvey -- called "Brave Harvey" in the song -- had no military training, and it showed. He ordered an ill-coordinated attach, exercised no control over the battle, made no real use of his captured artillery, and was unable to rally his troops when they fled.
John Kelly's part in the battle was brief. Harvey ordered him and his 800 men from Bantry to clear some loyalist outposts. They instead went straight for the Three Bullet Gate to New Ross. (The gate came to be known as "The Grim Gap of Death.") They broke in, but Kelly was wounded in the thigh and disabled. His troops continued on against orders, ran into the defenders and their artillery, were routed -- and fled the town, dragging undefeated soldiers with them. The notes on the Clancy Brothers "Irish Songs of Rebellion" record say Kelly was executed after the battle, though of course they don't cite a source.
Robert Kee, in The Most Distressful Country (being Volume I of The Green Flag), p. 118, doesn't mention Kelly's death either. According to him, "a young United Irish colonel, who led the first rebel assault, was John Kelly, a blacksmith from Killan (sic.). He was to become the hero of a popular ballad... when these bloody events acquired the rather fusty veneer appropriate to the drawing-room heroics of purely political warfare."
Robert Gogan, 130 Great Irish Ballads (third edition, Music Ireland, 2004), p. 114, says that Kelly was recovering from his wounds in Wexford when the British caught him and hanged him on Wexford bridge. No source for that statement either.
Despite Kelly's mismanaged thrust, the United Irish might still have won the battle (indeed, they almost did), but when their last push petered out, there was no reserve, which cost them the battle; the flight of Kelly's forces thus contributed greatly to the defeat.
As the song implies, wounded and defeated United men, if found, were killed on the field; this was sadly not unusual for the period. Harvey himself, who apparently had not wanted his command, gave it up and headed back into Wexford. He was eventually caught and executed.
Let no one say that the atrocities were one-sided, however. The United men burned much of New Ross deliberately. What is more, while the battle was shaping up, a force of United guards burned alive an estimated 90 loyalists, including women and children, in Scullabogue. This was in response to an unsubstantiated (and false) report of loyalist atrocities at New Ross. (For more information on this, see the notes to "Father Murphy (II) (The Wexford Men of '98).")
East and West Shelmalier were holdings in County Wexford. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: PGa033

Kelly's Lamentation (The Deserter)


DESCRIPTION: Kelly quarrels with his parents and leaves home. On his way to a hiring fair, he meets a sergeant, who buys his drinks and tells him he has enlisted. His parents cannot buy his freedom. Kelly deserts and returns home, but soon takes sick and dies
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1906 (JIFSS)
KEYWORDS: home family soldier money drink desertion escape disease death
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H223, pp. 83-84, "The Deserter" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #2405
File: HHH223

Kellyburn Braes


See The Farmer's Curst Wife [Child 278] (File: C278)

Kelvin's Purling Stream


DESCRIPTION: "The summer time being in tis prime, The weather calm and clear, I left that town called Portadown." The singer travels to Glasgow, telling Kelvin's stream of his troubles. He promises never to "forget the girl I love Who lives near Lurgan Braes."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1930 (Ord)
KEYWORDS: home travel love separation river
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ord, pp. 345-346, "Kelvin's Purling Stream" (1 text)
Roud #3947
File: Ord345

Kemo Kimo


DESCRIPTION: Non-ballad. Some texts have brief stories (e.g. about "darkies" ten feet tall and too big for their beds), but the basic characteristic is the nonsense refrain pattern: sing song kitty kitchie kimeo / kemo kimo, Delaware, me hi me ho and in comes Sally...
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1854 (Christy & Wood, _New Song Book_)
KEYWORDS: nonballad nonsense animal
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,MW,NE,SE,So) Canada(Mar)
REFERENCES (19 citations):
Randolph 282, "There Was an Old Frog" (2 texts plus an excerpt and a fragment, 2 tunes)
Randolph/Cohen, pp. 239-241, "There Was an Old Frog" (1 text, 1 tune -- Randolph's 282A)
Belden, pp. 494-499, "The Frog's Courtship" (7 texts in 3 groups, 2 tunes; several of the texts are short, and IB at least appears to be "Kemo Kimo")
BrownIII 120, "The Frog's Courtship" (3 texts in the appendix to this song)
Scarborough-SongCatcher, pp. 244-248, "The Frog He Went A-Courting" (3 texts; the third, with local title "The Gentleman Frog" and tune on pp. 420-421, is probably this piece the first two texts are "Frog Went A-Courting")
Scarborough-NegroFS, pp. 156-157, "Cree-Mo-Cri-Mo-Dorro-Wah" (1 text plus a fragent, 1 tune); also p. 201 (no title) (1 fragment); also p. 285, "Keemo Kimo" (1 text, the Christy/Wood version)
SharpAp 221, "The Frog in the Well" (4 texts, 4 tunes); 242, "The Opossum" (1 text, 1 tune)
MHenry-Appalachians, p. 1, "Farm Life Song" (1 text); p. 230, "The Frog and the Mouse" (1 fragment, probably this)
Ritchie-Southern, p. 67, "Bandyrowe" (1 text, 1 tune)
Brewster 78, "Keemo-Kimo" (3 fragments)
Eddy 45, "The Opossum" (2 fragments, 2 tunes)
Linscott, pp. 204-206, "Frog in the Well" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-Maritime, pp. 132-133, "Frog in the Well"; p. 135, "Get to Bed" (2 texts, 2 tunes)
Creighton-SNewBrunswick 84, "Kitty Alone and I" (1 text, 1 tune)
Warner 68, "The Bull Frog" (1 text, 1 tune)
Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #69, pp. 77-79, "(There was a frog liv'd in a well)" (a complex composite with a short version of "Frog Went A-Courting" plus enough auxiliary verses to make an almost complete "Kemo Kimo" text)
Montgomerie-ScottishNR 193, "(There dwelt a puddy in a well)" (1 text, very long, containing a full "Frog Went A-Courting" version plus sundry "Kemo Kimo" type verses)
Gilbert, p. 42, "Polly Won't You Try Me O" (1 fragmentary text)
DT, FRGCORT3* KEMOKIMO PUDDYWL2
Roud #16
RECORDINGS:
Lawrence Older, "Frog in the Spring" (on LOlder01)
Prairie Ramblers, "Beaver Creek" (c. 1935; on CrowTold02)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Carrion Crow/A Kangaroo Sat on an Oak"
cf. "Raccoon" (floating lyrics)
cf. "Frog Went A-Courting" (floating lyrics, theme)
cf. "One Fine Day" (floating lyrics)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Sing Song Kitty
NOTES: There is a songsheeet on the American Memory website which credits authorship to Charles White and states that the song was regularly sung by Dan Emmett; unfortunately, it is undated. - PJS
Several of these texts, such as Lawrence Older's "Frog in the Spring," have lyrics reminiscent of "Frog Went A-Courting," raising the possibility that this is a sort of a by-blow of that song, and some including Roud lump them.
The notes in Brown, in fact, state that this piece is a minstrel adaption created by Sam Cowell some time around 1850. (On this topic, see the notes to "Billy Barlow (II)"). Cohen accepts this attribution, though Christy and Wood claim that theirs is "the only authentic version." It mentions the frog only briefly in the third stanza, and in a way not at all reminiscent of "Frog Went A-Courting."
These sundry minstrel songs, however, have little plot and are really just thematic verses about animals. It appears that the two combined by mixture, rather than separated as a result of pieces breaking off. As a result, I classify them separately from "Frog...," with the understanding that this is a classification of the extremes. One should check the cross-references for related songs.
Lena Bourne Fish's version, collected by the Warners in 1941, has the extraordinary property of using only three notes of the major scale: Do re mi.
Roud separates the Ritchie "Bandyrowe" texts into its own number (#7402). The difference, though, is only one of name (apart from the two verses Jean Ritchie made up); her version is a fairly pure example of the "Kitty Alone" type, and I classify it here accordingly. - RBW
File: R282

Kemp Owyne [Child 34]


DESCRIPTION: When her mother dies, Isabel's father marries a vile woman who abuses and enchants her till Kemp Owyne shall rescue her. Owyne comes and sees a hideous beast. Despite her appearance, despite threats, he kisses her three times and restores her
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1802 (Scott)
KEYWORDS: shape-changing magic separation love rescue stepmother
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (10 citations):
Child 34, "Kemp Owyne" (3 texts)
Bronson 34, "Kemp Owyne" (1 version)
Leach, pp. 126-128, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
OBB 13, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
Friedman, p. 21, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
PBB 26, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
Gummere, pp. 280-282+359, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
DBuchan 26, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
TBB 33, "Kemp Owyne" (1 text)
DT 34, KEMPOWYN KEMPOWN2*
Roud #3912
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Laidley Worm of Spindleston Heughs"
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Kempion
NOTES: "Kemp Owyne" means "Owen the Champion"; he appears in some of the medieval grail romances. Child claims the plot of this is from an Icelandic saga, but for once his citations are sufficiently vague that I am not certain what he is referring to. The most famous Owen is surely the hero of the Welsh romance of Owain ("The Lady/Countess of the Fountain"), found in (although not properly part of) the Mabinogion; that tale is believed to be from the thirteenth century (Lacy, p. 412); he would appear as "Yvain" in Chretien's romance of the same name.
The story also eventually produced an English romance version, "Ywain and Gawain." This is evidently a modified translation of Chretien's version of the story, reducing the total length to about 60% of Chretien's original (Mills, p. xi).
It is interesting to see him here restoring a woman, since in "Owain" the hero himself develops amnesia and has to be restored by magic. Also, the Owyne of "Owain" has pity on a dangerous beast -- in this case, a lion, and not a transformed animal, but there is a certain similarity.
Given the relative obscurity of the English version (only one manuscript; Mills, p. xii), I wonder if the author of this ballad didn't hear the story of Owein in some form, and remember the name and a few details but not the general plot, and filled it out from the Scandinavian version Child points out.
For a good deal more on magical transformation and restoration by love, sex, or kissing, see the notes to "The Marriage of Sir Gawain" [Child 31].
Child prints "The Laidley Worm of Spindleston Heughs" as an appendix to this ballad, and later added a second version in his addenda. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C034

Kempy Kay [Child 33]


DESCRIPTION: A hideous maiden is courted by a deformed suitor. The grotesqueness of each is described in Rabelaisian detail. They exchange disgusting gifts, and the match is made.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1827 (Kinloch)
KEYWORDS: courting humorous marriage gift
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber,Bord))
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Child 33, "Kempy Kay" (7 texts)
Bronson 33, "Kempy Kay" (2 versions)
Kinloch-BBook XI, pp. 40-44, "Kempy Kaye" (1 text)
GreigDuncan7 1505, "Kempy Kay" (2 texts plus a single verse on p. 541)
DBuchan 46, "Kempy Kay" (1 text)
DT 33, KEMPYKAY
Roud #32
ALTERNATE TITLES:
King Knapperty
Knip Knap
The Slattern
File: C033

Kenneth Cameron


DESCRIPTION: Reading and McRae are breaking a logjam when their boat washes away and they are left on the logs. Kenneth Cameron volunteers to go to their assistance. After strenuous efforts, all drown
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1926 (Rickaby)
KEYWORDS: logger death drowning ship river
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Rickaby 34-III, (third of three "Fragments of Shanty Songs") (1 fragment)
ST Rick131 (Partial)
File: Rick131

Kenny Madland


DESCRIPTION: "The great master has called From heaven above To take Kenny Madland, A cowboy we all loved." The poet recalls Madland's "fun-loving ways and quick little smiles," expects him to ride well in Heaven, and regards his death as "Heaven's own gain"
AUTHOR: Lois Green
EARLIEST DATE: 1950 ("Buckboard" magazine)
KEYWORDS: death cowboy recitation
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1950 - Death of Kenny Madland when his horse fell on him
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ohrlin-HBT 37, "Kenny Madland" (1 text)
File: Ohr037

Kenny Wagner [Laws E7]


DESCRIPTION: Kenny Wagner kills a sheriff in Mississippi and heads for Tennessee, where he is captured. He escapes, but is again taken (this time by a female sheriff). He is imprisoned for life, and is offered as an example to potential lawbreakers
AUTHOR: Andrew Jenkins
EARLIEST DATE: 1926 (recording, "Al Craver")
KEYWORDS: murder escape prison punishment
FOUND IN: US(MW,SE,So)
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Laws E7, "Kenny Wagner"
Hudson 105, pp. 243-244, "Kenny Wagner" (1 text)
DT 778, KENWAGNR
Roud #978
RECORDINGS:
Al Craver [pseud. for Vernon Dalhart], "Kinnie Wagner" (Columbia 15065-D, 1926)
Warde Ford, "Texas Canyon" (AFS 4206 A3, 1938; tr. in AMMEM/Cowell)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Kenny Wagner's Surrender" [Laws E8] (plot)
NOTES: Evidently [this song] entered oral tradition quickly -- only a few years after Jenkins's recording, the name of the song has changed and so has the locale. The female sheriff, however, remains constant. - PJS
Hudson, who is the primary source for printed texts of both Kenny Wagner ballads, gives some details about his career but no dates. The notes in Brown (presumably from Hudson) calls Wagner simply a bad man of the 1920s. He notes that both songs were in circulation c. 1928; Wagner was apparently still alive at the time Hudson published in 1936.
Hudson was not aware that Andrew Jenkins composed these ballads; that information comes from D. K. Wilgus. - RBW
File: LE07

Kenny Wagner's Surrender [Laws E8]


DESCRIPTION: Kenny Wagner has killed three men, including a Mississippi sheriff. Captured in Tennessee, he escapes but is retaken and sentenced to life
AUTHOR: Andrew Jenkins
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (recordings, Vernon Dalhart, Ernest Stoneman)
KEYWORDS: murder escape prison punishment
FOUND IN: US(SE,So)
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Laws E8, "Kenny Wagner's Surrender"
BrownII 245, "Kenny Wagner's Surrender" (1 text)
Hudson 106, pp. 245-246, "Kenny Wagner's Surrender" (1 text)
Burt, p. 216-217, "(Kenny Wagner's Surrender)" (1 text)
DT 779, KENWAGSR
Roud #979
RECORDINGS:
Vernon Dalhart, "Kennie Wagner's Surrender" (Columbia 15098-D [as Al Craver] [as "Kinnie Wagner's Surrender"], 1926) (Edison 52020, 1927)
Ernest V. Stoneman, "Kenny Wagner's Surrender" (matrix # GEX 495-A recorded 1927 and issued 1927-1928 as: Herwin 75535, Gennett 6044 [as by Ernest V. Stoneman and his Graysen County Boys], Champion 1522 [as by Uncle Jim Seany], Silvertone 5004/Silvertone 25004 [as by Uncle Ben Hawkins])
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Kenny Wagner" [Laws E7] (plot)
NOTES: For the minimal background Hudson supplies for this song, see the notes to "Kenny Wagner" [Laws E7]. This is evidently a semi-sequel to "Kenny Wagner"; it refers to that song and adds more details but is told in the first person. - RBW
File: LE08

Kentucky Bootlegger


See Moonshine (File: Wa131)

Kentucky Moonshiner


See Moonshiner (File: San142)

Kerry Dance


DESCRIPTION: "Oh! the days of the Kerry dancing, oh! the ring of the piper's tune." The singer recalls the days of his youth, the summer night dances in the glen, old friends and Peggy, left behind. If he returns and "she has not resigned me" he'll stay with Peggy.
AUTHOR: Words: James Lyman Molloy (1837-1909)
EARLIEST DATE: 1879 (copyright); printed 1880 (broadside, LOCSheet sm1880 07527)
KEYWORDS: courting separation dancing music lyric nonballad
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (2 citations):
O'Conor, p. 46, "Kerry Dance" (1 text)
ADDITIONAL: Kathleen Hoagland, editor, One Thousand Years of Irish Poetry (New York, 1947), pp. 532-533, "The Kerry Dance" (1 text)
BROADSIDES:
LOCSheet, sm1880 07527, "Kerry Dance", Oliver Ditson (Boston), 1880; also sm1880 19158, sm1881 09435, sm1882 09656, sm1882 22365, sm1883 19631,s m1884 10781, sm1885 23600, "[The] Kerry Dance" (tune)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Dancing in Glenroan (Rinnceoiri Ghleann Ruain)" (theme)
NOTES: Copyright date 1879 (source: Santa Cruz Public Libraries site sheet music collection); source for Molloy's birth date and date of death: Public Domain Music site [same dates found in Hoagland - RBW]). - BS
According to [no author listed], The Library of Irish Music, Amsco, 1998, the music for this is "based on 'The Cuckoo' by Margaret Casson." - RBW
File: OCon046

Kerry Eagle


DESCRIPTION: O'Connell is the Kerry Eagle. His career is reviewed: elected MP for Clare, united Ireland for Emancipation, pursued Repeal until his death, killed D'Esterre, and died far from home. His heart remains in Rome but his body is buried in Glasnevin.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1847 (Zimmermann)
KEYWORDS: death Ireland memorial patriotic political
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Zimmermann 55, "Kerry Eagle" (1 text)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Firth b.25(429), "The Kerry Eagle," E.M.A. Hodges (London), 1846-1854; also 2806 b.10(30), 2806 b.10(21), Harding B 40(3), Harding B 11(1986), 2806 c.15(28)[barely legible], Firth c.26(288), Harding B 19(63), Firth b.27(279)[last two lines missing], Harding B 11(1984), Harding B 11(1985), Firth b.27(278)[some words illegible], Harding B 26(308)[some words illegible], "[The] Kerry Eagle"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Erin's Green Linnet" (subject: O'Connell's death)
cf. "Erin's King (Daniel Is No More)" (subject: O'Connell's death)
cf. "Daniel O'Connell (I)" (subject: Daniel O'Connell) and references there
NOTES: O'Connell (1775-1847) was born in County Kerry. O'Connell was elected MP from County Clare in 1828 (cf. "The Shan Van Voght" (1828)) (- BS)."1829 saw Catholic 'emancipation,' allowing them every political right open to Protestants of equivalent position" (- RBW). O'Connell led the movement of 1840-1843 to repeal the act that joined Ireland and Great Britain as the United Kingdom (cf. "Glorious Repeal Meeting Held at Tara Hill" and "The Meeting of Tara"). Zimmermann: "D'Esterre, an Alderman of the Dublin Corporation, challenged O'Connell to a duel, and was killed, 1st February, 1815" (p. 235); "O'Connell died at Genoa, on his way to Rome, 15th May, 1847." (p. 233) "In accordance with his wish his heart was brought to Rome and his body to Ireland. His funeral was of enormous dimensions, and since his death a splendid statue has been erected to his memory in Dublin and a round tower placed over his remains in Glasnevin" (source: "Daniel O'Connell" by E.A. D'Alton in The Catholic Encyclopedia on the New Advent site. - BS
For additional notes on O'Connell's last months, see the notes to "Erin's King (Daniel Is No More)." - RBW
File: Zimm055

Kerry Eviction, The


DESCRIPTION: Old McMahon in Kerry can't pay the rent and the agent, with soldiers and police, comes to evict him. To no avail, he asks that the children not be turned out in the snow and that he be given a week or two to pay. McMahon, evicted, dies in the snow.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1880's? (Zimmermann)
KEYWORDS: hardheartedness greed poverty death farming storm Ireland hardtimes children police soldier
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Zimmermann 87, "A New Song Entitled the Kerry Eviction" (1 text)
NOTES: This bit of brutality is a little extreme, in that evictions rarely happened in such unfortunate circumstances. But "rarely" is not the same as "never"; for about a century, English landlords had near-complete control over their Irish tenants, and did evict them for little reason or none. It was not until the nineteenth century that the English started supplying tenants' rights -- and the Land League (for which see "The Bold Tenant Farmer") helped support them. - RBW
File: Zimm087

Kerry Recruit, The [Laws J8]


DESCRIPTION: A Kerry lad enlists in the army and is introduced to the wonders of coats, guns, and horses. In some accounts he spends a quiet term in the service; in others, he loses a leg in the Crimea and returns home to live off his pension
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1849 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 25(1454))
KEYWORDS: war soldier humorous
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1853-1856 - Crimean War (Britain and France actively at war with Russia 1854-1855)
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MA,MW) Canada(Mar,Ont) Ireland Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (11 citations):
Laws J8, "The True Paddy's Song (The Kerry Recruit)"
GreigDuncan1 79, "The Irish Recruit" (4 texts, 3 tunes)
FSCatskills 11, "[The Kerry Recruit]" (1 text, 1 tune)
Randolph 477, "'Twas Nine Years Ago" (1 text, rather eroded with time -- e.g. the soldier runs without losing a leg)
Fowke/MacMillan 73, "Nine Years a Soldier" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-Maritime, p. 162, "Pat and the War"; p. 163, "Paddy Enlisted" (2 texts, 1 tune)
O'Conor, pp. 95-96, "The Kerry Recruit" (1 text)
OLochlainn 1, "The Kerry Recruit" (1 text, 1 tune)
Munnelly/Deasy-Lenihan 42, "The Kerry Recruit" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 274, "The Kerry Recruit" (1 text)
DT 393, KERRYRCT
Roud #520
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 25(1454), "Paddy's Ramble" ("About nine years ago, I was digging of land"), J. Kendrew (York), 1803-1848; also Harding B 25(1456), Harding B 28(218), "Paddy's Ramble"; Harding B 19(83), 2806 b.9(240), Firth c.14(115), "The Kerry Recruit"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Felix the Soldier" (theme)
cf. "Mrs. McGrath" (theme)
cf. "The Boy on the Land" (hints of plot)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Listing of the Spademan
Paddy Turned Soldier
NOTES: The fullest version of this song I have seen includes explicit references to several events in the Crimean War:
"Balaclave" - The city of Balaclava, which gave its name to the battle of October 25, 1854
Alma - The river by which the British and French landed, and where the first battle of the Allied war with the Russians was fought on September 20, 1854
"Innerman" = Inkerman, a town on the Chernaya River which gave its name to the final field battle of the war (November 5, 1854)
Redan - One of the major defensive works around Sevastopol, assaulted by the British on June 18, 1855. The British suffered 25% casualties in the attack, and their French allies to the north did no better. From that time onward, the Allies settled down to besiege Sevastopol rather than trying to take it by storm. - RBW
O'Conor's version refers to "Vinegar Hill" (Irish convicts break out of Castle Hill Barracks in New South Wales, trying to reach Sydney harbor to seize ships and escape to Ireland, March 5, 1804. Source: Holyrood NSW site re 200th Anniversary of the Battle of Vinegar Hill) and "Ballinamuck" (Humbert with the French and Irish are defeated on September 8, 1798. Source: Irish Cultural Society of the Garden City Area site re The Battle of Ballinamuck). So, Kerry Recruit, whose "father and mother were two Kerry men," has been fighting the Irish around the world. "Now war is all over and peace is come in, I'm paid all my wages, and God save the King! I'm nine years in glory, and glad it's not ten, And now I'm back diggin' praties agin."
Of the Bodleian broadsides the "Paddy's Rambles" versions are pre-Crimean war and are in line with O'Conor; the "Kerry's Recruit" versions refer to the Crimean War.
For a study of the history of this and related songs see Roly Brown, Glimpses into the 19th Century Broadside Ballad Trade No. 5: The Kerry Recruit, 2003 at the Musical Traditions site among the articles. - BS
Last updated in version 2.4
File: LJ08

Kevin Barry


DESCRIPTION: Eighteen year old Kevin Barry is hung, "another martyr for old Ireland, another murder for the crown." Despite torture, he will not betray his comrades. (Family and friends bid farewell.) (Barry asks to be shot as a soldier, but is hanged as a rebel)
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (Sandburg)
KEYWORDS: rebellion execution Ireland
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
Nov 1, 1920 - Execution of Kevin Barry
FOUND IN: Ireland US(MW)
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Sandburg, pp. 42-43, "Kevin Barry" (1 text, 1 tune)
Hodgart, p. 218, "Kevin Barry" (1 text)
PGalvin, pp. 67-68, "Kevin Barry" (1 text, 1 tune)
OLochlainn 49, "Kevin Barry" (1 text, 1 tune)
Silber-FSWB, p. 324, "Kevin Barry" (1 text)
DT, KEVBARRY*
Roud #3014
RECORDINGS:
The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem, "Kevin Barry" (on IRClancyMakem03)
Pete Seeger, "Kevin Barry" (on PeteSeeger11) (on HootenannyCarnegie)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Shall My Soul Pass Through Ireland" (tune)
cf. "Rolling Home" (tune)
NOTES: Patrick Galvin reports that "Kevin Barry, an eighteen-year-old student, [was] the first Irish patriot to be hanged in Ireland since Robert Emmet 117 years before. His death precipitated scores of his fellow-students into the I.R.A...."
Robert Kee's statement (in Ourselves Alone, being volume III of The Green Flag, pp. 122-123) gives him a slightly different distinction: Òthe first British execution of an Irishman in the post-war period.Ó
Terry Golway, For the Cause of Liberty, has a photo of Barry (who looks like any other schoolkid) on page 258, and gives a less biased report than Galvin. Given a good education, he still tried to join a nationalist organization at the age of 13. At 17, he could no longer be restrained from joining the Voluneers.
On September 20, 1920, Barry -- now 18 and in his first year of studying medicine -- was called upon to take part in a hijacking. The rebels desperately needed weapons (a perennial problem in Ireland, dating back to the rebellions against the Tudors; G. A. Hayes-McCoy, Irish Battles, p. 111, reports that it then took six head of cattle to buy a single musket! Rifles were cheaper in the twentieth century, but they were also, according to Charles Townshend, Easter 1916: The Irish Rebellion, p. 45, a fetish item for Irish volunteers of the time). To gain arms, a band of Volunteers set out to stop a British army truck. The Irish had only one gun, but somehow one of the British soldiers ended up being shot and killed. Barry's comrades fled; he was captured.
Threatened with death, though apparently suffering nothing worse than arm-twisting, Barry refused to give any information about his comrades. He was subjected to a military trial on October 20, and executed November 1. We observe that, though Barry died as a rebel, he was, by modern legal standards, guilty of murder (though not premeditated murder).
Of course, if they'd hung everyone guilty of that sort of murder in 1920 Ireland, the country would have been depopulated.
Tim Pat Coogan, in Michael Collins, p. 154, notes that the British cabinet actually considered clemency but could find no grounds. There are said to have been five thousand people praying outside his prison at the end.
Kee makes the interesting point that Barry's death Òmade a considerable impact on public opinion. By contrast the fact the the soldier he had shot was as young as himself made virtually none" (p. 123)
There is at least one other Barry poem, "Kevin Barry" (by Terence Ward), for which see Kathleen Hoagland, editor, One Thousand Years of Irish Poetry (New York, 1947), pp. 751-752.
There is also a 1989 biography, Kevin Barry, by Donal O'Donovan. Which mostly shows the power of songs like this; if Barry had lived in America a century later, he would probably be considered a "gang member." - RBW
File: San042

Keyhole in the Door, The


DESCRIPTION: Through a keyhole, the narrator spies upon a woman preparing for bed until the light is extinguished and "I knew the show was over."
AUTHOR: Attributed to Eugene Field
EARLIEST DATE: 1879
KEYWORDS: hiding clothes
FOUND IN: Britain(England) US(MW,SE,So,SW)
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Cray, pp. 116-119, "The Keyhole in the Door" (2 texts, 1 tune)
Randolph-Legman I, pp. 538-544, "The Keyhole in the Door" (5 texts, 1 tune)
Huntington-Whalemen, pp. 315-317, "The Keyhole in the Door" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT, KEYDOOR KEYDOOR2*
Roud #2099
RECORDINGS:
Jimmie Davis, "The Keyhole in the Door" (Bluebird B-5156, 1933)
Holland Puckett, "The Keyhole in the Door" (Challenge 328 [as by Harvey Watson]/Gennett 6271/Silvertone 5064, 25064, 8153, 1927/Supertone 9254 [as by Si Puckett; issued 1928])
Jim Wilson, "The Keyhole in the Door" (on Voice07)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Whummil Bore" [Child 27] (plot)
NOTES: In Randolph-Legman I, Legman offers substantial notes on the relationship or lack of relationship of this song to "The Whummil Bore" (Child 27). - EC
File: EM116

Keys of Canterbury, The


DESCRIPTION: The young man comes to the girl and offers her his love or other gifts if she will marry him. She scornfully refuses. After several similar exchanges, he typically offers his MONEY. She accepts. He withdraws the offer: "You love my money but... not me"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1849 (Halliwell)
KEYWORDS: bargaining courting rejection money dialog
FOUND IN: US(Ap,MW,NE,SE,So) Britain(England(All),Scotland) Canada(Newf)
REFERENCES (27 citations):
Belden, pp. 507-509, "A Paper of Pins" (3 texts)
Randolph 354, "The Paper of Pins" (3 texts, 3 tunes)
Randolph/Cohen, pp. 293-295, "The Paper of Pins" (1 text, 1 tune -- Randolph's 354A)
Eddy 39, "The Keys of Heaven" (4 texts, 3 tunes)
Gardner/Chickering 177, "A Paper of Pins" (1 text plus mention of 1 more)
Flanders/Brown, pp. 160-161, "Paper of Pins" (1 text, 1 tune)
Linscott, pp. 20-23, "I'll Give to You a Paper of Pins" (1 text, 1 tune)
BrownIII 1, "A Paper of Pins" (1 text plus 5 excerpts and mention of 7 more); 2, "Madam, Will You Walk" (1 text plus mention of 1 more)
Hudson 131, pp. 276-277, ""Paper of Pins (1 text plus mention of 11 more)
Scarborough-SongCatcher, pp. 299-304, "A Paper of Pins" (4 texts, 2 tunes on pp. 435-436)
Fuson, pp. 82-83, "The Lovers' Quarrel" (1 text); pp. 152-153, "I Will Give You a Red Dress" (1 text)
Peacock, pp. 22-23, "A Paper of Pins" (1 text, 1 tune)
SharpAp 92, "The Keys of Heaven" (6 texts, 6 tunes)
Sharp-100E 66, "The Keys of Canterbury"; 67, "My Man John" (2 texts, 2 tunes)
Butterworth/Dawney, pp. 26-27, "The Keys of Heaven" (1 text, 1 tune)
Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #286, pp. 166-167, "(Oh, madam, I will give you the keys of Canterbury)"
GreigDuncan4 825, "A Pennyworth o' Preens" (4 texts, 3 tunes)
Montgomerie-ScottishNR 88, "(I'll gie you a pennyworth o preens)" (1 text)
Scott-BoA, pp. 11-13, "The Keys of Canterbury" (1 text, 1 tune)
Copper-SoBreeze, pp. 262-263, "The Silver Pin" (1 text, 1 tune)
Lomax-ABFS, pp. 323-324, "Paper of Pins" (1 text, 1 tune)
Kennedy 135, "Madam, Will You Walk" (1 text, 1 tune)
LPound-ABS, 111, pp. 226-228, "Paper of Pins" (1 text)
Silber-FSWB, p. 346, "Paper of Pins" (1 text)
Fuld-WFM, p. 294, "I'll Give to You a Paper of Pins"
DT, PAPERPIN*
ADDITIONAL: Robert Chambers, The Popular Rhymes of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1870 ("Digitized by Google")), pp. 61-62, "The Tempted Lady" ("I'll gie you a pennyworth o' preens")
ST R354 (Full)
Roud #573
RECORDINGS:
Linda Brown & Donnie Stewart, "Paper of Pins" (on JThomas01)
Johnny Doughty, "Will You Marry Me?" (on Voice12)
Bradley Kincaid, "A Paper of Pins" (Gennett 6856/Supertone 9402, 1929; on CrowTold02)
Ray Napier & Margaret Winters, "Keys of Canterbury" (on JThomas01)
Vass Family, "Paper of Pins" (Decca 5425, 1937)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "No, John, No" (plot)
cf. "Wheel of Fortune (Dublin City, Spanish Lady)"
cf. "The Courting Case" (theme)
cf. "The Lover's Quarrel" (plot, lyrics)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Madam I Present You With Six Rows of Pins
Blue Muslin
I Will Give You The Keys of Heaven
If You Will Walk With Me
O Madam I Will Give to Thee
The Little Row of Pins
NOTES: Yates, Musical Traditions site Voice of the People suite "Notes - Volume 12" - 11.9.02: "Although versions of 'Will You Marry Me?' only appeared at the beginning of the 19th century ... it would seem certain that the song is based on an earlier pattern, namely the Elizabethan Stage Jig, a short dialogue song and dance performed by two or three characters." - BS
[In both of Sharp's versions], the lady accepts something and that's that. In "Keys of Canterbury" after rejecting various riches, she accepts a "broidered silken gownd," presumably a wedding gown, and the song ends there. In "My Man John", which also includes a servant who advises his master on how best to court the lady, she rejects all material things but accepts "the keys of my heart." - PJS
In the Chambers text the woman rejects the offer of "the half o' Bristol town," but accepts "the hale o' Bristol town." The script ends with the comment: "And aff he flew wi' her! Noo, lasses, ye see ye maun aye mind that." - BS
Although this certainly began as a true song, Linscott reports it as a singing game, adding "It was usually played by the girls alone, as it did not contain enough action for the boys." - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: R354

Keys of Heaven, The


See The Keys of Canterbury (File: R354)

Ki-Ma-Dearie


See Frog Went A-Courting (File: R108)

Kicker, The


DESCRIPTION: "Oh, here's to the kicker whose liver is wrong, Whose bile has leaked into his veins...." The "kicker's" myriad ailments are described, but we are assured that he could be "in good health, who takes care of himself By using St. Joseph's Liver Regulator"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1897 (manuscript copy)
KEYWORDS: medicine disease trick nonballad commerce
FOUND IN: US(So)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Randolph 505, "The Kicker" (1 text)
Roud #7591
File: R505

Kickin' Maude


See Whoa Mule (The Kickin' Mule) (File: LoF231)

Kicking Mule, The


See Whoa Mule (The Kickin' Mule) (File: LoF231)

Kid, The


DESCRIPTION: Recitation. Big Ed, a teamster, adopts a boy from town. A chain breaks Ed's spine; the boy drives him back; he dies on the way. The boy pushes on; he is killed by being thrown from the sledge. The narrator learns he's telling the story to the boy's father
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1941 (Beck)
LONG DESCRIPTION: Recitation. Big Ed, a teamster, comes back from town with a boy he has adopted. He teaches the boy the ways of the woods. One day a chain breaks Ed's spine; the boy drives him back, but he dies on the way. The boy doesn't notice, and pushes on; the narrator watches as he, too, is killed by being thrown from the sledge. The narrator discovers, at the end, that he's telling the story to the boy's father
KEYWORDS: lumbering work logger death recitation father
FOUND IN: US(MW)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Beck 58, "The Kid" (1 text)
Roud #4058
NOTES: This song is item dC37 in Laws's Appendix II. - RBW
File: Be058

Kidd's Lament


See Captain Kidd [Laws K35] (File: LK35)

Kidder Cole


DESCRIPTION: Singer meets Kidder Cole at a dance, wants to dance but she dances with Charlie Wright. He goes to another dance; she still won't dance (because he's drunk). He visits her; she cold-shoulders him; he vows he'll dance with her yet, and praises her beauty
AUTHOR: Felix Eugene Ally?
EARLIEST DATE: 1930
KEYWORDS: jealousy courting love beauty dancing drink
FOUND IN: US(SE)
Roud #9131
RECORDINGS:
Bascom Lamar Lunsford, "Kidder Cole" (Brunswick 230, 1928; on Cornshuckers1)
File: RcKidCo

Kielder Hunt, The


DESCRIPTION: Description of field trials at Kielder; owners and dogs are listed, and the dogs run a fox to earth. The singer drinks a toast to the "gallant sportsmen a'." Chorus: "Hark away! Hark away! O'er the bonnie hills of Kielder/Hark away"
AUTHOR: James Armstrong (source: Yates, Musical Traditions site _Voice of the People suite_ "Notes - Volume 18" - 15.9.02)
EARLIEST DATE: 1879 (in _Wannie Blossoms_, according to Yates, Musical Traditions site _Voice of the People suite_ "Notes - Volume 18" - 15.9.02)
KEYWORDS: hunting drink moniker animal dog
FOUND IN: Scotland(Bord)
Roud #5126
RECORDINGS:
Will & Sandy Scott, "The Kielder Hunt" (on Borders1)
Willie Scott, "The Kielder Hunt" (on Voice18)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Bold Reynard the Fox (Tallyho! Hark! Away!)" (subject, phrase)
NOTES: There's actually little in common between this song and "Bold Reynard the Fox (Tallyho! Hark! Away!)"; I include the cross-reference only because of the "Hark away" phrase, and to differentiate them. - PJS
File: RcKielHu

Kiethen Hairst, The


DESCRIPTION: The harvest crew are described by name, task, and characteristics. "The truth I mean to tell We always got the best of meat And plenty of hame brewed ale." "Although the weather it was wet We all got on with glee"
AUTHOR: James Trail (source: Greig)
EARLIEST DATE: 1908 (GreigDuncan3)
KEYWORDS: farming work moniker nonballad
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (2 citations):
Greig #7, pp. 1, "The Kiethen Hairst" (1 fragment)
GreigDuncan3 410, "The Kiethen Hairst" (1 text)
Roud #5394
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Hairst o' Rettie" (subject: harvest crew moniker song) and references there
cf. "The Boghead Crew" (subject: harvest crew moniker song)
cf. "The Ardlaw Crew" (subject: harvest crew moniker song)
cf. "The Northessie Crew" (subject: harvest crew moniker song)
NOTES: The song has the same happy tone about the harvest work as "The Boghead Crew" by the same author.
GreigDuncan3 dates the harvest: "The hairst began on Keithen's lands The 17th of September In the year of 1872 As we may well remember."
GreigDuncan3 has a map on p. xxxv, of "places mentioned in songs in volume 3" showing the song number as well as place name; Keithen (410) is at coordinate (h4-5,v8) on that map [roughly 27 miles NNW of Aberdeen] - BS
Last updated in version 2.4
File: GrD3410

Kilby Jail


See The Prisoner's Song (File: FSC100)

Kildallan Brown Red, The


DESCRIPTION: At Monaghan the Kildallan bird defeated a Piley from Leitrim that had previously won at Drumreilly. The Piley "brought our Kildallan bird down" first. When the Kildallan recovered he killed the Piley and "shocked the whole County Leitrim"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1979 (IRHardySons)
KEYWORDS: fight death gambling chickens
FOUND IN: Ireland
Roud #5669
RECORDINGS:
James and Paddy Halpin, "The Kildallan Brown Red" (on IRHardySons)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Cock-Fight" (theme)
cf. "The Follom Brown-Red" (theme)
File: RcKiBrRe

Kilkenny Cats


DESCRIPTION: "There once were two cats of Kilkenny, Each thought there was one cat too many, So they fought and they fit And they scratched and they bit, Till, excepting their nails, and the tips of their tails, Instead of two cats, there weren't any."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1962 (Baring-Gould-MotherGoose)
KEYWORDS: fight animal
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Baring-Gould-MotherGoose #835, p. 315, "(There once were two cats of Kilkenny)"
NOTES: I don't know if the poem of the Kiklenny Cats is traditional, but the legend certainly is, so I thought I should include this item.
According to David Pickering's The Cassell Dictionary of Folklore, there are at least two explanations offered for this legend. One is that, in Norman times, there were rival English and Irish towns in Kilkenny, which naturally were in competition. Another bases it on a story of two cats who had their tails tied together by soldiers during the 1798 rebellion. I can't say that I find either explanation very convincing. - RBW
File: BGMG835

Kilkenny Louse House


DESCRIPTION: Singer goes to Carrick-on-Suir looking for a place to sleep. He is taken to Buck St John's place on Cook Lane. When the lights were out he has to fight the bugs. The slaughter is described. The band plays The Dead March. Beware Buck St John's place.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1965 (recording, Tommy McGrath and Gemma McGrath)
KEYWORDS: battle poverty hardtimes bug
FOUND IN: Ireland
Roud #9228
RECORDINGS:
Mary Delaney, "The Kilkenny Louse House" (on IRTravellers01)
Tommy McGrath and Gemma McGrath, "Burke's Engine" (on Voice07)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "I'm No' Comin' Oot the Noo" (theme)
NOTES: Yates, Musical Traditions site Voice of the People suite "Notes - Volume 7" - 1.3.03: "Burke's Engine" on Voice07 is a version of "Kilkenny Louse House"; "the compilers mis-heard the name of the proprietor, one Buck St John, and transliterated it as 'Burke's Engine'." Taking the Musical Traditions statement as gospel I am using "Kilkenny Louse House" as the name of the piece. The description is based on the Voice07 text. - BS
File: RcKiLoHo

Kill or Cure


DESCRIPTION: The singer, "a roving Irish boy," marries Kitty O'Shaughnessy. She gets sick. He makes a bargain with the doctor: "kill or cure for twenty pounds." She dies. The doctor wants his money but he didn't cure her, won't admit he killed her, and doesn't collect
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1863 (broadside, Bodleian Firth c.14(191))
KEYWORDS: bargaining death humorous wife doctor money
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
O'Conor, p. 40, "Kill or Cure" (1 text)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Firth c.14(191), "Kill or Cure" or "Katty O'Shaughnessy", H. Such (London), 1849-1862; also Firth b.25(160), "Katty O'Shaughnessy" or "Kill or Cure"; Harding B 11(1988), "Kill or Cure"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Son of a Seven" (theme)
File: OCon040

Killafole Boasters


DESCRIPTION: The huntsmen around Newtown have a hunt for hare. The hounds are named as well as the landmarks passed. The local hunters succeed. The Killafole Boasters only follow false trails and "may go home with shame, And never come back for to hunt us again"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1980 (recording, Jimmy Halpin)
KEYWORDS: death hunting animal dog moniker Ireland
FOUND IN: Ireland
Roud #12922
RECORDINGS:
Jimmy Halpin, "Killafole Boasters" (on Voice18)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Fair of Rosslea" (subject: competitive hare hunt from the huntsman's point of view)
cf. "The Huntsman's Horn" (subject: competitive hare hunt from the huntsman's point of view)
NOTES: The hunt takes place in the area around Lough Erne, County Fermanagh, Northern Ireland.
Hall, notes to Voice18: "In Co. Fermaanagh, the average hunt club of small-town working men and small farmers is loosely organized and meets monthly in a pub to plan the month's fixtures, some of which might be in competition with another club." Hall goes on to discuss attitudes toward individual hares ("they divert the attention of the dogs if there seems any chance of a hare being killed") and foxes ("they might even take a gun out on a fox-hunting day"). "After a good meeting they might gather in a pub and sing about hunting."
Tunney-StoneFiddle p. 84: "'No good sportsman would shoot a hare; it is for coursing only', we were often told...." - BS
File: RcKilBoa

Killarney


DESCRIPTION: "By Killarney's lakes and fells" the singer describes "that Eden of the West; Beauty's home, Killarney": "Innisfallen's ruined shrine... Castle Lough and Glenna Bay, Mountains Tore and Eagle's Nest." Sights that "charm the eye," "each sound a harmony"
AUTHOR: probably Edmund Falconer (Edmund O'Rourke) (see Notes)
EARLIEST DATE: 1882 (The Song Wave)
KEYWORDS: lyric nonballad
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (2 citations):
O'Conor, p. 81, "Killarney" (1 text)
ADDITIONAL: H. S. Perkins, H, J. Danforth, and E. V. DeGraff, _The Song Wave_, American Book Company, 1882, pp. 131-133, "Killarney" (1 text, 1 tune)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Firth c.26(71), "Killarney", T. Pearson (Manchester), 1850-1899; also Harding B 12(207), 2806 c.16(219), "Killarney"
NOTES: This is credited to Edmund Falconer in Ralph L. Woods's A Second Treasury of the Familiar." The uncredited book The Library of Irish Music (published by Amsco music) says the words are by Edmund O'Rourke and music by Michael William Balfe. The earliest version I have found of the music, the 1882 version in The Song Wave, credits the music to M. W. Balfe but lists no source for the lyrics. Granger's Index to Poetry says that Edmund Falconer was another name for Edmund O'Rourke, and this is confirmed by O'Rourke's Wikipedia entry. This is the only poem or song of Falconer's listed in the very large Granger's database.
Wikipedia also credits O'Rourke (1814-1879), an Irish actor, theater manager, and writer, with writing this song. This attribution thus seems fairly firm.
Michael William Balfe (1808-1870) was an Irish-born violinist and opera singer who later began producing his own operas and eventually retired in England (where he had migrated in 1823; he also studied for a time in Italy). His best-known work was the opera "The Bohemian Girl." Neither Wikipedia nor Balfe's entry in Scholes (p. 71) nor Balfe's entry in Gilder (p. 26) mentions this piece among his compositions. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: OCon081

Killeavy's Pride


See The Pride of Newry Town (File: HHH190)

Killeevy's Pride


See The Pride of Newry Town (File: HHH190)

Killer, The


See Dobie Bill (Dobe Bill, The Killer) (File: LxA403)

Killiecrankie


See Killy Kranky (File: JRSF111)

Killin' in the Gap, The (Stevie Allen)


DESCRIPTION: "It was on a Sunday night and the moon was shining bright, Stevie Allen held his baby in his lap." The child is sick (?); Allen says he will ride to the doctor despite his enemies. The baby dies; Allen's horse returns riderless
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1939 (Thomas)
KEYWORDS: children death feud horse disease
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Thomas-Makin', pp. 21-22, "The Killin' in the Gap" (1 text)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. " Bonnie George Campbell" [Child 210] (theme)
NOTES: Thomas indicates no tune for this, but it looks like "The Little Old Log Cabin in the Lane." - RBW
File: ThBa021

Killy Kranky


DESCRIPTION: "Killy Krankie is my song, Sing and dance it all day long, From my elbow to my wrist, Then we do the double twist." "Broke my arm, I broke my arm, a-swinging pretty Nancy." The dancers are encouraged into other difficult positions
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1936 (Hudson)
KEYWORDS: playparty dancing
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
July 27, 1689 - Battle of Killiecrankie
FOUND IN: US(Ap)
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Ritchie-SingFam, pp. 111-112, "[Killy Kranky]" (1 text, 1 tune)
Ritchie-Southern, p. 4, "Killy Kranky" (1 text, 1 tune)
Hudson 54, pp. 170-171, "Killiecrankie" (1 text)
DT, KILCRNK2*
Roud #2572
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Sad Condition" (lyrics)
NOTES: Despite the Ritchie spelling, which I assume will be the best-known form of this piece, is no doubt in my mind that the title of this song derives from the battle of Killiecrankie (1689). But her words have obviously wandered far, and the tune does not match either of the two I know as "Killiecrankie."
Ritchie says that this "was both a game and a song and not much of either one. The players sang the song while they 'wound the grapevine,' ... all of which Uncle Jason [from whom she learned the song] avowed was just a good excuse to get their arms around each other."
Hudson's text (with no tune) doesn't appear to be a playparty, and clearly derives from a Scots original, but appears confused ("I've fought on land and I've fought on sea, At home I've fought my auntie O"?!). I'm still looking for an intact version of this song.
The Battle of Killiecrankie effectively ended the fight in Scotland on behalf of James II in the Glorious Revolution.
Dundee (John Graham of Claverhouse, first Viscount Dundee, 1648-1689) had had a bad reputation in Scotland until that time for his persecution of Covenanters, and was known as "Black John Graham." But, absent another royalist leader, he was "recycled" as "Bonnie Dundee" (I owe that word "recycled," which is a brilliant description of what happened, to Oliver Thomson, The Great Feud: The Campbells & the MacDonalds,Sutton, 2000, p. 81)
Claverhouse led a small Jacobite army in an attack on Williamite forces led by General Hugh Mackay. The Jacobite cause was entirely dependent on Dundee, but he fought in the front line of the battle (he had to prove his courage, and promised that, if he won, he would not join the fray again). The Jacobites won, but Dundee was killed, and that was that. The more so as the victory was not decisive; Mackay kept his forces together, and their losses were not extreme.
Peter Underwood in A Gazetteer of British, Scottish & Irish Ghosts, pp. 378-379, states that Dundee had a vision before the battle, seemingly of a mortally wounded man calling the general to the field of Killiecrankie. Supposedly, every July 27, a red haze can be seen by some (but not all) over the battlefield; this is linked to Dundee's vision. (If you think this sounds very much like the story of Duncan Campbell at Ticonderoga -- yes, it does. For the Campbell legend, in addition to Richard Nardin's "The Piper's Refrain," see Walter R. Borneman, The French and Indian War Harper-Collins, 2006, pp. 136-137.)
Peculiarly, I recently heard a classical recording of the tune "Killiecrankie" (definitely the same melody as that recorded by Archie Fisher and others as a Jacobite tune) which claimed that it came from c. 1600, i.e. well *before* the battle. I have been unable to determine the source of this claim. But I also have heard a classical type call the piece "Gillycrankie" (not sure about the spelling, but the first consonant was pretty definitely a "G"), so what do they know?- RBW
File: JRSF111

Killy's Den


DESCRIPTION: Blythe and happy was I" meeting Mary "among the flowers of Killy's Den." The singer meets her walking by the mill and "gently led her up the glen." "At ilka kiss she dropped a tear, We parted soon to meet again"
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1864 (dated manuscript, according to Greig-Duncan4)
KEYWORDS: courting flowers
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan4 710, "Killy's Den" (2 texts, 1 tune)
Roud #6150
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Spanish Lady" (tune, per GreigDuncan4)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Amongst the Flowers o' Kylieden
File: GrD4710

Killyclare (Carrowclare; The Maid of Carrowclare)


DESCRIPTION: The singer deliberately spies on a couple courting under the moon. The boy says he is sailing to America. The girl fears the local women will cause him to forget her. He promises never to forget her
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1927 (Sam Henry collection)
KEYWORDS: love courting separation emigration
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
SHenry H169, pp. 298-299, "The Maid of Carrowclare" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #2939
RECORDINGS:
Eddie Butcher, "Killyclare" (on Voice04, IREButcher01)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Erin's Flowery Vale (The Irish Girl's Lament)" [Laws O29] (plot) and references there
NOTES: I notice that the guy doesn't promise to be true -- just to remember.
"Luna" is the Latin name for the moon. Its use seems to indicate a literary origin. - RBW
File: HHH298

Kilnamartyra Exile, The


DESCRIPTION: The singer left Ireland for America for "love of money." After twelve years travelling from Alabama to the Rockies "black misfortune followed me" "Age has overtaken me and youth has long forsaken me." He will always fondly remember Kilnamartyra.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1978 (OCanainn)
KEYWORDS: homesickness emigration separation hardtimes America Ireland age
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
OCanainn, pp. 74-75, "The Kilnamartyra Exile" (1 text, 1 tune)
NOTES: OCanainn: "This well-known song of the exile from Kilnamartyra in West Cork was sung for us by Sean O Se. Sean said it was written around the turn of the century by John Brown, a soldier who eventually became a John of God lay-brother." - BS
File: OCan074

Kilrane Boys, The


DESCRIPTION: April 13, 1844: thirteen "matchless youths" -- all named -- leave Wexford's Quay "bound for Buenos Aires, the land of liberty." "Foul British laws are the whole cause of our going far away ... with one for Dan O'Connell they boldly sailed away."
AUTHOR: Walter McCormack of the Bing, Kilrane
EARLIEST DATE: 1943 (Ranson)
KEYWORDS: emigration farewell sea ship
FOUND IN: Ireland
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ranson, pp. 74-75, "The Kilrane Boys" (1 text)
NOTES: Ranson: "A centenary celebration was held in Kilrane on April 11th, 1944, to honor the memory of the emigrants, when the cart, which brought some of the emigrants into Wexford, was drawn into the procession." The thirteen are twelve men and a bride. - BS
File: Ran074

Kilruddery Hunt, The


DESCRIPTION: An early December morning the hunters, horses, and dogs "rode from Kilruddery, to try for a fox." The huntsmen and dogs are named. Reynard is "unkennelled" and the route is traced. The fox is killed after a five hour chase. The hunters party until night.
AUTHOR: Thomas Mozeen and Owen Bray (source: Croker-PopularSongs and _The Fiddler's Companion_ )
EARLIEST DATE: 1762 (probably written 1744, according to Croker-PopularSongs)
KEYWORDS: hunting drink party moniker animal dog horse
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Croker-PopularSongs, pp. 204-215, "The Kilruddery Hunt" (1 text)
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Shelah na Guiragh" (tune, according to Croker-PopularSongs)
NOTES: The song says the hunt began at 5 in the morning, December 5, 1744. Among the places named, Kilruddery, County Wicklow, is near Bray, ten or fifteen miles down the coast from Dublin.
Croker-PopularSongs: "Called, by Ritson, 'The Irish Hunt,' and printed by him in the second volume of his collection of English Songs (ed. Park. 1813, p.184).... Mr. Walker ... informed Ritson that ''The Irish Hunt' was written by T Mozeen. It appeared in a collection of 'Miscellaneous Essays,' which he published by subscription in 1762.... Mozeen entitles the song ... 'A Description of a Fox Chase that happened in the County of Dublin with the Earl of Meath's Hounds.'"
"'The Kilruddery Hunt,' was written to this air ["Celia O'Gara (Sighile ni Ghadharadh)"] in 1744 by Thomas Mozeen and Owen Bray of Loughlinstown, Co. Dublin. It soon became enormously popular, according to Grattan Flood (1906), and was called by Ritson 'The Irish Hunt' (who incorrectly ascribed it to St. Leger)[until he corrected that error]." (source: Andrew Kuntz, The Fiddler's Companion Copyright 1996-2006) - BS
File: CrPS204

Kilties in the Crimea, The


DESCRIPTION: "The Kilties are the lads for me, They're aye the foremost on a spree." The singer praises the Highland soldiers, and recounts their exploits in the Crimea, mentioning Alma, Sir Colin Campbell, and several Highland regiments
AUTHOR: John Lorimer
EARLIEST DATE: 1856 (date of composition)
KEYWORDS:
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1853-1856 - Crimean War (Britain and France actively at war with Russia 1854-1855)
Sept 20, 1854 - Battle of Alma
Oct 25, 1854 - Battle of Balaclava
Nov 5, 1854 - Battle of Inkerman clears the way for the siege of Sevastopol (the city fell in the fall of 1855)
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ford-Vagabond, pp. 223-227, "The Kilties in the Crimea" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #13083
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Heights of Alma (I)" [Laws J10] (subject)
cf. "Grand Conversation on Sebastopol Arose (II)" (subject)
NOTES: Among the various references in this song:
* The Royal Forty-Twa: The famous "Black Watch," which earned battle honours for Alma and Sevastopol. For more of its history, see the notes to "Wha Saw the Forty-Second." I can't help but add that this famous regiment, which held together despite service in the Crimea and the Sudan and so many other failures, has in the early twenty-first century been amalgamated into a "Super Scottish Regiment." The reason? People won't join because they refuse to go to Iraq.
* Alma: Battle of Alma. For history of this particular campaign, see "The Heights of Alma (I)"
* Sir Colin: Colin Campbell (1792-1863), commander of the Highland Brigade. He may have been the best soldier -- certainly the best brigade commander! -- in the British army at this time, but he was not a nobleman (he wasn't knighted until 1849) and wasn't rich, and so did not receive and could not buy the promotions he deserved.
According to Farwell, p. 110, Campbell was "born Colin Macliver in 1792, the son of a carpenter. He was educated by his uncle, a soldier named John Campbell." His uncle (his mother's brother) also managed to secure him a commission, though it was under the name Campbell. And so the young man became Colin Campbell. His early service was in the Peninsular Campaign, where he earned promotion to captain by merit -- and stalled. According to Thomson, p. 128, he was "invalided home in 1813. He recovered but by 1837 -- a bachelor in his late forties -- he was still only a colonel on garrison duty. Though recognized... 'as the best administrator and soldier since Wellington' he could not buy promotion and had to earn it." He gained much useful experience in Asia, but was still only a colonel when he resigned his command and went on half pay in 1853.
He was called back to duty for the Crimean War, and promoted Major General (the equivalent of a modern brigadier). His Highlanders made the key push at the Battle of Alma, and they blunted the initial charge at Balaclava. It will tell you something about the officers in the Crimea that, according to Palmer, p. 250, he was ony of only two senior officers in the Crimea to do anything to improve their reputations afterward.
Having done much to win the Crimean War, he was appointed to command the Indian Army at the time of the 1857 rebellion. It was he who finally relieved Lucknow (Farwell, p. 112), the key event in the supression of the rebellion. He was rewarded with a peerage; according Oxford Companion, p. 157, becoming Lord Clyde in 1858. That's not really much of a compliment, considering how many awful soldiers were ennobled by the British over the years, but in his case, it was richly deserved.
This is not the only song about Campbell; he is mentioned in several Crimean War songs, and Firth, p. 330, prints a song called "General Campbell" about his work in India.
* Ninety-Third: Another Highland regiment (93rd Highlanders, now the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders), with battle honours for Alma, Balaclava, and Sebastopol. It was the Ninety-third, more than any other regiment, which halted the Russian charge on Balaclava.
* Balaclava: For the history of this incredible botch, see "The Famous Light Brigade." - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: FVS224

Kind Fortune


DESCRIPTION: A drummer proposes marriage to a maiden. She rejects him because her father "is a captain of honour and fame" and she would not "bind myself down to slav'ry." He threatens suicide. She relents. They elope. Her outraged father gives them an annual income
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1826 (broadside, Harding B 17(285a))
KEYWORDS: elopement soldier father money marriage suicide
FOUND IN: Canada(Mar,Newf) Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Karpeles-Newfoundland 74, "Kind Fortune" (1 text, 1 tune)
Creighton-SNewBrunswick 27, "The Drummer" (1 text, 1 tune)
Greig #178, p. 2, "O Hard Fortune" (1 text)
GreigDuncan1 86, "Oh! Hard Fortune" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST KaNew074 (Partial)
Roud #2302
RECORDINGS:
Martin Gorman, "The Little Drummer" (on Voice01)
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 17(285a), "The Silly Drummer," Angus (Newcastle), 1774-1825; also Firth c.14(305), Harding B 25(677), "The Fortunate Drummer"
ALTERNATE TITLES:
Hard Times
O Bad Fortune
NOTES: Karpeles-Newfoundland omits the broadside touch of the father's money after the elopement; we are left to believe that she is left to "follow the drum."
Grieg Folk-Song of the North-East, CLXXVIII p.2, "O Hard Fortune," adds the following elements to the beginning of the story: A company of soldiers is playing and a drummer among them falls in love with a beautiful lady. He asks his captain what he should do since "for love I must die." His captain advises him to tell her. The plot described in DESCRIPTION continues.
Martin Gorman's version on Voice01 follows Grieg. - BS
Last updated in version 2.4
File: KaNew074

Kind Friends and Companions


See A Health to the Company (Come All My Old Comrades) (File: CrSe222)

Kind Miss


See Wheel of Fortune (Dublin City, Spanish Lady) AND The Drowsy Sleeper [Laws M4] (File: E098)

Kind Sir


See The Courting Case (File: R361)

Kinding Wood (My Name is Dinah from South Carolina)


DESCRIPTION: "My name is Dinah From South Carolina And I'm selling kindling wood to get along." "If you don't believe me, come down to see me, For I'm selling kindling wood to get along." "And won't you buy some, Oh won't you buy some."
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1922 (Brown)
KEYWORDS: commerce nonballad
FOUND IN: US(SE)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
BrownIII 324, "Kindling Wood" (3 short texts)
Roud #15888
NOTES: This reads like a street cry, but how many street cries are there from South Carolina? It may be a fragment of a longer ballad, perhaps of an orphan child -- but if so, it has not been located. - RBW
File: Br3324

King and Miller of Mansfield, The


See King Edward the Fourth and a Tanner of Tamworth [Child 273] (File: C273)

King and the Bishop, The


See King John and the Bishop [Child 45] (File: C045)

King Arthur and King Cornwall [Child 30]


DESCRIPTION: King Arthur, disguised, goes to King Cornwall's castle, where Cornwall boasts how he is better than Arthur.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1750 (Percy MS.)
KEYWORDS: royalty disguise bragging
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Child 30, "King Arthur and King Cornwall" (1 text)
OBB 18, "King Arthur and King Cornwall (A Fragment)" (1 text)
ADDITIONAL: Thomas Hahn, editor, _Sir Gawain: Eleven Romances and Tales_, TEAMS (Consortium for the Teaching of the Middle Ages), Medieval Institute Publications, Western Michigan University, 1995), pp. 419-436, "King Arthur and King Cornwall" (1 text)
Roud #3965
NOTES: Sadly, the only text of this piece is from the Percy Folio, and it defective at many points. Nor is there any real hope of recovering another copy; this is clearly a metrical romance, not a ballad. Unless it, like many of the romances (e.g. "King Orfeo") produced a ballad parallel, there is no reason to think this was ever in oral tradition. We don't have even an approximation of the original story, and must reconstruct first the tale, and then the history behind it, as best we can.
It isn't easy. If Arthur existed at all, he lived in one of the most ill-documented periods in history. We know that the Romans conquered southern Britain in the first century C.E. We know that the Roman administration ended in the early fifth century -- leaving a people probably somewhat Romanized (although still speaking Celtic languages) but with little ability to defend themselves. We know that, by the fifth century, German-speaking invaders were arriving, and that they had driven the inhabitants back to Cornwall and Wales and the north of Britain by about the seventh century But we have almost no information about how these events came about.
Davies, p. 58, says that archaeological evident indicates that conquests by the German invaders seem to have largely stopped between 500 and 550. If this is accurate, then perhaps something happened toward the beginning of that period to slow them down. (We need to be cautious, however; Morris, pp. 30-31, notes that the post-Roman Britons left almost nothing in the way of datable artifacts. Thus we can only date when Saxons artifacts first appear. Since many Saxon artifacts come from burials, their front line might be well in advance of their known artifacts.)
We have only one contemporary written source, the monk Gildas. He is in general very ill-informed; he doesn't even seem to have known that the Romans abandoned Britain in 410 (Morris, p. 36). Lacy, p. 234, is about as generous as is possible in declareing that Gildas "is a source of history but not primarily a historian." What value he has is mostly for events in his own lifetime -- and he is not very specific about when he lived! There are a few statements about his life from later chronicles (Kunitz/Haycraft, p. 217), but they were compiled some 500 years after his time and are unlikely to have any accurate data.
Some time in the sixth century, Gildas wrote a bitter complaint about how the moral decline of the British (the book is actually sometimes called the "Liber querulus" or "Book of Complaints"; Jenkins, p. 22), which led to their suffering, and in the course of which he let slip -- almost it seems by accident -- some historical facts, including a very brief description of the siege of Mount Badon. Badon, it appears, was the single most important event in this hazy period, and we will come back to it.
Anderson, p. 42, declares that Gildas is "the earliest piece of Anglo-Latin prose to have any particular importance" -- but adds that it is a "dreary Latin chronicle whose importanceis chiefly negative, in that it says nothing concerning King Arthur." It also contains numerous errors of fact, such as misdating Hadrian's wall by centuries. (Gildas admits to using "foreign sources," according to Kunitz/Haycraft, p. 219; they suggest that this is one reason for his inaccuracies. They also suggest that we may not have his complete history; what remains may be only some sort of epitome.)
To make matters worse, Gildas never tells us who was the British commander at Badon; the one name he mentions around this time is Ambrosius (Alcock, p. 28), but there is no clear reason to connect him with the battle.
The first serious attempt to put Gildas in historical context was made by the Venerable Bede. His account states that, in the fifth century, a British kinglet named Vortigern invited a few German mercenaries into his service to deal with local disturbances (Bede/LL I.15, p. 55). The visitors liked it so much that they went home and brought back a whole invading force (Bede/LL, I.15, p. 56). The date of this is debated -- Bede's estimate was was around 449, but German sources imply a date not far from when the Roman legion left in 410 (Morris, p. 40). The effect is not. The Britons -- who until a few decades earlier had relied upon Roman legions for security -- were soon routed and in retreat. Nowhere in this rather brief account does Bede mention Arthur.
There are two problems here. One is Bede's use of Gildas, and the other is Gildas himself.
Morris states, p. 39, that "Before 597, Bede is a secondary writer," and Alcock, p. 90, is convinced that Gildas is Bede's source. There are clear literary signs that Bede had Gildas before him. On the other hand, Bede adds details -- it appears to me that Bede had another source as well, even if it is only oral tradition. But Bede no more mentions Arthur than did Gildas.
This is not proof of anything ("absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"), but it is indicative. Garnett/Gosse, volume I, p. 35, declare that "Bede is little more than a compiler; his life of St. Cuthbert convicts him of gross credulity... [but he was] the first scholar of his day." He had access to the large libraries at Wearmouth and Jarrow, perhaps the best in Britain at the time. If he does not mention Arthur, it is a strong indication that Arthur was not known in Britain in his time. Similarly, if the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which was begun at the instigation of Alfred the Great and became the standard source for English history from that time on, does not mention either Badon or Arthur, they cannot have been well-known in the late ninth and early tenth.
To be sure, Gerald of Wales, writing in the twelfth century, had an explanation for why Gildas didn't mention Arthur: supposedly Arthur had killed Gildas's brother. (Gerald/Thorpe, p. 259). But he gives no source for this information, and there is absolutely nothing to support it. Gerald is, however, one of our earliest sources for the spread of the Arthurian legend, since it is he who reports on the exhumation of Arthur and Guinivere's alleged grave at Glastonbury (Gerald/Thorpe, pp. 280-288). But Gerald is a late source who gives us little that is useful except for his strange account of the excavation. And our other sources disagree with the account of the excavation on almost every point (Alcock, pp. 73-74). The whole thing may have been a fake anyway -- particularly since the grave marker called Arthur a king, which he almost certainly was not (Jenkins, p. 86).
(The whole Glastonbury thing may have been cooked up by none other than Henry II; supposedly a letter circulated at this time, purporting to be from Arthur, flattering Hnery II but telling him to give up his control of Brittany; Owen, p. 39. Obviously if Arthur was dead, the letter was a fake. So the Glastonbury business was useful to Henry; Jenkins, p. 84. Glastonbury perhaps went along because they had suffered a disastrous fire some years earlier and needed to raise money; Jenkins, pp. 84-85. Henry also arranged for the Bretons to have a prince named Arthur: Henry's son Geoffrey's posthumous son Arthur was Duke of Brittany -- but Henry ruled the place; Jenkins, p. 84. Thus the Glastonbury excavation probably tells us nothing about Arthur himself, but a lot about Arthurian legends in the reign of Henry II -- clearly people in the twelfth century believed Arthur had been active in the Glastonbury area; Alcock, p. 75.)
Alcock, p. 100, implies another explanation why Gildas might suppress Arthur -- he suggests that Ambrosius was an orthodox Christian, while Vortigern followed the Pelagian heresy. If Arthur was also a Pelagian, Gildas might have ignored him. This is just barely on the ragged edge of possibility -- Pelagianism (for which see the notes to "Only Remembered") was a genuine heresy, but it never produced a schism. It was strong in Britain, which was the home of Pelagius -- but we have no sign that it continued to grow in the fifth century. And it had no separate rituals, so you couldn't tell if someone was Pelagian by looking at him. I mention this mostly to show how little detail we have about this period.
Can we trust Bede's interpretation of Gildas? The historicity of Vortigern is much debated -- Alcock, p. 103, notes that in the British dialects, the name means something like "High Chief," meaning that Vortigern may have been a title, not a personal name. In that case, there might be multiple Vortigerns. The whole story of the invitation of the Saxons might well be folklore. The fact that they arrived and quickly began to overrun southern Britain is, however, beyond question. (If they hadn't, this NOTE would not be written in the English language!)
Our other most noteworthy source is the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle," which is the single most important record for pre-Norman England but which was started by Alfred the Great in the late ninth century. It is not contemporary with the Saxon conquest-- not by centuries -- but it was assembled by pulling together every source available. There are several manuscripts of the Chronicle, kept at different locations, and they include different material -- but the general story they give is the same.
According to the Chronicle, it was in 448 (Swanton, p. 12) or 449 (Swanton, p. 13) that Vortigern invited in the Saxons. In 455, their leaders Hengist and Horsa turned on Vortigern. Horsa was killed, and Aesc took his place (Swanton, p. 13). By 465, they were fighting the Welsh (Swanton, pp. 13, 14). Vortigern is mentioned only once in the Chronicle, Ambrosius not at all, and there is no reference to Badon.
The best guess is that the Chronicle's information is largely from Bede, and Bede's information, from Gildas, making the Chronicle a tertiary source. This is fairly important, because the date of the Saxon invasions affects what is possible. If the 449 date is correct, then Ambrosius and the hypothetical Arthur must have been nearly contemporary. But if we accept Morris's date for the Saxon invasion, then we have thirty or forty extra years to play with -- and Morris uses them to hypothesize that Arthur was Ambrosius's successor (Morris, p. 43). Badon was fought late in the fifth century, and stopped the Saxons until after 550.
Of course, this is pure reconstruction, with no documentary support. I would consider very litle to be certain, but would trust Gildas at least this far: The Britons found a savior of sorts in Ambrosius Aurelianus, a man of Roman descent, who finally organized them to fight the Saxons (Bede/LL, I.16, pp. 57). A victory he won at Mount Badon (Badon Hill in Bede/LL) gave the Britons a temporary respite (Bede/LL, I.16, pp. 58).
It was not until some three centuries after Gildas that Arthur enters the tale -- and in the form of a "missing link" as mysterious as Arthur himself. It is a writing attributed to one "Nennius," although we really know nothing about him. Nor is his work coherent; he says that he simply made "a heap" of the historical sources he found (Morris, p. 37). To add to the problem, the work exists in several dozen copies, and some of these seem to have been modified by later hands (Kunitz/Haycraft, p. 375).
It is suggested that "Nennius" finished his work in south Wales in or around 826 (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. ix). "Nennius" seems to have had a significant source for Northumbria not otherwise known, and some saints' legends and scraps, but it is hard to assess his Arthurian source. The best guess is that he rewrote and expanded the few scraps of old material from Gildas and Bede, and perhaps mixed in a little Welsh folklore (the first Welsh account of Arthur is found in the Black Book of Carmarthen, written probably in the period 1150-1200; Malory/Rhys, p. xii), to give a much fuller account. WaceLawman, p. xxii, outlines Nennius as follows (I've shortened their summary even further)
1. Germanic invaders arrive under Hengist and Horsa
2. Conflict between Britons and Saxons. Saxons kill many Britons, often by treachery
3. Vortigern, who brought in the Saxons, died in flames (attacked not by the Saxons but by Ambrosius; Jenkins, p. 24).
4. Ambrosius becomes King of Britain
5. Arthur campaigns against the Saxons, fighting twelve battles ending with the Battle of Badon
Curiously, Arthur just appears in this account; as the translators of WaceLawman say, he has "no parents, no queen, no throne, no overseas conquests -- and no death." Almost a British Melchizedek. And Davies, p. 48, observes that "where it is possible to prove the correctness of Nennius's material [which isn't often], it is clear that his ignorance was monumental." Alcock, p. 34, observes that no source analysis has been done on the relevant sections of his work (and, frankly, I suspect it cannot succeed, given the state of the materials.) But at last we have a mention of Arthur as a leader who fought the Saxons to a halt.
Is it possible that "Nennius" is correct? If this were all we had, we would probably say no. Except for one other early source which mentions Badon. It is very short but at least not wrapped in mystery.
This work is preserved in only a single manuscript, British Library Harleian 3859 (Alcock, p. 29, although he disliked the catalog number on the grounds that several manuscripts were bound within this cover; he prefers to call the one he cares about the "British Historical Miscellany." His explanation seems to be almost deliberately confused -- perhaps to conceal how very thin the evidence is.)
The source consists of two lines in an Easter Table -- a catalog of the yearly dates of Easter, to which a sentence or two is sometimes appended telling of events in a particular year. This particular Easter Table covers 533 years (Alcock, p. 39), but in a singularly incomplete form; it appears that it was being transcribed from an older document, and that it was never finished. For example, the numbers of the years were never filled in (it is reasonable to guess that they were to be written in another color). The dates of some of the events listed can be determined from other sources, and this allows us to establish an approximate chronology, with perhaps a year or two of error.
The Easter Table extends to about the year 955 (Alcock, p. 48), presumably meaning it was assembled after that time, but it is assumed that it garnered materials from early chronicles. This table, incomplete as it is, contains two statements (in Latin). One, for the year 518 (give or take) says that Arthur in that year won the Battle of Badon carrying a cross on his shoulders. The other, for the year 539, refers to the strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Medraut (Modred?) died (Alcock, p. 45). Interestingly, the Camlann conflict is called a "gueith" -- a Welsh rather than a Latin word (Alcock, p. 49; cf. Malory/Rhys, p. x). Badon was listed as a "bellum," the ordinary Latin word for battle. Alcock, pp. 49-50, doubts that this makes the Camlann entry an interpolation, although it looks suspicious to me.
In any case, those two sources are *it*. The sum total of our references to Arthur before he appears as a legendary figure in Welsh myths. "Nennius," written three centuries after the fact, and the Easter Table, incompletely copied perhaps five centuries after the fact. Both credit Arthur with winning the Battle of Badon (which seems, based on Gildas, to have been historical, although Ambrosius may have been the general) and seem to imply a victory by Christian Britons against the Saxons. Nennius, to be sure, has much more to say, but there is no reason to trust it.
The Easter Table, it should be noted, never says that Medraut/Modred was Arthur's son. We do find in Nennius a statement that Arthur killed his son Anwr -- but also a statement that attempts to measure Anwr's grave never produces the same number twice (Jenkins, p. 35; this should give you a clue how much Nennius is worth).
(We might note that, although the story that Arthur fought Modred does show up in the Welsh stories of the Mabinogion, the relevant tale -- "The Dream of Rhonabwy" -- makes "Medrawd" the nephew, not the son, of Arthur; Mabinogion/Gantz, p. 181.)
Neither does the Easter table link Arthur and Ambrosius. Insofar as there is a link at all, it too comes from Nennius, who considered Ambrosius a young prophet (Jenkins, p. 53). The obvious supposition, since our various sources credit Arthur and Ambrosius with the same victories, is that Arthur and Ambrosius are names for the same shadowy person. William of Malmesbury, writing in the early twelfth century, would have us believe that Arthur was Ambrosius's assistant and, apparently, chief general. But Geoffrey of Monmouth combined Ambrosius with a Welsh seer named Merddin, and thus created Merlin Ambrosius, separate from Arthur (Jenkins, p. 53). And thus was a legend born.
Little can be said about the area of Arthur's activity. Alcock, p. 62, shows a list of possible locations for Nennius's 12 battles. He shows six locations for Badon, ranging from the south coast to the region between the Humber and the Wash. Camlann he shows near the future Scottish border, although elsewhere he seems to imply a Cornish location. Alcock, pp. 58-66, engages in a great deal of special pleading to argue that Nennius's account *might* be accurate -- but none of it proves that it *is* accurate. On pp. 72-73, he brings forth some Welsh evidence of uncertain date -- but which at best simply attests to a belief among people in the period before Nennius that Arthur existed.
Alcock's conclusion on p. 89 is that "[W]e have discovered acceptable evidence that Arthur was a renowned British soldier, more probably a great commander than a King. His battles were fought principally in the first part of the sixth century AD or perhaps around the turn of the fifth and sixth centuries." Malory/Rhys, p. ix, backs this by suggesting that Arthur bore the title dux bellorum, the Roman commander of battles -- although this obviously requires that he be a Roman rather than a Celt. Ashley, p. 24, summarizes, "About 500 a chieftain named Arthur, converted by later chroniclers into the legendary King Arthur of the Round Table, won a resounding victory at Mount Badon, of which the location is unknown. Arthur may have been a cavalry leader and the battle may have been fought upon the Upper Thames. If this was so, it was the last contest fought in the afterglow of Roman Britain. Though resistance continued in western England and in Wales for many years, the battle of Mount Badon was the last considerable defeat inflicted upon the pervasive Anglo-Saxons."
I personally think the evidence insufficient to support even these conclusions, but we can take this as, perhaps, the maximum amount of actual historical data and proceed from there. Alcock spends many more pages sifting records for tiny clues that might give us additional information. Frankly, this strikes me as utterly pointless in studying Arthur (although very interesting for the history of Britain); none of it contributed to the later tales.
Whatever the truth about Arthur, his legend in the years after the Saxon conquest was certainly the property of the Welsh -- who were, after all, the survivors of the British people smashed by the Anglo-Saxon invaders. Many of the tales of the Mabinogion are set in the court of Arthur -- although Arthur himself is rarely a major character, and the supporting cast is very different -- we have Gwenhwyvar (Guinevere) and Kei (Sir Kay), and Bedwyr perhaps became Sir Bedivere, but there is no Lancelot (a French name, of course, although Jenkins, p. 79, mentions Welsh Lluch Llauynnauc and Irish Lugh Lamhfada as possible sources), and Gawain, if he exists at all, is Gwalchmai (Mabinogion/Gantz, p. 30).
It was Geoffrey of Monmouth who changed that, with his Historia Britonum, The History of (the Kings of) Britain, published around 1135. Geoffrey -- a cleric who seems to have spend very little time on clerical work (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xv) lived near the Welsh border, and was probably Welsh himself (although WaceLawman, p. xxiii, argues that he is Breton, which connects with the suggestion on p. viii on Malory/Rhys that some of the late tales are Breton). He claimed to have a "British book" which he used as a basis for his work (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, xviii). It seems clear, however, that there was no such book (even Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xviii, admit that he doesn't seem to have taken this source "with tremendous seriousness"). What he really did was take the Welsh legends, plus a few brief Latin chronicles, and massively rewrite and expand them. It was Geoffrey, e.g., who created the story that Arthur was the child of Uther Pendragon on the wife of the Duke of Cornwall (Jenkins, p. 54). His was the first real step in creating the modern legend of King Arthur.
Even the introduction to Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xxiii, which is naturally inclined to be relatively charitable, admits, "We are to turn to the Historia, then, feeling that we are to read not a chronicle, but a romance of early British history... [by an author who] handled his material with interest and ingenuity. What he has done for Arthurian romance is absolutely clear. He raised a national hero, already the center of legend and myth, to the rank of an imperial monarch...."
It is ironic to note that the further development of the legend took place mostly outside Britain. "[Geoffrey's] history was at once denounced by sober historians as 'a shameless lie,' and Geoffrey himself could not have believed very much of it. But it made interesting reading, and was soon worked over into Welsh, English, and French" (Newcomer, p. 37). The French translation was Wace's (who also adapted and expanded freely), from perhaps around 1155-1160 (WaceLawman, p. xix). It was Wace who gave us the Round Table (Jenkins, p. 66).
(Students of folk song will be interested to note that the Arthurian legends inform us about the origin of carols: "The first mention of a carole appears to be in the Anglo-Norman Wace's account, about 1155, of King Arthur's wedding. Here the women carolent and the men behourdent, 'jesting' while they watch the performance"; Chambers, p. 66.)
The next stages of the legend evolved mostly in France, where Chretien de Troyes produced the figure of Lancelot (Jenkins, p. 77, although she seems to think he had some history prior to Chretien; on p. 80, Jenkins makes it sound as if Chretien's big contribution was the love affair between Lancelot and Guinevere). This was followed by the "Vulgate Cycle" -- the anonymous romances also known as the "Prose Lancelot," consisting of "Lancelot," "The Quest of the Holy Grail," and "The Death of King Arthur" (VulgateDeath/Cable, p. 10). Finally Malory took the whole mess and worked it into the (almost) coherent tale that we hear today.
It is worth noting that relatively little of this development happened in England (after all, Arthur was a Celt fighting the invading Saxons; Layamon was first English-language author to really cover Arthur Jenkins, p. 67). Of few English works on Arthur, very little was the direct result of tradition, and none of it (as best we can tell) influenced this song. From the time of Geoffrey on, the story of Arthur was a tale of court bards, not of the folk. Although the British tradition did develop somewhat differently from the French; in the Vulgate Cycle, it is Gawain who pushes Arthur into the disastrous war on Lancelot which lets Modred take over (VulgateDeath/Cable, p. 12), whereas in England at the time we still find Gawain as the almost-perfect hero of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight; Lancelot is mentioned only casually (line 553).
Brooke's conclusion (pp. 191-192) is perhaps typical: "Arthur probably existed, and was a leader in the British revival and reconquest of some part of England about the year 500. But for centuries his legend grew slowly; and it was only in the twelfth century that he came to join Charlemagne and Alexander the Great as the supreme legendary monarch of European literature. His fame grew up, like so many of the legends which flourished in the twelfth century, in the Celtic lands. Its early history is quite obscure. But Arthur was made respectable very largely by the daring inventions of Geoffrey of Monmouth"
Most Englishmen apparently knew it was garbage. Gerald of Wales gave his opinion in a passage about a sick man allegedly tormented by demons (Gerald/Thorpe, p. 117-118): When a copy of the Gospel of John was placed on the sick man's lap, the demons fled -- but if "the gospel were afterward removed and... [Geoffrey's book] put there in its place, just to see what would happen, the demons would alight all over his body, and on the book, too, staying there longer than usual and being even more demanding." Somehow, this did not stop Geoffrey from being accepted and even amplified on the continent.
There is one interesting point about Geoffrey: He seems to base the final, fatal battle of Camlann in Cornwall (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xxi. This is by contrast to the map on p. 62 of Alcock, which locates in near Hadrian's Wall). This is another hint at a conflict between Arthur and the "King of Cornwall." Layamon also places Camlann in Cornwall (Jenkins, p. 69).
It is also Geoffrey who linked the "Medraut" of the Easter Table with "Modred" the nephew of Arthur (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xxiii); as Alcock notes on p. 99, the Easter Table "does not tell us where or why Camlann was fought. It tells us nothing about Medraut, and it is only in the light of later tradition that we identify Medraut with 'Modred' and assume that Arthur and Medraut fought on opposite sides."
So how did we get from this legend to "King Arthur and King Cornwall"? This involves further guesswork. We can of course assume that the composer of the song knew a fairly developed Arthur legend (although it is striking that he seems to base Arthur's kingdom in Brittany, not Britain; Hahn, p. 419) -- but what did he use as the basis for his plot? Obviously the fact that the poem is incomplete makes this hard to determine.
The motivating theme of the ballad is commonplace -- who has not heard "Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?" from the Grimm version of "Snow White."? And the theme of a king boasting of his greatness and then being brought low is familiar all the way back to the tale of Nebuchadnezzar's humbling in Daniel 4 (note the line in Daniel 4:30 -- "Isn't this great Babylon, which I have built by my great power as a royal residence and for my majestic glory"). Daniel's version dates back to c. 165 B.C.E., and there are earlier tales in other languages (which of course would not have been known to the author of this ballad). Plus Jesus more than once speaks of ways in which the over-proud were humbled.
I also think it interesting that the original source for the Arthur legends is Welsh mythology, and the "Tale of Culhwch and Olwen" in the Mabinogion involves Arthur's court in a set of prodigies somewhat similar to this. And "Culhwch and Olwen" is the part of the Mabinogion considered most free of French influence (Geoffrey/Evans/Dunn, p. xiii).
Most interesting is the fact, noted by Mabinogion/Gantz, p. 134, that the first part of "Culhwch" lists 39 incredible tasks assigned to Culhwch and his companions, with only about half fulfilled and the fulfillment of only two described in detail. Parry/Shipley, p. 1004, offers a possible explanation for this, stating that early Welsh prose tales did not have fixed form -- just a plot outline, with only the verse portions (if there were any) to be memorized verbatim. He believes "Culhwich" an example of a tale which has been only partially preserved -- an incomplete example of the form. If so, what else might have been in a "pure" form? (We have only two copies of "Culhwch," and one of those incomplete.) It could indeed have been a tale of boasts....
It is fairly clear that this song is not directly tied to the historical tradition started by Geoffrey of Monmouth, since that had Arthur conceived in Cornwall. While Geoffrey's account might hint at a conflict between Arthur's realm and the realm of Cornwall, Arthur could hardly be unaware of the Cornish realm. What's more,in Geoffrey's tale, Arthur was conceived by magic; it was not the Cornish who were enchanters.
Child, however, connects this with the legend of Charlemagne's Journey to Jerusalem. Similarly, Lacy, p. 316, says that the piece "bears comparison with the Old French Pelerinage de Charlemagne" -- but offers no details. Child has a description of the Pelerinage; I will summarize mine from Oinas just to give an independent source.
"The Pelerinage de Charlemagne (Charlemagne's Pilgrimage) is one of the most interesting early chansons de geste in the Cycle of the King. The poem, which is generally dated at the beginning of the twelfth century, survived only in one relatively late manuscript which has been lost since 1879. Fortunately, copies were made.... The work is relatively short (870 verses) and seems to be a parody of the epic genre. It is in alexandrines rather than the customary dectasyllables" (Oinas, p. 202).
Charlemagne is told by his wife that Hugo, ruler of Greece and Constantinople, is said to be more majestic than Charlemagne himself. Nettled by this, Charlemagne goes first to Jerusalem (where the patriarch gives him many strong relics). He then goes to Constantinople, where Hugo entertains him in an enchanted palace, When they go to bed after a feast, Charlemagne's men boast to one another of the incredible feats they can perform. A spy reveals their boasts to Hugo, who demands they fulfil their boasts. They manage to do so -- with supernatural help. Hugo then gives Charlemagne a crown, and the Franks believe Charlemagne wears it more fittingly than Hugo. Charlemagne goes home, and his wife asks forgiveness.
This is, of course, not historical. The Byzantine Emperors of this period were indeed wealthier and more civilized than the Franks, but none of them were named "Hugo" or anything like it. The Byzantine Emperors in the period after Charlemagne was crowned Emperor were Irene (797-802), Nicephoros I (802-811), Stauracius (811), Michael I (811-813), and Leo V (813-820) (ChambersDict, p. 146). It will surely be evident that this was an unsettled time in Byzantine history; it would have been difficult for any of these Emperors to host Charlemagne in style.
To be sure, Charlemagne's Pilgrimage could not have come after he became Emperor in 800 -- because the tale mentions Roland, and Oliver, and Archbishop Turpin. This means that the visit to the East must have taken place before 778, when Roland died at Roncesvalles.
But an early date poses a different problem -- because Charlemagne, while King of the Franks, was not in the period before Roncesvalles considered the equal of the Emperor of Byzantium -- who, after all, had supervision of the Holy Places, even if they were actually in Islamic hands. The Byzantine Emperor was an *emperor*; Charlemagne in 778 was the strongest king in western Christendom, but only a King, and only the second of his dynasty, and even possibly illegitimate (Thorpe, p. 4).
Of course, the bottom line is, the mention of Oliver proves that the "Pilgrimage" had to be written after the Song of Roland, so the chronology is probably beyond straightening out.
The simple fact is that Charlemagne did not make such a voyage to the east -- although he did have good relations with the Byzantines (Thorpe, pp 70-71). And he did go on several pilgrimages. It's just that they were pilgrimages to Rome, not the Holy Land.
Owen, p. 27, suggests that the "Pilgrimage" was in fact written in the late twelfth century, after the disastrous Second Crusade (which accomplished nothing except to kill a lot of Europeans and damage the Crusading kingdoms in the east). Louis VII and Eleanor of Aquitaine -- who had less than harmonious relations -- had gone to the east in the 1140s, and came back ready to divorce. Owen coments, "The whole story is a burlesque, and I am not the first to see in it a possily wry comment on Louis's crusade and a dig at the king's marital insecurity...." This cannot be proved, but if true, it makes it reasonable that the story would be inaccurate -- it wasn't a story of Charlemagne, except by projection (using the Song of Roland as a base); little wonder if, three and a half centuries after the fact, it got some details wrong!
Of course, this might cause us to wonder if there might have been a still earlier Pilgrimage epic which inspired Charlemagne's Pilgrimage.
It should also be noted that there was interchange between Welsh and French romance in the period when the French were building the Arthurian legend. The Welsh, according to Parry/Shipley, p. 1005, had versions of "The Song of Roland" and "The Pilgrimage of Charlemagne," among others. But tales of Charlemagne -- and Roland and his betrayer Ganelon -- were widespread; Roland/Butler, p. xix, points out that Chaucer refers to a traitor as "a very Ganelon," and Dante mentions Roland's horn, and the Song of Roland itself was translated into German and Icelandic and Italian and beyond (Roland/Butler, p. xviii).
The boasting which brings Charlemagne and his companions so much trouble is certainly not particular to the Pilgrimage of Charlemagne; we find it also in the Song of Roland, and indeed the "gab" is apparently a characteristic of French tales (Roland/Terry, p. xix). Consider, too, Thor and Loki's contest with the giants in Norse myth.
Nor is the common element of the spy necessarily a link. The same trick is also found in the Tristan story (Beroul/Fedrick, p. 16). Indeed, Beroul's version of Tristan more nearly resembles "King Arthur and King Cornwall" than does the Charlemagne story -- in the latter, the spy is merely a spy, while in Beroul, the spy is a magic-working dwarf, like the Billy Blin' of "King Arthur." To be sure, the Tristan romance, despite its British setting, seems no more native to England than tales of Charlemagne -- but it was much more widely known than the tale of Charlemagne's Pilgrimage.
In terms of setting, "King Arthur and King Cornwall" again stands closer to the legends than the Charlemagne story. Cornwall, unlike Hugo of Byzantium, is a pagan -- and a user of magic, like the giants in the Thor myth.
Competition between Arthur's knights and those of Cornwall is also known -- even in Malory, book IX, chapter XXXVII, we find Arthur's knights jousting with those of King Mark of Cornwall (Malory/Rhys, p. 357). Of course this is a later graft from the Tristan legend, and no one jousted in the time of the real Arthur, but it shows that such tales did float about.
In one sense, the song is accurate: Cornwall was the last part of England proper to come under English dominance (with the curious side-note that, according to Mabinogion/Gantz, p. 177, Arthur's court seems to be based in Cornwall in several tales, including "Culhwch and Olwen.") Egbert, King of Wessex (died 839) is often credited with conquering Cornwall in 815 (OxfordCompanion, p. 338), but the area retained its own culture and some measure of independence; it did not become a Norman earldom until c. 1140 (OxfordCompanion, p. 247), then a dukedom from 1337, although frequently held by the crown from that time on. Thus a King Arthur who actually ruled what is now England would have had, other than the small kingdoms of Wales and Scotland, only one actual neighbor in England, and that would be Cornwall -- although there is no evidence that Cornwall ever had its own King.
Bottom line: "King Arthur and King Cornwall" is obviously derived from the same sorts of legends as "The Pilgrimage of Charlemagne" -- but until and unless we find more of the romance, I do not think we can assume direct literary dependence.
There does appear to be a different sort of dependence in that the hero of "King Arthur" is Sir Bredbeddle (Hahn, p. 420). Despite his improbable name, this fellow appears in another Arthurian romance, "The Greene Knight." This is the inferior version of the tale of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" found in the Percy Folio; Bredbeddle is the Green Knight of the tale. The fact that there are two tales in the Percy Folio involving him, and no mentions elsewhere, makes one wonder if someone didn't write a Bredbeddle cycle which survives only in the folio. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C030

King Canna Swagger, A


See Beggars and Ballad Singers (File: GrD3486)

King David


See Little David, Play on Your Harp (File: CNFM046)

King David had a Pleasant Dream [Laws O16]


DESCRIPTION: A soldier asks for a kiss. The girl refuses; her mother has told her to avoid soldiers. He replies with the story of David, who began as a shepherd but ended as a king and the killer of Goliath. The girl decides to kiss him after all
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1905 (Belden)
KEYWORDS: soldier courting Bible royalty
FOUND IN: US(Ap,So)
REFERENCES (4 citations):
Laws O16, "King David had a Pleasant Dream"
Belden, p 170, "King David had a Pleasant Dream" (1 text)
SharpAp 175, "The Slighted Soldier" (1 text, 1 tune)
DT 478, KNGDAVID
Roud #988
File: LO16

King Edward the Fourth and a Tanner of Tamworth [Child 273]


DESCRIPTION: The King goes out a-riding and meets the Tanner. The Tanner gives abrupt answers to the King's questions. The King tries to exchange horses; again the Tanner wants no part of the deal. Finally the King gives the Tanner a gift/pension
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1765 (Percy) (entered in the Stationer's Register in 1589)
KEYWORDS: royalty contest disguise trick gift money horse
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1154-1189 - Reign of King Henry II
1399-1413 - Reign of King Henry IV
1461-1470 AND 1471-1483 - Reign of King Edward IV
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Bord)) Ireland Canada(Ont)
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Child 273, "King Edward IV and a Tanner of Tamworth" (4 texts -- though three of them are appendices)
Bronson 273, "King Edward IV and a Tanner of Tamworth" (3 versions)
Percy/Wheatley II, pp. 92-100, "King Edward IV. And Tanner of Tamworth"; III, pp. 178-188, "The King and Miller of Mansfield" (2 texts)
Leach, pp. 649-653, "King Edward the Fourth and a Tanner of Tamworth" (1 text)
PBB 73, "King Edward the Fourth and a Tanner of Tamworth" (1 text)
BBI, ZN1472, "In summer time when leaves grow green"
Roud #248
NOTES: The king mentioned in this ballad varies. Child's primary text simply calls the king "Edward." Of the three texts in the appendices, the first gives no name. The second goes under the title "King Edward the Fourth and a Tanner of Tamworth," but again the King is simply called "Edward." The third text (from the Percy folio, but not the version printed in the Reliques) is "King Henry II and the Miller of Mansefield," but again no name is given in the text itself. The records of 1564 also mention a printing of "The story of Kynge Henry IIIJth and the Tanner of Tamowthe."
On the other hand, Henry II was engaged in constant wars with France. Henry IV was an usurper who had to deal with periodic rebellions. And Edward IV lived during the Wars of the Roses. None of them had the petty cash to give the sorts of rewards mentioned here. Henry IV, in particular, had no money at all.
What I suspect to be the earliest mention of the song lists no name at all. According to Holt, p. 140, one Robert Langham heard an entertainment in July 1575 when Queen Elizabeth visited the Earl of Leicester's palace of Kenilworth; among the pieces perforned was "The King and the Tanner." We can't prove that that is this song, but it seems likely.
Chambers, p. 155, notes that there is a large class of "King and Subject narratives," most of which Child ignores. Chambers adds that this particular piece is "a late and much abridged version of The King and the Barker."
No matter which king we choose, there is no historical record of an event such as this. There is at least some verisimilitude in assigning the piece to Edward IV.
Edward was a hunter (most English kings were), but could be easily distracted by those he came across. The story is that he met his wife Elizabeth Woodville this way; she had been left a landless widow by the Wars of the Roses, and she deliberately stationed herself along his route to beg him for help (Lofts, p. 81).
Sadly for the legend, Ross, pp. 85-86, declares that "No one knows when Edward first met and became enamored of Elizabeth [Woodville or Wydeville, his future Queen]." The sources are assembled by Dockray, pp. 40-49, and most have little to say except that the two were secretly married, with almost no witnesses except her family, in May 1464. Kendall, p. 60, suspects that he had first seen her in passing in 1461 -- almost as if he had met his wife in the way described in this ballad. Edward actually kept the marriage secret for four months, possibly because he knew it was so far beneath his dignity to marry a woman who was English rather than a foreign princess, a widow, a mother, a Lancastrian (her former husband had died fighting against Edward in 1461), several years older than her husband, and the daughter of a mere knight (Lander, pp. 104-105; Dockray, pp. 40-41, who notes that all these things made her an "unsuitable" consort).
Ross, p. 87, remarks that "Edward's motives for this remarkable misalliance remain a matter for awestruck speculation," and notes that it "ultimately contributed largely to the downfall of the Yorkist dynasty." For all the speculation about the reasons, it is clear that, ultimately, it was a love match (or, at least, a lust match). Edward may have thought he had reasons other than physical, but there seems little doubt that it caused his contemporaries to think him impulsive (in the time of Richard III, there would be charges that he had been bewitched).
In addition, Edward was a friendly, cheerful man who could easily be involved in games such as this. He was also a forgiving man, less likely than many kings to punish someone he met merely for being surly. Ross, p. 52, refers to his "natural generosity" -- even in his treatment of known traitors. Ross, p. 10, also quotes Dominic Mancini regarding his character: "Edward was of a gentle nature and cheerful aspect." Ross, p. 122, notes how Edward even ignored evidence of treason; when the Earl of Warwick began conspiring against him, "His easy-going nature, persistent optimism, and confidence in his personal harm prevented him from taking a hard and suspicious line."
Edward was also the sort of figure about whom legends easily arose. Even by Plantagenet standards, he was unusually handsome; Ross, p. 10, tells us that "His good looks were universally acclaimed by his contemporaries.... Even his sharpest contemporary critic, Philippe de Commynes, who met him twice, repeatedly praises his fine appearance: 'He was a very handsome prince, and tall... I do not remember ever having seem a more handsome prince.'"
On the other hand, if we assume this is truly about Edward IV, we probably have to abandon Tamworth as a setting. Ross, p. 271, notes that "The more distant parts of his realm saw him but rarely," and adds that his visits to the north of England were "infrequent." He was there before he became King, but after that, it was mostly in times of crisis -- at the Battle of Towton, or during the Earl of Warwick's rebellion. He went as far north as Nottingham in 1475 and again in 1476, and visited Pontrefract and York in 1478, but Tamworth, near modern Birmingham, seems to have been too far west to earn a visit in times of peace. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C273

King Edwards


DESCRIPTION: "There never was a king so great, but love cause him to abdicate. Ch: Love, love alone, cause King Edwards to leave the t'rone (repeat)." Verses sung in first person as Edward explains reasons for abdicating and marrying Wallace Simpson.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1938 (Colcord)
KEYWORDS: shanty love royalty marriage
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1936 - Abdication of Edward VIII and his marriage to Wallis Simpson
FOUND IN: West Indies
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Colcord, pp. 186-187, "King Edwards" (1 text, 1 tune)
ST Colc186 (Partial)
Roud #4707
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "Edward's Abdication" (theme of Edward VIII)
NOTES: I don't have a copy of Thomas-Makin', but based on the description of "Edward's Abdication" I'd say that even though they are covering the same subject, these are two different songs. [Yes, they are. And this is pretty definitely the better one. - RBW] Colcord gives a tune for the chorus but says that the verses were song in a droning monotone. The chorus tune, by the way, is not "House Carpenter," which was the tune supposed for "Edward's Abdication."
Brought back from the West Indies by a Prof. Samuel E. Morison, and said to have been sung by Negro boatmen in Basse Terre, St. Kitts. - SL
Morison is, of course, the great American historian who was particularly involved in naval history. I believe he published this in one of his own books also, though I don't know which one; I'm sure I've seen the text before.
For additional information on Edward VIII and his marriage, see the notes to "Edward's Abdication." This song in addition mentions the Duke of York, Edward's brother, who became George VI (reigned 1936-1952). Stanley Baldwin (1867-1947) was Conservative Prime Minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929, and 1935-1937. The Abdication Crisis of 1936 was in some ways his finest hour; by consulting with the royal family, his own party, the opposition, and the Dominions, he found an answer everyone could accept. He resigned immediately after, leaving the post to Neville Chamberlain -- and you *know* how that turned out....
To tell this from "Edward's Abdication," consider the first few lines of text:
King Edwards:
Love, love alone, Cause King Edwards to leave the t'rone
Love, love alone, Cause King Edwards to leave the t'rone.
Edward's Abdication:
Come hearken good friends to this story so tre
Of a lord of high degree;
Concerning the love of this bonny young prince.
The King of his own countree. - RBW
File: Colc186

King Emanuel


DESCRIPTION: "O my king Emanuel, my Emanuel above, Sing the glory to my King Emanuel. If you want to walk the golden street, and you join the golden band, Sing glory be to my King Emanuel." The singer tells of the joys of heaven
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1867 (Allen/Ware/Garrison)
KEYWORDS: religious nonballad
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Allen/Ware/Garrison, p. 26, "King Emanuel" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #11979
NOTES: Allen/Ware/Garrison spell the name in this song "Emanuel" (one "m"), and I have followed this even though it has no scriptural basis; in the King James rendering of Isaiah 7:14, 8:8, it's "Immanuel," and in Matthew 1:23 we find "Emmanuel." Nor is Emmanuel ever called a king, though this usage is understandable since in Matthew 1:23 (though not the uses in Isaiah) it is taken to refer to Jesus. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: AWG026

King Estmere [Child 60]


DESCRIPTION: King Estmere, aided by his brother Adler Younge, seeks to wed the daughter of King Adland. He wins her troth; at threat of losing her to rival (heathen) king of Spain, he attends the wedding in guise of a harper, kills his rival, and wins the bride.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1765 (Percy)
KEYWORDS: courting marriage disguise trick royalty
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (5 citations):
Child 60, "King Estmere" (1 text)
Percy/Wheatley I, pp. 85-98, "King Estmere" (1 text)
OBB 41, "King Estmere" (1 text)
Gummere, pp. 270-279+358-359, "King Estmere" (1 text)
ADDITIONAL: Iona & Peter Opie, The Oxford Book of Narrative Verse, pp. 100-108, "King Estmere" (1 text)
Roud #3970
NOTES: This ballad does not exist in any proper copy. It was found in the Percy manuscript, but Percy himself tore it out (apparently to give to the printer or someone, but not until he had rewritten it in his pompous style; Nick Groom, The Making of Percy's Reliques, Oxford English Monographs, 1999, pp. 231, 46), and the pages have been lost. Thus the only reference is the text printed in the Reliques -- and, from Percy's comments and his patently false claim to have another copy, it seems clear that he touched that up somewhere. Nor do Percy's two editions agree entirely.
The Opies and E. K. Chambers, English Literature at the Close of the Middle Ages, Oxford, 1945, 1947, p. 181, both note an item mentioned in The Complaint of Scotland (1549), "quhou the king of est mure land mareit the kyngis docher of vest mure land." Possibly the same story -- but who knows? It does seem to imply that "Estmere" is the "East Moor" -- i.e. the lands east of the West Moor, or Westmoreland. Which would be Northumberland or maybe Durham. Of course, neither Northumberland nor Durham had a King -- Northumbria had an Earl, until the county was upgraded to a Dukedom, and Durham was governed primarily by its bishop.
Unless one is prepared to go back to Anglo-Saxon times, anyway, and assume that King Estmere is the king of the nation of Northumbria (effectively destroyed around 850 C.E. by the Vikings). In which case Adland/Westmoor is the Kingdom of Strathclyde. But, of course, there was no nation of Spain back then.... - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C060

King George IV's Visit to Edinburgh


DESCRIPTION: The singer's friend Pate has come to say King George has come to visit Holyrood. They think of going to see him but decide not to risk the crowd and cold but rather to stay at home, drink some more, and toast the king from home.
AUTHOR: William Lillie (source: GreigDuncan1)
EARLIEST DATE: 1914 (GreigDuncan1)
KEYWORDS: travel drink Scotland royalty
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (1 citation):
GreigDuncan1 138, "King George IV's Visit to Edinburgh" (1 text, 1 tune)
Roud #5819
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The King's Visit
NOTES: GreigDuncan1: "This visit took place in August 1822." "Holyrood is the royal palace in Edinburgh"[p. 532]. - BS
The history of the joint monarchs of Great Britain was one of ignoring Scotland as much as possible. Once James I went to London, he tried to avoid ever going to Edinburgh. Charles I went to Scotland only when he had to. Charles II spent more time there when he was trying to gain the crown, but ignored it after he was restored. William III and Anne and the first three Georges all avoided a country which was far less willing to acknowledge them than was England.
The coming of George IV was therefore a fairly significant event. Commenting on the aftermath of the 1745 Jacobite rebellion, Christopher Sinclair-Stevenson, Blood Royal: The Illustrious House of Hanover (Doubleday, 1980), p. 63, remarks that "it was the English, above all George IV, who suddenly decided that the Jacobites had been wrong, but very definitely romantic." He was actually painted wearing a tartan, and started the habit of visiting Scotland that Victoria so happily followed. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.4
File: GrD1138

King Henry [Child 32]


DESCRIPTION: King Henry goes hunting and encounters a hideous woman. For courtesy he salutes her, only to find her making incredible demands -- first the flesh of his animals, and finally that he sleep with her. He does, to find her transformed into a beautiful woman
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE:
KEYWORDS: courting sex shape-changing royalty
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Aber))
REFERENCES (6 citations):
Child 32, "King Henry" (1 text)
Bronson 32, "King Henry" (1 version)
Leach, pp. 124-126, "King Henry" (1 text)
OBB 16, "King Henry" (1 text)
DBuchan 4, "King Henry" (1 text, 1 tune in appendix) {Bronson's {#1})
DT 32, KINGHENR*
Roud #3967
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Marriage of Sir Gawaine" [Child 31] (theme of the loathly woman)
NOTES: For a discussion of the Loathly Woman theme, see the notes to "The Marriage of Sir Gawaine" [Child 31]. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C032

King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164] --- Part 01


DESCRIPTION: The English king sends to the French king a reminder of tribute due. The French king says our king is too young to be a threat and sends tennis balls instead. Our king takes an army, excluding married men and widows' sons, and succeeds against the French
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1820 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 25(1028)); many undated manuscript copies predate this [for example, Bodleian Harding B 1(38)], and D'Urfey had something similar
KEYWORDS: war royalty battle
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1413 - Accession of Henry V
1415 - Henry V attacks France, captures Harfleur, and wins the Battle of Agincourt
1415-1421 - Continuing campaigns in France
1421 - Henry marries Catherine (the youngest daughter of Charles VI "the Mad," the king of France) and is declared the heir of France
1422 - Death of Henry V
FOUND IN: Britain(England,Scotland(Aber)) US(Ap,NE,SE)
REFERENCES (7 citations):
Child 164, "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France" (1 text, 2 tunes) {Bronson's #6, #1}
Bronson 164, "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France" (10 versions)
Flanders-Ancient3, pp. 145-148, "King Henry the Fifth's Conquest of France" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #2 a/b, although the three transcriptions are all slightly different musically}
Leach, pp. 463-466, "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France" (2 texts)
Niles 49, "King Henry Fith's Conquest of France" (3 texts, 1 tune)
BBI, ZN305, "As our King lay musing on his bed"
DT 164, HENRYV*
Roud #251
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 25(1028), "King Henry the Fifth's Conquest of France" ("As our king lay musing upon his bed"), J. Pitts (London), 1802-1819; also Harding B 1(38), "King Henry V. his Conquest of France"
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf. "The Agincourt Carol" (subject)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The Fency King and the English King
Henry's Tribute
The Tennis Balls
NOTES: The career of Henry V marked the high point, for the English, of the Hundred Years' War. That war, fought between England and France with some participation by other countries, was a long, incredibly complex business (as you'd expect for a war that lasted from 1437 to 1453 -- though with many long periods of truce).
Because this is so complicated, I ended up with what is (as of this writing) the third-longest entry in the Ballad Index. I have therefore broken it up into the following sections, divided among four different entries in the Ballad Index. which you can search for if you don't want to read the whole thing. These aren't really chapters; the note is meant to be read continuously. But it may help you to find the part you most want.
Contents:
*** Included in this entry:*
* Full References for the song
* Bibliography
*** Included in the Entry "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 02 (File Number Link C164A):*
* The Causes of the War
* The Reign of Edward III
* Strengths and Weaknesses of France and England
*** Included in the Entry "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 03 (File Number Link C164B):*
* Edward III, Sluys, Crecy, Poitiers, and Bretigny
* The Failure of Bretigny; Richard II and Henry IV
*** Included in the Entry "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 04 (File Number Link C164C):*
* The Reign of Henry V
* 1415: Harfleur and Agincourt
* The Second Invasion and Troyes: Henry the Heir of France
* The Death of Henry V and the Regency of Bedford
* Orleans
*** Included in the Entry "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 05 (File Number Link C164D):*
* The Death of Bedford and the Loss of France
* England After the Wars: the Overthrow of Lancaster
* The Historical Content of the Ballad
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C164

King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164] --- Part 02


DESCRIPTION: Continuation of the notes to "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of FranceÓ [Child 164]. Entry continues in "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 03 (File Number C164B)
Last updated in version 2.5
NOTES: THE CAUSES OF THE WAR
The Hundred Years' War started with a dispute over land. Under Henry II (reigned 1154-1189), England had controlled most of western France: Henry had inherited Normandy from his great-grandfather William the Conqueror; Anjou, Maine, and Touraine from his father Geoffrey of Anjou; and had gained Acquitaine (Guyenne and other lands) by marrying its Duchess Eleanor. He would also manage to gain working control of Brittany by marrying one of his sons to the heiress. (For a map of all this, see e.g. Ashley-Kings, p. 519.)
Over the next century and a half, those possessions were nibbled away by the French government. A large part of the problem was that, while the English King was the Duke or Count of the French territories, he still owed homage to the King of France for them. Petty nobles were always appealing to the French government for redress, and the French king often seized the land as a result. The English were usually unable to reclaim the land.
Sometimes the French captured more than just a border strip. In 1204, they recaptured the whole Duchy of Normandy in one great campaign (Harvey, p. 82). It was King John who lost the Duchy, and people said it was because he was too involved with his young wife Isabella of Angouleme -- but the real problem was that John's older brother Richard had left England bankrupt with his crusades and his temper and his ransom after he had been captured by the Austrians.
John tends to get blamed for a lot of things, these days I think mostly because of his role in the Robin Hood legends, and there is no question that he was a very violent man. Most monarchs of the time were. Many historians still condemn him as a disaster. But it seems to me that the balance has shifted somewhat: He was no worse than other kings of the time, merely much more unlucky -- his brother had left him with a lot of enemies and a lot of problems, and no money to deal with them.
Still, John's reign left England so weak that the French actually invaded -- at the time John's son Henry III was crowned, there was "no organized government, no exchequer, no royal seal. London and half the shires were held by Louis of France and the baronial rebels" (Powicke, p. 1).
Amazingly, the death of John brought most of the barons (who the year before had forced the Magna Carta upon him) back to the side of the new king. A major victory for the English at Lincoln (Powicke, pp. 9-11) and a series of smaller engagements freed England of the French invaders.
But an England distracted by invasion could hardly counter-attack in France. The French had invaded England before completing the conquest of the English territory in Gascony, but even after they were driven out of Britain, they continued to nibble away at the English property in the south of France. This continued through the reign of John's son Henry III (reigned 1216-1272). Henry III in 1258 agreed to the Treaty of Paris, in which he formally gave up his claim to Normandy, Anjou, and other northern territories, in return for being confirmed in Guyenne; he even picked up a few additional districts at the borders (Perroy, p. 61). The treaty, however, did not cause the French to stop nibbling.
The next king, the energetic Edward I (reigned 1272-1307) tried to turn things around. He stayed at peace with France for two decades (Wilkinson, p. 98), but French lawyers continued to press claims against the English domain (Wilkinson, p. 99). And, in 1294, the French king declared all English territory in France forfeit.
Edward was far the better soldier of the two monarchs; had he been fighting only the French, he might have been able to regain the territory directly (since it is believed the Gascons for the most part preferred English to French rule). But he was already fighting Wales, and the situation with Scotland was also heating up. He simply didn't have the resources to pull off all the things he was trying (Prestwich, p. 18, notes that he never found the money to complete Beaumaris Castle in Wales, and at one point apparently resorted to paying his masons with leather coin-shaped IOUs because he had not the ready coin to pay them). The three-way wars, and perhaps Edward's increasing age, seems to have left him far less able to deal with problems after about 1290 (Prestwich, pp. 26-27).
The English might have lost their foothold in France completely had not the French been badly beaten at Courtrai by the Flemings in 1302. This gave Edward the strength to negotiate things back to the situation as it had been before the confiscation (Wilkinson, pp. 101-102). Still, that left the English with only a rather precarious hold on their southern territory. (And would cause the future King Edward III to be "conditioned" to fighting with France over his holdings there; Ormrod, p. 17.)
And then came the disastrous Edward II. Most of us will know him for losing the Battle of Bannockburn, or for being deposed in 1327, but he also oversaw the loss of additional land in France. By the time his son Edward III took the throne, English possessions in France amounted to little more than a coastal strip from Bordeaux to Bayonne. (And even that had been confiscated again a few years before, and once again given back.) As Sedgwick notes on p. 23, this was only about an eighth of the original Angevin dominion. It's not really fair to blame Edward II for all the English problems -- Edward I's biggest single defect was his financial incompetence (Prestwich, p. 41), and he left the problem for Edward II to solve -- but he failed utterly to improve the situation, and he faced baronial revolts throughout his reign (Prestwich, pp. 83-85, etc.); these can only have weakened the crown.
THE REIGN OF EDWARD III
Edward III came to power in two uncomfortable stages. After the most recent French takeover of Guyenne, Edward II had sent his wife Isabel (called the "she wolf of France"on p. 17 of Sedgwick, though Shakespeare saved that name for Margaret of Anjou, who deserved it even more; cf. 3 Henry VI I.iv.111) and his son to try to negotiate with their cousin Philip. But by letting her take their son, Edward II had given Isabel the key player in the English political situation. She scorned her husband, and the fact that she had her son meant that could stay in France until Edward II was put aside -- or she could start her own conspiracy (Prestwich, p. 96). She chose the latter, strengthening her hand by marrying Edward to Philippa of Hainault; soldiers from the Low Countries enabled her to invade England.
In 1326, when Edward III was fourteen, his mother and her lover Roger Mortimer made their move (Prestwich, p. 97). Edward II failed to respond in any useful way, and was deposed in early 1327 (Prestwich, p. 98). He was killed later in the year (Perroy, pp. 58-59). Edward III was now theoretically king, but his mother and Mortimer ran things -- with great brutality, and without much success; their attempts to fight Scotland, e.g., resulted in an unfavorable treaty in 1328 (Ormrod, p. 14).
In 1330, Edward rebelled III against his own mother, killing Mortimer and taking power into his own hands. He found himself in a very interesting situation. For one thing, he could make a very strong case that he should be King of France. France had no real succession law at this time; Perroy, p. 71, notes that for more than three centuries, every King had had sons to succeed him, so none had been needed -- the crown just naturally passed to the King's son (who often was crowned before his father died).
But that suddenly changed. The old king Philip IV "the Fair" (i.e. "Handsome," not "Just" or "Unbiased"), who had died in 1314, had had three sons. Louis X had died in 1316. He left a posthumous son who died within days and an infant daughter Joan who was set aside (Perroy, p. 72, seems to think that Joan of Navarre would have had a better chance of succeeding had it not been for the brief life of John the Posthumous, since there would have been no chance for people to sit around waiting). Louis's brother Philip V, who perhaps used the time between the old king's death and the baby's birth to improve his position, reigned 1316-1322. There had been some dissatisfaction when he succeeded (Perroy, p. 73), but when he died, leaving only daughters, the throne apparently went to his brother Charles without serious protest. Charles IV reigned 1322-1328 and left one daughter and a pregnant wife (Perroy, p. 74). The child was a daughter, and based on the recent precedents, was set aside.
In better times, the Pope might have intervened at this point. But the Papacy was under the French thumb. Philip the Fair had actually called a Pope to stand before a church council (Renouard, p. 13), and since 1305 the Popes had resided at Avignon, and were all French (Renouard, p. 15). Not all Avignon popes were entirely worthless, as is sometimes claimed; Urban V would eventually be sainted (Renouard, p. 55). But the French king definitely was in a position to pressure them (Dante, in fact, called the early popes of this period the French king's "whore"; Saunders, p. 35. Another wit of the time called Avignon a "bawdy house"; Sedgwick, p. 22. On pp. 123-124, Saunders notes an instance where Urban V was forced to deny Edward III's son Edmund a dispensation to marry a rather distant cousin because the French feared the match). It was not until 1365, when England and France were theoretically at peace, that the Pope decided to go back to Rome (Renouard, p. 58), and it didn't arrive until 1367, and even then, much of the administration was left in Avignon (Renouard, p. 60).
It is deeply ironic that this Papal ineffectiveness came about because the Pope elected in 1305, Clement V, was a Gascon who truly wanted peace between France and England; Renouard, p. 20. But Clement V -- who had helped arrange the marriage of Edward II to Isabella of France; Renouard, p. 21 -- died in 1314. And his successor, though he thought about returning to Rome, was comfortable in Avignon and feared the political situation in Italy (Renouard, pp. 27-28). (This was the political situation underlying Dante's Divine Comedy, which, if you study Dante, you will know was extremely unsettled).
The next Pope, Benedict XII, decided it was time to build a palace in Avignon (Renouard, p. 41), and the Pope after that, Clement VI, built an even fancier dwelling, and that was that. For much of the war, there simply was no impartial pope to mediate. Benedict XII was still Pope when the Hundred Years' War started, and though Renouard declares he had "fundamental good sense," few of the other authors I've read think much of him. And Innocent VI, who succeeded Clement VI in 1352, had so many burdens due to demands by the cardinals and the poverty caused by Clement VI's excesses that he could do nothing (Renouard, p. 49).
This was the situation when Charles IV died. With his daughter out of the running, there were three candidates left for the crown of France. One was Isabel, the sister of Louis X, Philip V, and Charles IV -- or, if the French insisted on a male king but would allow succession in the female line, her son Edward III. A second possibility was Count Philip of Evreuex, who was himself of the French royal family (he was the son of Philip the Fair's younger half-brother Louis) and who by this time had married Joan of Navarre, the daughter of Louis X (in later centuries, they might have been proclaimed joint monarchs, like William and Mary or Ferdinand and Isabella, but that apparently never occurred to anyone). The third candidate was Philip of Valois, the son of Philip the Fair's full brother Charles of Valois and hence the first cousin of the three recently deceased royal brothers (Perroy, p. 74).
Perroy notes that Philip of Valois, already the regent of France, was an adult, of known competence and no great moral disqualifications, and he was the senior prince to be descended from Philip III entirely in male line. In contrast, Isabel (who had shown up in France in 1325 with her lover Mortimer) was regarded as an appalling degenerate; Edward her son was still very young; and Philip of Evreuex was also young and also had a questionable character.
It was an odd situation. If one ignored Joan, the daughter of Louis X (which everyone did, since she was only a little more than twelve years old and at this time had no supporters though she did became Queen of Navarre; in any case, she had *already* been passed over), then under English law, which permitted succession in the female line; Isabel was the rightful Queen of France and Edward her heir. The French, however, managed to dig up a law -- the so-called "Salic Law" -- that said that the throne of France could only be passed on through a male line (no one really believed this law was relevant, but the French didn't want an English king, and to they used what came to hand).
(We might note that Joan of Navarre ended up with a really raw deal. Apart from being the legitimate Queen of France, she was Queen of Navarre, Countess of Champagne, and overlord of Brie. She was eventually allowed to succeed in Navarre, but only after the French monarchy had enjoyed it its revenue for some time, and she never got the French counties, since they were traded off for lesser lands; Perroy, pp. 80-81. In the end, this was to hurt the Valois monarch, since the heirs of Navarre would often side with the English; Joan's son Charles the Bad was truly a thorn in the French side until finally suppressed; Perroy, pp. 127-129.)
Guerard, p. 100, sums up what happened after Charles IV died: "For the third time the king had no son. The rule adopted in 1316 was applied: women could not inherit the throne, nor transmit rights which never were theirs. So a cousin of the late three kings, Philip of Valois, received the crown instead of their nephew, soon to be Edward III of England. The decision was neither absurd nor inevitable. Authority was still linked with leadership in battle, but on the other hand, women, like Eleanor [of Acquitaine], had been suffered to inherit vast feudal domains. To give this practice the prestige of antiquity, it was later called 'the Salic Law." But the French royal house had forgotten for many centuries that there ever were Salian Franks." (So much so that I've head the name "Salic Law" linked with laws governing salt. Butler, p. 14, goes so far as to declare the whole thing an invention).
Perroy, p. 71, notes that every other fief in France could pass in female line, and that the French even had rules for how female vassals could meet military obligations to their feudal overlords. But he adds that the French nobility universally accepted the accession of Philip of Valois (p. 76).
Keen, p. 245, thinks that the fact that Edward III was still a minor was significant; the French didn't want an underage King.
(Incidentally, there is a folkloric twist to the tale of the deaths of the last French kings of the Capetian line, according to Barker, pp. 12-13 and Doherty, pp. 57-58. Philip IV had plundered the Knights Templar, on the grounds that they were no longer defending the Temple, long lost to the Saracens -- accurate as far as it went, but it should have been the Pope's decision. Philip seized their rich treasury, and covered it up with confessions under torture. He eventually had the Grand Master of the Temple, Jacques de Molay, burned as a relapsed heretic -- relapsed because he denied a confession given under torture! De Molay cursed the Pope, Philip, and Philip's descendents. The Pope and Philip of course died, and Philip's male line died out, and the female lines never regained the throne of France.)
Despite his disappointment, Edward might have accepted the French decision regarding the kingship if he had been treated fairly -- in his early weakness, he actually paid homage to Philip VI in 1329 for his territory in Guyenne (Seward, p. 24). For a time, Edward even considered going on crusade with Philip (Perroy, p. 88). Perroy, pp. 84-85, sums up the situation in 1330 as follows: "So it had taken no more than three years for the diplomacy of the Valois, again, employing all the [bullying] methods used by the last Capetians and covering all the tracks already beaten by them, to win a victory of the highest importance over their Gascon vassal. Edward's homage at Amiens, and his subsequent declaration which put it on the same footing as liege homage, would seem to have set aside the dynastic pretensions of the Plantagenets forever. Beaten in every round of this close conflict, Edward was back in a position more humiliating than ever in relation to his suzerain. Acquitaine remained diminished by a partial occupation and weakened by the greater subjection of its duke to the French monarchy."
Several false moves changed Edward's attitude toward Philip. Edward had taken all he was going to take in France. He had unwillingly offered homage, but he had his own terms -- he wanted to keep what he had; no more French nibbling at the border! The French had never really restored what they took from Edward II in 1325, leaving Guyenne far too small to be defensible. But Philip not only kept up the pressure, he even opened up a sort of second front by demanding that the Scots would be part of any peace (Perroy, pp. 87-88). Edward, who was as tired of fighting the Scots as he was of being cheated by the French, was in the process of trying to put Edward Balliol on the Scots throne (Ormrod, p. 18), and he wanted a free hand against them.
Edward, tired of shooting at a moving target, promptly started working on building a coalition against France. Parliament voted him subsidies for war in 1336 (Perroy, p. 91). Negotiations were still going on, mediated by the Pope, but the Pope was trying so hard to prevent war that he actually made it harder for the participants to address the real issues. Perroy, p. 90, says that "From December 1334 onwards, the policy of Benedict XII ended by precipitating the conflict which it aimed at avoiding." The crisis of 1336 came about because it appeared that Philip would be sending reinforcements to Scotland, now in desperate straits in its war against Edward.
A peaceful resolution became impossible in 1337; in that year, the French once again declared Guyenne forfeit to the French crown (Seward, p. 35; Ashley-GB, p. 130; Barker, p. 12). Perroy, p. 66, suspects this may have been simply another dodge used by the French to bring the English to heel; after all, it had worked twice before in the reigns of the last two kings! But, Perroy notes, both Edward I and Edward II had been distracted. What the French had really accomplished was to convince the English that they wanted to retake Guyenne. And Edward III didn't have to take this as tamely as his predecessors; he was not distracted, as Edward I had been in 1294, or facing revolt, as Edward II had in 1324. Edward therefore declared war on his first cousin once removed.
The war which followed was not expected to last long (indeed, both parties thought they had ended it in 1360). They didn't even get down to serious fighting immediately. In this whole first phase of the war, there were only three major battles.
Although Hundred Years War is generally held to have lasted 116 years (1337-1453), the serious periods of combat were only 1337-1360, 1414-1436, and 1449-1453. The reigns of Richard II (1377-1399) and Henry IV (1399-1413) were especially quiet. Some have proposed to split the war into three conflicts, called something like the "Crecy War" (1337-1460), the "Agincourt War" (1415-1422), and the "Reconquest." There is some validity to this (especially since 1453 did not actually end the English attempts to invade -- Edward IV and Henry VIII also mounted invasions). But the whole conflict from 1337 to 1453 was all about the same two issues: Who would control Gascony, and what would be the English King's relationship with the French. Edward III, in starting the war, probably wanted simply to get full control of Gascony, without having to answer to the French king.
Interestingly, though Edward had earlier stopped treated Philip as King of France (Perroy, p. 93), it wasn't until 1340 that Edward formally claimed the throne of France -- presumably partly as a bargaining chip, but mostly to make it possible for the Flemish to ally with him (Burne, p. 51). The cities of Flanders officially acknowledged the French King as their suzerain, so rebelling against Philip would have caused them to be punished by the Church. But once Edward claimed to be King of France, the Flemish could acknowledge *him* and be free from those sanctions. Of course, they would still have to face French wrath if the French won....
Edward probably never expected to become the actual King of France; indeed, when he dictated something approaching a victor's peace in 1360, he asked for far less. But he had made his claim (and the Kings of England would in fact continue to call themselves Kings of France for centuries), and that started a chain of events that would take half a century to work out.
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF FRANCE AND ENGLAND
The French actually had one advantage over what they had had in the time of Edward I: France was a more united country, meaning that the French could bring more pressure to bear. And France had a far larger population base than England -- at least three times the total population (Perroy, p. 51). Even more important, it had greater financial resources, meaning a greater ability to pay an army (Edward III, who had to keep his army together long enough to gather, invade, fight, and come home, repeatedly went bankrupt, and even drove his bankers bankrupt; Seward, p. 33. Renouard, p. 44, notes that between 1342 and 1346, the majority of Florentine banking firms -- the source of credit to all of Europe -- crashed. England's population was large enough to supply plenty of soldiers, but unless Edward could pay them, they wouldn't fight. It is interesting, though futile, to speculate how much of the economic crisis of 1348-1350 was due to the Black Death and how much due to the collapse of international credit).
But Edward III had at least *six* advantages over his grandfather for the contest with the French.
One of them was, in fact, the result of Edward I's own campaigns. Wales was now firmly in English hands. There was no possibility at all that Edward III would be seriously distracted by the Welsh -- indeed, he would have some Welshmen in the armies he took to France, and derived at least a little revenue from Wales.
Second, Edward did not have to worry too much about the Scots. He had loosed Edward Balliol upon them as a shadow king, causing several years of civil war (Magnusson, pp. 197-198). When the Scots had invaded England in 1333, Edward III faced then in his first great battle, at Halidon Hill. It was a complete English victory (Magnusson, pp. 198-199), which in fact set the pattern for the later battles of Crecy and Agincourt. Scotland was devastated. They did not manage another serious attack on the English until Neville's Cross in 1346. And even in 1346, Edward III didn't even have to show up in the north.
Third, the French, though they had money, found it almost impossible to collect. Their tax system was incoherent. The French monarchy had spent years devaluing its coinage, making it almost impossible to value or spend. By the time of the Agincourt campaigns, it was little more than pot metal (Perroy observes on p. 127 that the currency was devalued 70% in *just six years* after Crecy! Butler, p. 44, says that there were 64 devaluations under Philip VI, 104 under Jean II, and 41 under Charles V, though how this is possible is beyond me, and adds on p. 62 that there were times when no one would accept *any* money because they didn't know what the coins would be worth. Prestwich, p. 170, notes that one of the things Edward III had promised if he became King of France was a stable currency).
The British, though they too had trouble raising money, at least had a meaningful coinage which did not decline significantly over the years (Perroy, p. 124, argues that lack of finances was the chief reason the war lasted so long: Both sides had more big ideas than they had cash); Perroy, p. 56, says that "after a century of exhausting war [the pound] had not been devalued by more than 20 per cent." (The English did, however, play around with the French coinage -- Butler, p. 44 -- though some of this is the fault of Burgundians.)
Fourth, Edward had a new way of raising armies, and new tactics for the army raised. The new tactic was the chevauchee, the plundering raid (Seward, p. 28). It was the ancestor of Sherman's March to the Sea: A fast-moving force doing as much destruction as possible. (Walsingham summed up one of Edward III's chevauchees with the Caesaresque, "Cepit, spoliavit, combussit" -- "he came, he despoiled, he burned"; Sedgwick, p. 36.) It could inflict extreme economic damage and spread great misery, though it could not defeat an enemy outright. He also had the contract ("indenture") system for raising troops.
Historians have called indentures the most significant military development of the Middle Ages (Burne, p. 31). In the old days, the King called on his retainers to bring out their servants for brief military service (a system that went back to Anglo-Saxon times); the result was often to bring out a useless, unarmed rabble -- villages would often send the men for whom they had the least use (Prestwich, pp. 63-66). Edward I had first experimented with paying soldiers to serve, and by the time Edward III took the throne, this was the standard method. It cost dearly -- it was the single biggest reason why Edward III was constantly broke -- but it brought in solid armies. They were also more disciplined, according to Burne, p. 35; a man who has to give satisfaction if he wants to be paid has to obey orders. It was not a true standing army (the French would in fact invent that later in the war), but it was closer to a professional army than anything which had existed to that time (Featherstone, p. 36).
Plus, because declines in the power of the aristocracy and the failure of some families, Edward was able to appoint more "professional" commanders -- Prestwich, p. 190, notes that Edward was able to appoint his own Marshal and Constable of England, instead of having the offices handed down by heredity. The French, by contrast, still had hereditary high officers. It is unlikely that they could have employed men such as the brilliant knights Thomas Dagworth, John Chandos, and Walter Mauny in such high posts as Edward did.
Edward also could call out men the French would never have dared to employ. Many of his soldiers were convicts given conditional pardons in return for service (Prestwich, p. 193). John Hawkwood himself was seemingly one of these; in 1350-1351, we find records of him brutally attacking a man, and soon after he was charged with stealing a horse (Saunders, p. 46). A Frenchman guilty of the sorts of crimes these men committed would likely have deserted. An Englishman in France would be less likely to do so, since he was far from home -- and even if he did desert, he would probably start preying on the French, making him a de facto ally even if not part of the army.
Fifth, Edward had the sympathy of the people of the Low Countries, many of whom were technically subject to the French but whose industries depended on English wool. Edward was to use this as something of an economic lever, selling wool to the counties that were on his side and denying it to the pro-French areas (Perroy, p. 95). This proved a mixed blessing, however, since it put the English wool production system into a severe recession -- and Edward depended on that revenue.
Edward's biggest advantage, in any case, was the longbow.
Oh, Edward I had had longbowmen, too, but not as many (indeed, the Welsh invented the longbow, so they potentially had the advantage against him -- except they never used it). By Edward III's time, practice with the bow was mandatory for the lower classes. So Edward III could assemble much larger, better armies of bowmen.
Today we tend to sneer at any weapon of the pre-firearms era. We should not. The longbow (and oriental composite bow) were the best weapons known to man until the mid-nineteenth century, when the Minie bullet made relatively rapid-fire rifled guns possible. (Indeed, Featherstone, p. 177, lists several authors who argued the English should give up arquebuses and other early firearms and return to longbows. On pp. 189-191, he actually details a case of a longbow being used in World War II!) A longbow, in the hands of a trained archer, had a greater range than a smoothbore musket, and greater accuracy than a musket, and a higher rate of fire than a musket -- a brilliant musketeer might get off five shots in two minutes, and the average would have been somewhat less than four. In two minutes, a truly excellent archer could get off more than a dozen arrows.
Prestwich, p. 70, describes the bow as follows: "[T]he classic longbow was two ells in length, or about seven feet six inches... was the thickness of four thumbs, and fired a 'clotharrow' a yard long.... It is likely that the heaviest bows had a range of up to four hundred yards, though real accuracy was unlikely beyond two hundred. A rate of fire of ten flights per minute was possible; a constantly reiterated simile of fourteenth century chroniclers is that arrows fell like snow on the battlefield; but, unlike snow, arrows produced a terrifying noise." It has been estimated that perhaps half a million arrows were shot at Crecy (Saunders, p. 3). We don't know just how much time the archers spent firing at that battle, but if we assume 20 French charges (higher than any estimate I've seen), and that the attackers were in range for four minutes per charge (which is also mathematically high), that would mean that, during the charges, a hundred arrows landing per second. Even if all they did was stick up in the dirt, they would he a fair obstacle to the attackers!
Burne, p. 28, gives slightly different statistics: "The longbow could be discharged six times a minute: It had an effective range of 250 yards and an extreme range of about 350 yards." Featherstone, p. 40, gives identical numbers, but elsewhere claims that there are instances on record of a bowshot travelling a third of a mile, although these were unaimed shafts fired solely for distance. (And I frankly don't believe it. Saunders, p. 62, says that trained twentieth century archers "achieved a range of 180-200 yards," though to be sure they did not grow up with the bow.)
Seward, p. 53, says bowmen "could shoot ten or even twelve [arrows] a minute, literally darkening the sky, and had a fighting range of over 150 yards with a plate-armour-piercing range of about sixty." Barker, p. 88, states that the bows of the period had an astonishing pull of 150-160 pounds, giving them a range of about 240 yards, though Featherstone, p. 61, claims the standard pull was 100 pounds, which matches what I have read elsewhere. Jarman, pp. 73-74, makes perhaps the most extreme claim: that the bow could pierce chain mail at 275 yards! Ross, p. 111, believes the "effective" range to have been 165 yards with a rate of fire of 10-12 arrows per minute.
Some of those range citations may actually be inspired by Shakespeare; in Henry IV, Part 2, Act III, scene ii, about line 45, Shallow claims that an archer named "Double" could shoot direct fire to a range of 280-290 yards, while implying a normal archer could shoot 240 yards. Of course, any data on anything taken from Shakespeare should be viewed with extreme suspicion. All of this is hard to prove, since no longbows of the Agincourt era have survived, according to Featherstone, p. 59. Bows eventually wore out, after all -- plus, since the best bows were made of imported yew, the supply was somewhat limited; Featherstone, p. 62. The Yorkist kings, in fact, passed laws forcing importers to bring them bowstaves; Featherstone, p. 64
Other differences in the figures may be attributed partly to the fact that different archers had different abilities, plus the fact that an arrow can be fired on either a straight or a falling trajectory, with the latter having much greater range but far less accuracy. Also there was the question of how much damage it was supposed to do when it arrived. Though national feeling also seems to have caused different assessments -- the one French historian I've studied, Perroy, claims on p. 97 that the longbow was not especially accurate and that it had a rate of fire only three times that of a crossbow. Prestwich, p. 198, says by contrast that the longbow could fire five times as fast. Featherstone says it fired four times as fast.
Different arrows may also play a part; Barker, p. 86, notes that there were two standard types of arrows in use by the time of Agincourt. One had a longer shaft of a lightweight wood, with a leafed or barbed head that was hard to extract; the other, designed to penetrate plate, had a shorter, lighter arrow with a "bodkin point" that was extremely sharp, with a narrow point, for maximum penetration. Barker states that this sort of arrow could pierce plate at 150 yards, though it will be evident that it would not be as stable in flight and so was less likely to hit. Featherstone, p. 48, quotes a contemporary account which describes a sheaf of arrows as containing two-thirds heavy and one-third light shafts; the latter of course did less damage but could be fired farther.
A clothyard arrow could go six inches into the flesh, and the barbed head made extraction difficult (Saunders, pp. 4-5). Such wounds were very difficult to treat using fourteenth century techniques.
To put this in perspective: Keegan, p. 95, estimates that a knight on a trained destrier could charge at 12 to 15 miles per hour. Let's use 15. That's 26400 yards per hour, or 440 yards per minute. If a bowman could begin firing at 150 yards, and could fire eight arrows per minute, then he could get off three arrows while the knight was charging him, and the last one at least could pierce armor. If he could keep calm, he could certainly stop any individual knight charging him -- and, because bowmen could stand closer together than knights on horseback, there would typically be two to four archers firing at each horseman. The longbow was about as close as the fourteenth century came to a terror weapon -- especially against horsemen; although a clothyard arrow could not at long range penetrate plate mail (which was becoming common by the time of Crecy, and was almost universally used by the time of Agincourt), it could bring down a horse, and if a charging horse fell, it was just about sure to knock out the rider as well. And, in the crush, a man who fell to the ground was likely to suffocate or be killed by the pressure (Saunders, p. 3).
Edward III seems to have made his archers even more effective by mounting them. They still fought on foot, just like his knights -- but they were mobile while on campaign. This gave him much more operational flexibility.
And the longbow was exclusively English. The French had none. They did have archers -- crossbowmen. A crossbow was in many ways an easier weapon than a longbow; it gave the arrow a higher initial velocity than a longbow, so a crossbowman could aim straight at the target; no fancy training about angles-of-flight needed. That higher velocity also meant that it had somewhat longer range in the hands of a true expert. But it took the better part of a minute to crank it up to prepare to fire the thing. (Seward, p. 55, says that an expert could fire four quarrels per minute. It would have taken an exceptional expert; Barker is more nearly correct when she says on p. 87 that the standard was two shots per minute -- after all, the thing had to be loaded, then aimed. A good longbowman could load and aim in one gesture. Plus crossbows were heavy and complex enough to break down fairly frequently. A longbow, being just a well-shaped piece of wood and a string, didn't have nearly as many parts that could go wrong, though it did need maintenance to retain its strength.)
A crossbowman faced with longbowmen would rarely get off a first shot; he almost never got off a second shot. And while a crossbowman didn't require as much training as a longbowman, he required some, so the French couldn't just overwhelm the English with numbers. On a man-for-man basis, longbowmen remained the most deadly soldiers in the world until the nineteenth century. (Well, apart from artillerymen, anyway.) The English lost the Hundred Years War primarily because the French eventually managed to develop a useful individual firearm. It didn't make French men-at-arms equal to English longbowmen -- but it was easy enough to use that the French could finally give all their soldiers a weapon that could hit at a distance. The English could not match that; a good longbowman had to be trained from birth (Burne, p. 220n, claims that one can still see the marks on some church walls where archers sharpened their arrows on their way to Sunday archery practice), and needed to be physically strong as well.
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C164A

King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164] --- Part 03


DESCRIPTION: Continuation of the notes to "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of FranceÓ [Child 164]. Entry continues in "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 04 (File Number C164C)
Last updated in version 2.5
NOTES: EDWARD III, SLUYS, CRECY, POITIERS, AND BRETIGNY
Edward III's war, as mentioned, involved three major battles. He had hoped for more, but the first phase of the war, from 1337-1341, was a complete failure on land. Edward and his Flemish allies were constantly chasing around in Flanders and northern France, but they accomplished little. The French usually had an army in the vicinity, but it consistently refused to fight -- e.g. Burne, p. 45, notes an instance early in the war where French and English armies were only twelve miles apart, but the French avoided battle; on pp. 47-49 we hear of the French and English actually coming to a battlefield, but the French still refusing to fight -- and the English couldn't go on the offensive because all their allies quit.
Gradually Edward started trusting more in his own nation and less in the allies. By 1341, his grand coalition in Flanders had dissolved and he had lost his appointment in the Holy Roman Empire (Burne, p. 63). Meanwhile, Edward was firing his ministers at home because they hadn't come up with the money he needed to keep paying off his allies. (Perroy, p. 96, remarks, "In May 1337, th[e English] set up at Valenciennes a regular market for alliances, which were bought for hard cash. It cost a great deal, for the princes of the Empire were grasping." Buying them off in fact drove Edward to bankruptcy and destroyed his bankers -- Edward's third son was called John of Gaunt because he was born in Ghent (=Gaunt). And he was born there, rather than in England, because Edward had had to leave his wife in Ghent as security for what he owed the various lords in the low countries; Perroy, p. 105.)
So high were the taxes that they must have severely damaged the English economy (Ormrod, p. 20, details the exactions made in this period -- and on p. 22 notes that Edward still spent more than he was able to collect). The French were planning invasion, and had they managed it, I suspect an exhausted England would have fallen. Ormrod, p. 24, compares the situation in 1340 to that under Edward II, implying that he thinks Edward III was in danger of deposition. In 1344, a parliament called for an end to the war, though they covered it by asking that the end be by "battle or an honorable peace" (Sedgwick, p. 28).
Yet Edward actually did better on his own than when he had with the support of the Flemish. The first big fight of the war was the naval battle of Sluys, in 1340. The English fleet attacked the fleets of their enemies at anchor off Flanders, inflicting tremendous damage and ending the threat of a French invasion (Seward, pp. 43-46; Burne believes that the English captured 190 ships, though there are no accurate estimates of casualties). The French still had enough ships to raid England, but England was now clearly stronger at sea. Edward then took the army that had won at Sluys into the Low Countries -- where it accomplished nothing. Perroy, p. 113, comments that "the period of great enterprises seemed over." On the face of it, Edward had lost the Hundred Years War after only three years.
Luckily for him, he managed to find a way to redirect the war. A succession crisis in the County of Brittany let England open a new front (Ormrod p. 26, calls this the "provincial strategy" -- ironically, something rather like it would be used against the English when they were on the defensive). When Duke John III died, the French recognized his niece Joan as heir (Burne, p. 66). This was proper under English law, since Joan was the son of John's younger full brother. The English responded by supporting John, the half-brother of the dead Duke (Burne, p. 67, notes the irony that the French followed the English law of inheritance, while the English supported the candidate who was the heir if women were excluded -- thus reversing their positions with regard to the throne of France).
Joan, who in addition to being female was apparently not physically sound (she was called "Joan the Lame"; Perroy, p. 114), could not entirely control the duchy. Brittany ended up in chaos -- the civil war became deadly serious in 1342 -- and the English were able to exploit to their own ends (Prestwich, p. 174). It didn't really do much to damage the French monarchy, but it let the English practice their tactics at a price they could afford.
By 1345, Edward was planning a fight on many fronts (Ormrod, p. 26). The French tried to counter by inciting the Scots to attack England -- but Edward III didn't let that distract him. The 1346 campaigns opened on the already active battlefields of Brittany and Guyenne, where his deputies Sir Thomas Dagworth and Henry Earl of Lancaster (often called the Earl of Derby at this time, because his father was still alive and held the Lancastrian titlewhen the campaign began) had been perfecting the English tactics for archers and men-at-arms. Derby in particular was absolutely brilliant, winning several battles against extreme odds and regaining much land for the English (Burne, pp. 101-117; he adds on page 128 that Derby should be considered one of England's great captains and laments that he is nearly forgotten).
Those campaigns offered a real opening for Edward III, because the French sent all their troops to defend those fronts (Burne, p. 120). The rest of the country was almost undefended. So Edward III in 1346 mounted the first all-English invasion of the war -- and did it amphibiously, landing on the almost-undefended coast of Normandy (Prestwich, p. 176). This was a brilliant success, since Edward had no opposition in Normandy but the French response lessened the pressure on other fronts.
Edward did a massive amount of damage to the Norman countryside (Sedgwick, pp. 35-37). He sacked Caen (Prestwich, p. 177), which had been at peace for so long that its defences were almost useless (Sumption, p. 507) but which nonetheless defied him because part of it was protected by rivers and a castle (Burne, pp. 144-145). He made a feint at Paris itself (Seward, p. 60; Burne, p. 150, thinks that this was forced upon him because he had to get across the Seine, and the one major crossing-place near his path, at Rouen, was too strongly defended, so he had to go upstream. He then rebuilt a bridge under the French noses by distracting them with small raids; Burne, p. 152). It was this army which beat the French decisively at Crecy, and which went on to capture Calais.
At first glance, the English seemed to be in great danger at Crecy. They were far from their bases, and had had much difficulty crossing the Seine and the Somme (Seward, p. 60). His army was nearly worn out, and needed rest. This was probably why Edward fought at Crecy rather than continuing to Flanders (Seward, p. 61), though Sedgwick, pp. 44-45, quotes Froissart's explanation that Crecy was in Ponthieu, a territory which belonged to Edward; supposedly Edward didn't want the French invading it..
Seward, p. 61, estimates that the English at this time had about 11,000 men -- 7000 archers, 2000 men-at-arms, and 2000 others. Sumption, p. 497, estimates that the ships which took his army to France had a capacity of 7,000 to 10,000, and believes that over half were archers. Perroy, also based on the ship capacity, argued for 8,000 riders (including both men-at-arms and mounted archers) plus 2,000 infantry. Burne, p. 138, agrees with Seward's figure of 2000 men-at-arms but estimates the whole invasion force at 15,000; on p. 167 he gives the even more amazing figure of 16,500 (neither of which I find credible, even though he uses shipping capacity as a cross-check); allowing for losses along the way, he argues for 12,000 to 13,000 Englishmen at Crecy (p. 170).
Sedgwick, p. 33, by estimating the size of the entourage of the "typical" nobleman, thinks Edward started with 20,000 men, and on p. 47 says he had 18,900 at Crecy. On p. 284 he lists some other historians' estimates: 18,900 or 19,000 or even 25,000 -- but these are patently impossible; there would have been no way to feed them; clearly these people were paying too much attention to Froissart.
We have very little knowledge of French numbers, since of course no fleet transported it and it was not a contract army in the same way as the English. One French historian, according to Burne, p. 186, actually estimated that they were fewer than the English (i.e. not even 9000 men). But just the casualty count makes this extremely unlikely, and almost every other authority accepts that the French had superior numbers; the only question is *how* superior. Burne himself, p. 176, admits he is guessing when he gives its numbers at 40,000; he seems more confident in estimating that it outnumbered the English by three to one or more. Seward, p. 63, estimates the French army at about 30,000, of whom 20,000 were men-at-arms. Sedgwick, p. 50, again has the highest total, guessing 30,000 to 60,000. However, these forces straggled up during the battle, so it would never have been possible for the French to attack with their entire strength.
Edward had chosen an excellent position, on a slight rise, with a wood and small river to guard his right flank. And the French, it appears, would have had to march all the way across his front to attack his left flank, so that was probably safe too, at least in practice, though the only defensive feature was a small hamlet.
That French straggling added to their troubles. King Philip wanted to halt, sort out the troops, and attack the next day (Burne, p. 177). But the army was restless, and were coming up so fast that the ones in the rear were pushing forward the soldiers who had arrived first; finally, around evening, he gave the order to attack.
First to go in were the French (properly Genoese) crossbowmen -- who promptly learned that an army of longbowmen could demolish an army of crossbowmen. Especially since the situation meant that they had to deploy and then change the angle of their line before attacking -- a difficult maneuver indeed under the circumstances (Burne, p. 178). To top it all off, their shields and most of their bolts were still with the baggage, and their bowstrings may have been wet (Sedgwick, pp. 52-53).
Seward, p. 63, speculates that the crossbowmen may have been routed within a minute. And their rout caused the first line of French chivalry to charge (Burne, p. 180, thinks the knights thought the crossbowmen cowards, and were actually attacking their own troops), and the horsemen were just as thoroughly massacred.
In the end, the French knights may have mounted as many as fifteen charges (Seward, p. 66; Burne, p. 177), lasting well into the night. Unfortunately for them, the charges were not continuous, letting the English gather the arrows needed to halt the next attack (Burne, p. 182). One did make it among the English men-at-arms, forcing the young Prince Edward and his guard to fight, but most were broken up by the archers.
The blind king of Bohemia was killed (in an extreme case of chivalric stupidity, he had insisted on charging the English even though he couldn't see them!), and Philip of France suffered an arrow wound and lost a horse. The French army was all but destroyed -- Burne, p. 181, says 1500 knights were lost just on the part of the line in front of the Prince of Wales and reports on p. 184 that the English army claimed to have found 1542 bodies of knights and men-at-arms; he makes what he admits is a very rough estimate of 10,000 "communes" killed. Seward, p. 67, seems to be following these figures; he guesses French losses at more than 10,000, including 1,500 lords and knights. Perroy, p. 119, gives no numbers and names only a few names but says that the "flower of the French nobility" was destroyed.
As Sedgwick says on p. 56, "The victory was won by the English archers, but the primal cause was the disorder in the French army, for French bravery was as conspicuous as ever."
Burne, p. 183, and Sedgwick, pp. 56-57, observe that King Philip had lost his brother, his brother-in-law, and his nephew.
(Crecy incidentally is considered to be the first battle at which artillery was used, though it is not thought to have made any real difference; Burne, p. 28; rates of fire were low and accuracy was pitiful. Barker, p. 90, notes that, as late as Agincourt, a gunner who managed to hit three targets in the course of a day was suspected of having made a pact with the devil!)
The biggest effect of Crecy was to show that the English, who until then had not been considered very good soldiers, were now some of the best in the world. The longbow had completely changed the military equation. Some historians have argued that Edward should have attacked Paris at that time -- but, as Burne, p. 205, points out, Edward probably did not realize the completeness of his victory, and in any case was running out of supplies; he needed to get back in touch with his fleet (though Burne, pp. 206-207, also argues that Edward should have tried to capture Paris). But not even Edward III had that much daring. Hence the decision to head for the coast and besiege Calais.
The moral effect of Crecy was quickly seen. The French in early 1347 brought up a relieving army -- but were afraid to fight another battle (Prestwich, pp. 178-179; Perroy, p. 120, says that Philip of Valois "seemed to have lost all energy"; Burne, pp. 214-215, says that Philip assembled 50,000 men but messed up his negotiations with the Flemings and then stuck himself in a strategically untenable spot and had to retreat). Calais was strong enough that Saul, p. 9, estimates that half the English nobles and knights eventually took part in the siege, and even so, the defenders held out until 1347. But Edward had the answer to the usual problems of a siege; he built a town for his own soldiers, to keep them safe from disease (Burne, p. 210). Calais eventually had to capitulate, with the entire French population being forced to leave, replaced by English settlers (Seward, p. 70). Calais would remain in English hands for more than two centuries -- indeed, for a full century after every other French possession was lost.
In the aftermath, Edward III would found the famous Order of the Garter, mostly of veterans of Crecy (Sedgwick, pp. 78-79, though he omits the rather tawdry story of why it was given the name it did -- most accounts say that Edward III picked up a garter dropped by Joan "the Fair Maid of Kent," and when questioned about why he was so quick to pick up a garter from a woman not his wife, said "Hone suit qui mal y pense," which is usually translated, rather loosely, "Evil to the one whom evil thinks." Joan seems to have had quite a collection of suitors, according to Sedgwick, p. 82, and others; the Earl of Salisbury and Sir Thomas Holland fought over her; the Black Prince married her after Holland died, and supposedly Edward III wanted her himself). The order endures to this day, and is still considered one of the most exclusive orders of knighthood.
The French in 1347 tried to plan a counterattack (Perroy, p. 121). They prepared an army, and also induced the Scots to attack northern England. That proved a fiasco; Edward didn't even have to send a senior noble to fight them. The Scots were defeated at Neville's Cross, and King David was captured in the process (Burne, p. 218; Seward, p. 69; Magnusson, pp. 202-204). The Scots, for almost a decade, were out of the war.
Before the French could come into action, the Black Death struck, reducing the population of both France and England dramatically. In France, both the King's wife and the dauphin's wife died. The English royal family fared better -- Edward III and all of his sons lived. But one of his daughters died, and so of course did many ordinary people (Sedgwick, p. 86). That, and lack of money, meant that the English could do little for the next few years. The French in turn were incapacitated by the plague, lack of money -- and the death of Philip of Valois in 1450. (Seward, p. 74, and Perroy, p. 107, make the ironic note that, despite being accounted a failure, Philip had actually enlarged France -- though he lost some ground in the west, he managed to gain much in the east.)
The Plague hit both countries hard; lands went vacant, buildings fell into decay, food production dropped. The governments on both sides of the channel saw their tax revenues decline dramatically. But England recovered somewhat faster -- with its lower population, it may have suffered less in the first place, and it also had the advantage that there were no "Free Companies" of brigands ("routiers") laying the nation waste (Perroy, p. 123; Seward, p. 105).
The war was quiet from 1350 to about 1355 (Seward, p. 78, though Burne, p. 224 notes that there were plenty of skirmishes; he points out on p. 230 that Sir Thomas Dagworth was killed at this time and on pp. 233-234 mentions English attempts to add to their property around Calais; it's just that there were no major campaigns). There was even a provisional peace made in 1354 (one which, amazingly, gave the English more than they would gain in 1360; Perroy, p. 129). But it collapsed when the French realized what they were giving up, and by the mid-1350s, the English were again leading armies in France. 1355 was supposed to bring a three-front campaign (Burne, p. 246), but the front in Normandy collapsed when Charles the Bad of Navarre changed sides. Edward III's campaign from Calais was aborted by a Scottish raid which caused him to return home (Burne, p. 248. Edward went on to pillage Edinburgh -- the so-called "Burnt Candlemass"; Burne, p. 250 -- but that brought him no closer to defeating France).
That left the southern army, led by Edward the Black Prince, the son of Edward III, which defeated another French army at Poitiers. This campaign followed a raid that took the Prince's forces almost to the Mediterranean (Burne, pp. 252-254). The Prince wanted to mount another such raid -- but, this time, the French were actually prepared to fight, and they also controlled his path by blocking river crossings (Burne, p. 278). Poitiers was a much, much closer thing than Crecy -- the French thought they had the Prince trapped, and were so sure of victory that they refused the Prince's offer of the release of prisoners, return of castles, and a promise that the he would not fight in France for seven years (Prestwich, p. 181; Seward, pp. 87-88).
As usual, the French seem to have had an overwhelming superiority in numbers; Seward, p. 86, estimates that the French had some three times the 6000 or so soldiers in the English army, and that the Prince didn't have a high enough proportion of archers (or, at least, they did not have enough arrows to fight as long as needed; this seems to be what Burne is saying on p. 302, followed by Featherstone on p. 129, though Burne's figures on p. 313 imply that the number of bowmen was very small -- perhaps based on Baker's chronicle, which credited the English with 4000 men-at-arms, 2000 archers, and 1500 others; Sedgwick, p. 296. Froissart also says 7500 men, but with mor archers). Burne, p. 298 and repeated in more detail on pp. 313-314, has similar numbers: 6000 English, 20,000 French. Featherstone, p. 126, agrees with the figure of 20,000 for the French, and credits the English with 6000, of whom only 2000 were archers. Sedgwick, who has a bad tendency to follow the exaggerated chronicles of the time, suggests on p. 122 that the English had 7,000-8,000 men, and on p. 126 suggests that the French had at least a three to one edge.
There is much about Poitiers that is confusing, despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that we have twenty or so near-contemporary sources (Burne, p. 310). The available records disagree on what was going on -- was the Prince trying to fight, or to escape? (Burne, pp. 280-281). Burne, p. 285, thinks he wanted to fight, and had been maneuvering to prevent two French forces from joining against him. Arguing against this is the fact that the Prince probably knew by this time that reinforcements led by the Duke of Lancaster could not join him, so he would be more heavily outnumbered than he expected.
Burne, pp. 290-291, seems to split the difference: The Prince stayed in position to fight, but sent his baggage train away so that he could rapidly head for Bordeaux if the French declined to attack him. This, I must say, seems an extremely risky strategy. Sedgwick, p. 133, has a variation on this which seems a little more sensible: The English expected the French to attack but were afraid they might instead try an encirclement. The English sent enough forces to the rear to give him some protection against this.
Seward, pp. 88-91 thinks that the English were trying to retreat from the field, and the French, surprised by this, launched the part of their forward division (he thinks they had four divisions in all) in an attempt to halt their escape. Its disorganized charge was halted, and the rest of the division failed to do much damage in the chaos as the main English force returned to the field. The second division was barely turned back. The third French division, that of Orleans, simply dodged the battle. (Sedgwick, p. 142, doesn't acknowledge that there was such a group.)
That left the final French division, led by the King himself. It was perhaps slow to come into action due to Orleans's misbehavior (Sedgwick, p. 142, thinks it was positioned much too far from the leading divisions.) Still, it outnumbered the remaining English, and it was fresh, but a tiny English reserve showed up at just the right time and put the French in panic. (Burne, p. 306, thinks the exhausted English actually *attacked* at this stage, though it's hard to imagine them having the strength for it. Reading the flowery speeches quoted on p. 144 of Sedgwick, my guess is that the English simply moved forward as the French came on, to assure the French did not have the advantage of momentum.) King Jean himself tried to hold his division together -- and, as a result, was captured. As an individual, he had fought very hard; as a general, he had been a disaster. (Perroy, p. 125, says that when Jean had come to the throne, he had "given proof of nothing but gallantry and military incompetence." Attaining the crown did little to change that.)
It is interesting to note that the French historian, Perroy, devotes only two paragraphs to the battle (pp. 130-131), and attributes the English victory to "stratagems unworthy of knights" (meaning that they took advantage of the terrain). Even more than Crecy, the loss at Poitiers seemed to really *bother* the French. Perhaps it is because, as Sedgwick says on p. 127, "this French army was very similar to that at Crecy, a mob of gentlemen who fought with brilliant valor and dazzling stupidity."
Featherstone, p. 134, concludes that 2500 French were killed, 2000 captured, and 4000 wounded. Seward, p. 93, reports that the French had lost 2500 men-at-arms, and that 17 counts were captured. Sedgwick says that the King, a younger son, 17 counts, and "unnumbered barons" were taken. The government was in ruins, with the Estates refusing to grant taxes unless there were reforms (Perroy, p. 133) -- which, however, were implemented in a fairly arbitrary fashion. (Keen, p. 251, goes so far as to suggest that France was on the verge of coming apart, and was saved only by a peasant revolt that so frightened the nobility that they decided to keep working with the monarchy.) The Dauphin was being "terrorized" by rival factions (Perroy, p. 134), and the peasantry was revolting (Perroy, p. 135).
In that situation, the French had little choice but to negotiate. They made a dramatic offer: A large ransom for Jean (so large that Jean would be accused of selling his daughter on the marriage market to raise it; Saunders, pp, 118-119). All of Acquitaine (not just Guyenne) turned over to the English in full sovereignty -- in other words, it would be *theirs*, not a holding they had from the King of France. Plus other territories -- said to total a third of France.
Edward III blew it. The ransom was slow in coming, and Edward was the one who declared the provisional agreement violated (Perroy, p. 137). He made one last try, diplomatic and military, to gain the French throne in 1359 (Prestwich, p. 182; Burne, p. 334, notes that his destination was Rheims, where French kings were crowned).
The French, having survived Philip of Valois and now being stuck with his even worse son Jean, the former Duke of Normandy, might arguably have been better off had they taken the deal. But the army Edward led in 1359, even though it may have been the largest he ever assembled (Burne, p. 331, says it was the largest army to leave England prior to 1513) got bogged down in unsuccessful sieges, and was plagued by bad weather (Burne, p. 345). Saunders, p. 23, says that "Black Monday" was so bad that knights were actually electrocuted on their horses by lightning. One report has it that the storm was so severe that it caused Edward to make a vow that he would accept terms of peace in gratitude for surviving it.
Edward started out the 1359-1360 campaign on his best behavior, but ended up getting so disgusted that he turned the thing into a chevauchee (Burne, p. 343). This had its usual lack of effect; the whole thing was a fiasco. But the French sent negotiators even as Edward started to pull back (Burne, p. 345), perhaps fearing that the English King had another trick up his sleeve. The English, who obviously didn't, agreed to go back to the bargaining table (Perroy, pp. 138-139; Seward, pp. 98-99; Burne, p. 347, speculates that there was already an agreement made in secret but that the French were not willing to announce it while one of their cities was under siege).
The result was the Treaty of Bretigny, which was settled in 1360. It gave the English rather less than the proposal of 1358. They would get a reduced but still large ransom for King Jean, and would be given all of Acquitaine in full sovereignty. In return, Edward III would renounce the French throne. (Note: Some, including Perroy, call the final treaty the "Treaty of Calais," since that was where it was formally ratified, using the name "Treaty of Bretigny" only for the preliminary draft. But the changes in the broad outlines are too small to make it worthwhile to differentiate -- e.g. Burne, p. 348, mentions the "Treaty of Calais" only in a two-line footnote. Unfortunately for England, one change in the details proved substantial: the renunciation of titles was postponed for a time. As it turned out, the French would never formally renounce their control over Acquitaine.)
THE FAILURE OF BRETIGNY; RICHARD II AND HENRY IV
Ironically, although the French at once started turning land over to the English, the victorious Peace of Bretigny almost immediately resulted in a turn for the worse for the English. The single biggest reason was probably money. England had "won" the war, but even with the extra revenue that brought it, she was financially exhausted. They never saw most of the money from Jean's ransom; after months in luxurious captivity (he actually grew fat while in England; Saunders, p. 24), he was set free to raise it, could not get his people to pay it, and had one of the hostages he had given escape to visit his young wife. This was a technical violation of the treaty, and caused Edward to ask a slight modification of the treaty. The Estates balked, and Jean went back into English custody, where he died in 1364, at the age of about 45 (Perroy, p. 142), perhaps of partying too much (Seward, p. 200).
The English leaders, meanwhile, were starting to wear out. Edward III at the time of Bretigny was pushing fifty, and though he was still competing at tournaments as late as 1359 (Prestwich, p. 205), he was starting to lose his energy; by the time he died in 1377, he was a non-entity even though he was still only 65 (Ashley-Great, p. 134). When the French used a legal quibble to claim that the treaty need not be fully implemented, he was stuck (Barker, p. 15; Perroy, p. 116, claims that the French had not the right to concede sovereignty of Acquitaine, but this argument is silly; it would make us all pretenders to be king of somewhere).
Edward's younger sons, such as John of Gaunt, were not particularly good leaders (Prestwich, p. 189). Sir Thomas Dagworth had been killed a decade earlier. Henry of Derby and Lancaster died in 1361. Sir John Chandos was killed in 1369 (Seward, p. 111) or 1370 (Saunders, p. 4, who tells an embarrassing tale of him slipping on ice as he got off his horse and being killed; compare Sedgwick, pp. 269-270, who says he suffered the fatal blow as a result of being blind on one side from an earlier war injury).
Plus England was still suffering the after-effects of the Black Death. There were still more than enough men to fight France (French booty was all over England, and the money from ransoming French prisoners had made many a low-born man rich, according to Prestwich, pp. 202-203; attacking France seems to have attracted men the way gold rushes attracted prospectors a few hundred years later), but they weren't as restless, simply because there was now enough land for all.
An attempt by the English to open a second front by gaining a foothold in Italy promptly failed; Edward III's second son Lionel was married to 13-year-old Violante Visconte in 1368 (Saunders, pp. 133-135), but died in October that year, causing the potential alliance to unravel (Saunders, pp. 136-137. There were no children of the marriage.)
To top it all off, the Black Prince, who should have been in his prime, was ruined -- he had engaged on an expensive campaign to restore king Pedro the Cruel to the throne of Castile. This, like the attempt to gain a foothold in Italy via Lionel, was almost a proxy war between England and France, but the English expended far more troops and money -- and wasted them, because they demanded so many concessions from their side of the conflict that Pedro's government was unable to hold together (Prestwich, p. 183).
The Black Prince won a great battle at Najera in 1367, and Pedro was temporarily restored -- but Pedro was so vicious that he was soon re-expelled (Perroy, p. 156, says that Pedro was "intelligent, brave, and self-assertive, but so brutal that he estranged most of his subjects" -- and this in an age when brutality was the norm, not the exception! Pedro lasted only two years after that, according to Perroy, p. 157).
Pedro obviously could not pay the costs of the campaign (about all he paid was a large ruby which begame part of the British Crown Jewels; Jarman, p. 52), which left the Black Prince to pay for it from the revenue of Acquitaine -- and it bankrupted him (Seward, p. 107; Perroy, p. 159; Sedgwick, p. 261, says that he had to dismiss his army unpaid, causing them to go raiding in France, disturbing the peace with French, and adds on pp. 262-263 that he ended up imposing extreme taxation).
The cost of the invasion was not just cash. It cost lives as well. The English army, which should have been guarding the French frontier, had been devastated by disease.
The Prince himself came back with some sort of bug; according to Saul, p. 10, it started with dysentery, but he never recovered; Sedgwick, p. 22, mentions the suggestion that it was dropsy, i.e. an edema, but does not describe the source of the excess water. Sedgwick, p. 284, mentions frequent haemorrhages. By 1370, he had to be carried on campaign in a litter (Seward, p. 112). He was so weak that he went home to England in 1371 (Sedgwick, p. 273), and though he recovered a little, he only once, very briefly, was able to go on campaign again (Sedgwick, p. 275), and that expedition never arrived due to bad weather (Seward, p. 114).
The Prince left the war in France to his less effective brother John of Gaunt, who was not a good enough general to win on his own account and was too unpopular to be able to help someone else fight. Prince Edward died in 1376, a year before his father (Seward, p. 108). That meant that Edward III's heir was his grandson, Richard II, who was still a boy; the Black Prince had married relatively late, and Richard was his second son -- the elder boy, Edward, had died young (Sedgwick, p. 272) -- so Richard II was only ten when he succeeded.
It would have been a wonderful time for the Pope to step in to end the war, but there still wasn't much the Papacy could do to control the situation. In the aftermath of the Anglo-French peace of 1360, the routiers who had previously raided western and northern France turned their attention to Provence (Saunders, p. 30) and even Avignon (Renouard, p. 52), causing perhaps as much trouble as the political unrest in Italy, but by that time, the Papacy was settled in Avignon. (The "Great Company," which would come to dominate Italy, formed seemingly spontaneously in late 1360; Saunders, p. 30. It went on to attack Avignon; Saunders, p. 48. There were suggestions that Edward III encouraged this rather than take such scoundrels back to England.) The Papacy remained under French influence during the period when the consequences of Bretigny were worked out.
Meanwhile, the French changed their approach. There was unrest in Paris (Guerard, p. 103), which convinced the Dauphin, the future Charles V, that things could not continue as they were.
It helped that Jean II died soon after. The French from that time decided that there would be no more big battles for them! Charles V, physically weak and inclined to intellectual rather than physical pursuits, could hardly hope to lead an army anyway -- Seward, p. 103, notes that he was called "Charles the Wise," but the title was meant in the sense of "Charles the Learned" or "Charles the Bookish." Perroy, p. 132, says he was "worthless as a soldier" and had fled the field at Poitiers -- slightly ironic in that Perroy had said earlier that King Jean should have done the same. Saunders, p. 147, describes him as "handsome, but thin and pallid, weakened by an obscure illness that left him easily exhausted"; she speculates that he suffered from arsenic poisoning, perhaps based on the fact that his hair and nails fell out in 1360.
When the Pope called a crusade, Charles ignored him -- "all his efforts were bent on not fulfilling his obligations under the treaty of Bretigny" (Renouard, p. 56). But if Charles could not lead, he could organize an army, and get the royal finances into better shape (Seward, p. 109) -- far more important than mere generalship.
Similarly Bertrand du Guesclin, the new Constable of France, had proved a poor general in the Castilian campaign; Perroy, pp. 148-149, declares him a "mediocre captain, incapable of winning a battle or being successful in a siege of any scope," but admits that the new French King Charles V "found [in him] a fitting leader for the commonplace tasks which alone remained within [France's] power."
Du Guesclin did manage to get many of the "routiers," or independent raiders, out of France -- but he did that by luring them to the war in Spain; Perroy, p. 156. Others left for Italy -- it is noteworthy that Sir John Hawkwood, who later became a very strong force in Italian politics, went to Italy in 1361 (Saunders, p. xvii). Keegan, p. 80, refers to this time as the "Duguesclin war" and calls it a "Fabian" policy (a word also used by Seward, p. 110): Avoid battle, take a weak little property here and there, eventually putting a strong point under enough pressure that it had to give in. There was no "glory" in it -- but there was no risk of a major defeat, and it slowly but steadily undercut the English position.
The war officially resumed in 1369 (Prestwich, p. 184) when the French started again hearing complaints from Gascon nobles against the English administration (Seward, p. 110; Perroy, p. 160, thinks that Charles V felt "embarrassment and hesitation" when the nobles of Acquitaine appealed to him, but the English historians pretty consistently disagree, and certainly Charles V was not slow to take advantage. Even Perroy admits that Charles kept his plans very secret until he could spring his trap). In that same year, Edward III again started claiming the title King of France (Saunders, p. 147).
And, yet again, the Pope was unable to act as a moderator -- Urban V, who had tried to move back to Rome in 1367 (Saunders, p. 109, says that France, and King Charles V, were "appalled"), headed back to Avignon in 1370 to try to deal with the situation, and died there three months later (Saunders, pp. 152-153), before he had any chance to influence things (Renouard, p. 61. Urban almost certainly intended to return to Rome if possible, but he didn't live long enough, and because he died outside Italy, the Italians feld betrayed). And, without his energy, the papal entourage again set up camp in Avignon, under French influence. The next Pope, Gregory XI, was held in Avignon for years by the renewed war (Renouard, p. 64). Having condoned a massacre to rebuild his power (Saunders, pp. 216-221), he finally returned to Rome in 1377 -- and died there just over a year later (Renouard, p. 66).
Nearly everything else was turning to French advantage, too. In 1366, the French had paid enough of King Jean's ransom that most of the major hostages went free (Perroy, p. 158). To be sure, some were supposed to come back if the ransom payments halted -- but the English no longer had any hold on them. And, in fact, the hostages never went back into custody once the money stopped.
Even this proved an advantage to the French government. Charles V cut off the money to England -- but, because he hadn't actually paid off the ransom, he was able to continue the taxes which had been levied to raise the ransom! -- Perroy, p. 162.
And England was in a bad state in 1369. The plague was back, and horrible weather caused severe shortages of food (Saunders, p. 149. There would be several famines in the mid-1370s also; Saunders, p. 195). There was no way Edward could raise a major army at the time. He couldn't even induce the Free Companies of routiers back from Italy; Hawkwood and others found the pickings there too rich (Saunders, pp. 149-150. Saunders thinks Edward III wanted Hawkwood to stay in Italy to distract the Pope, but this is hard to believe -- if he wanted to distract the Pope, he'd go to Avignon!).
Early in the period, the English at least found a way to punish the French for their betrayal -- they would more regularly "wage the chevauchee." This was an early version of the "scorched earth campaign" such as William T. Sherman would use in marching across Georgia. An English band would set out to bring fire and sword to as large an area of France as possible. This had been a part of the English policy from the beginning (the army that won at Poitiers had set out expecting simply to wage the chevauchee). Now it was the main strategy. Since the French would not fight, there was little danger to the English, and they did the French economy significant harm. But there was no winning the war that way. And, eventually, even raiding proved economically difficult for the English.
By the time Edward III died in 1377 (Seward, p. 116), English possessions in Gascony were about the same as they had been fifty years earlier, when Edward came to the throne: the coastal strip from Bordeaux to Bayonne (Prestwich, p. 184). Strategically, their situation may even have been worse, since the French had driven a salient into the middle of the coastal strip (Perroy, p. 165; Seward, p. 115), so Bordeaux and Bayonne were no longer mutually supporting. The allies of the English also lost control of most of Brittany. In 1377, the Forty Years War (the name it might have been given had not Henry V come along) looked like a strategic draw, despite the fact that the English had won all the major battles and had gained Calais.
As Prestwich says on pp. 186-187, "The reversal of English fortunes in Edward III's declining years was almost as remarkable as the earlier successes. The lack of firm direction by the ageing king was revealed in a want of coherent planning. The earlier grand strategies of simultaneous attacks from various fronts had been abandoned in favour of what appeared to be aimless raids, often launched too late in the year to do much damage." In 1376, the so-called "Good Parliament" tried for reforms, but the Black Prince died before it ended (Sedgwick, p. 283), and Edward III was senile, and little could be done to rescue the decrepit government.
Ormrod, p. 10, notes that "Edward III is now often seen as a rather second-rate ruler, stubborn and selfish in his foreign ambition, weak and yielding in his domestic policies." There is much truth in this; Edward III did little to strengthen the government of his nation (and his grandson would pay for it). But he did start a tradition -- of chivalry, and of expansionism. We may call this bad. But it clearly inspired Henry V.
The Crecy war had one noteworthy effect which is rarely mentioned in the military histories: To make the whole thing work, Edward III needed the consent of the people being taxed to pay for it. Edward consulted regularly with his nobles -- thus forming the first true parliaments. Ormrod, pp. 193-194, counts 48 parliaments in Edward's fifty year reign, and another nine quasi-parliamentary councils.
Edward's assemblies were a far cry from the modern form of parliamentary government (few, according to Ormrod, lasted more than a month, and 17 lasted ten or fewer days; some were only four days long), but they were a major step. England, and England alone, has had parliamentary government ever since -- with the result that descendents of Edward III still sit on the English throne, two centuries and more after the last descendent of the Valois were set aside in France. The fact that England had a strong parliament also made it easier for Henry V to assemble his armies in 1415. The government was still stronger than parliament -- OxfordCompanion, p. 426, notes that the reforms of the Good Parliament (which lasted an amazingly long 73 days) were overturned within about a year -- but it was a step in the right direction.
For fifty years -- from shortly after 1360 to 1413, during the latter part of the reign of Edward III and the whole reigns of Richard II (1377-1399) and Henry IV (1399-1413), the English made no serious attempt to defeat the French. Perroy, p. 169, seems to imply that they would have lost all of Guyenne in 1377 had not John Neville of Raby won enough small successes to make the French temporarily stop spending money on reconquest (followed soon after by the death of Charles V, which changed the whole equation).
Richard II, in fact, wanted to end the French conflict altogether; he raised no armies, floated offers to turn Guyenne over to the French if they would allow an English duke to rule it (Saul, p. 211, who notes that Richard made John of Gaunt Duke of Acquitaine, though of course when Gaunt's son Henry IV ascended, that eliminated the whole idea since the Duke of Acquitaine was once again King of England), and made noises about supporting the French Pope during the schism (though Saul, p. 232, notes that this was really dependent on a peace with France). Richard and his government also refused to give any serious help to the anti-French forces in Flanders, meaning that these firm (if only intermittently effective) English allies were brought under French domination (Saul, pp. 138-140). Plus, in the early 1390s, he and the French negotiated for years, and according to Saul, p. 218, no one really even knows why the negotiations finally failed.
It's easy to see why Richard wanted out: The French came very close to winning the war in the first few years of his reign, attacking Calais,picking up more land in Gascony, and heavily raiding the English south coast (Saul, pp. 33-34, though on p. 208 he argues that Richard's real reason was that he wanted to go on crusade. Possible, but the idea of Richard II on a crusade strikes me as pretty scary -- for the other crusaders).
By the mid-1380s, the situation was so bad that England was afraid of an all-out invasion. Perroy, p. 191, has no explanation for what happened next: "For some obscure reasons, the expedition was called off. Was the adventure found to be too risky, the strength available too small? Or did Philip [of Burgundy] put on a costly act simply to frighten England, and was he satisfied when he obtained the reopening of the wool trade between England and Flanders? We do not know." (Saul's explanation, p. 156, is that the French lacked the money to put their armada to sea.
Whatever the explanation, it was lucky for England that the invasion was cancelled; Richard's government had little real plan to fight it (Seward, pp. 133-134). In the whole reign, there were no great land battles, and only one major sea battle, in which the Earl of Arundel defeated a larger French convoy in early 1387 (Saul, p. 168). Even this was minor enough that I have never seen the battle given a name.
The boy-king's council at first didn't even have money from parliament to fight the threat (Saul, p. 47, notes that there were *six* parliaments in the first four years of Richard's reign, most of which voted money, but somehow the cash never accomplished anything). And when they tried to mount a counter-offensive, it was late and accomplished nothing except to show that England was short on quality generals at this time (Saul, pp. 35-36). Their one major success in the early period was taking over Cherbourg, but the English obtained that by diplomacy with Charles of Navarre, not by conquest (Saul, p. 41).
Taxes in these early years were so heavy (Saul, p. 56) and Richard II's administration was so inefficient, that he in fact faced the first great peasant revolt in English history, Wat Tyler's rebellion (Ashley-Great, pp. 146-147. It is interesting to note that there were only two really major peasant revolts in English history -- Tyler's of 1381 and Jack Cade's of 1450 -- and both came during the Hundred Years War, and both came at a time when the English were clearly losing and desperate to try to fight back. Of the two, Tyler's was the more dangerous, and came about when attempts to evade an exorbitant poll tax failed; Saul, p. 57. The common people, with their population still much reduced by the Black Death, simply couldn't pay what was asked; Saul, p. 60). Perroy also blames Lollard agitation (p. 182), but Perroy (who after all was French and seems to have little knowledge of non-Catholic faiths) didn't understand Wycliff or Lollardy; the revolt did have some "communist" elements, but they almost certainly were not Lollards.
The 14-year-old King Richard did much to calm and control Tyler's rebels -- but the rebellion's failure just meant that the abuses which caused the rebellion went unchecked. Indeed, Richard had temporized during the negotiations (Saul, pp. 67-69), and it led to a reign of terror and perhaps was a foreshadowing of what Richard would become. Richard never did manage to promote meaningful reforms; it's doubtful that he ever realized how messed-up his government was. (To be fair, when the Lords Appellant forcibly took charge in the late 1380s, they proved just as incompetent. But not even having control taken out of his hands knocked any sense into Richard.)
Richard's only attempt at a foreign adventure was two visits to Ireland, which were part invasion and part progress to awe the locals. Even there, he didn't want much responsibility; his main goal in the first was to create a palatine territory for his favorite Robert de Vere (Saul, p. 274). His response to the French invasions was to seek a truce. This was agreed to in 1389, and Richard held to it for the rest of his life (Seward, p. 138), doing his best to negotiate a lasting peace (Perroy, p. 198). To calm tensions, he gave away Brest and Cherbourg, leaving England with only Calais in northern France and the remnants of Guyenne in the south. This was the period when the king tried to give Guyenne to his uncle John of Gaunt, in effect washing his hands of the whole area.
Richard eventually married as his second wife a daughter of the French king (Seward, p. 139, Barker, pp. 15-16) -- though Isabella of France was only a quarter of his age (she was six when the French offered the marriage; Saul, p. 226), and pre-pubescent even when he died; they of course left no children. After Richard's deposition and death, Henry IV used her as a bargaining chip against France (Perroy, p. 214), but in 1400 allowed her to go back to France, where she remarried at 16 and died in childbirth at 19 (Barker, p. 17). It seems Richard and his government tried to secure a true treaty with France, but couldn't come up with a deal that both the French government and the English parliament would accept -- but, in return for the French marriage, they did secure a 28 year truce, which in many ways was better than a peace since it didn't cause the sort of wranglings over precise interpretations that had spoiled earlier treaties (Saul, p. 227). In practice, the truce lasted less than two decades -- but Richard was long gone by them.
Shortly before Richard's first truce, John of Gaunt's son Henry of Bolingbroke's wife, Mary de Bohun, bore her first surviving son, Henry. (There had apparently been an earlier pregnancy resulting in a boy who died at birth, perhaps because the mother was so young -- only 11 or 12, according to Allmand, p. 8.) A record from the reign of Henry VI documents his birth near Monmouth (Allmand, p. 7), so he was called "Henry of Monmouth."
The young man was a member of the royal family, but with half a dozen people senior to him (including Richard II, who as yet was too young for anyone to know that he would die childless; Allmand, p. 8). No one realized that the young man would be particularly significant(Jarman, p. 32), so the date of his birth is not firmly known (Earle, p. 12). Allmand notes that references to his age make it possible that it was 1386 or 1387. The likely dates are August 9 or September 16. Allmand notes that his parents were in Monmouth in 1386, and so favors that year; the majority of other sources I have checked seem to prefer 1387 (e.g. Jarman, p. 32 says September 16 1387).
Mary de Bohun died in 1394, at the age of 24, bearing her sixth child (Earle, p. 12; Allmand, p. 9). She ended up with four sons and two daughters -- seemingly a fine flock, but three of the boys (Henry, the eldest; Thomas, the second, and John, the third) would die well before the age of fifty, and neither Thomas, nor John, nor Humphrey (the fourth boy) would leave a legitimate child.
Henry was considered significant enough that a marriage into the ducal house of Brittany was considered in 1395 (Allmand, p. 10), but this fell through -- and, in an "I'm My Own Grandpa" touch, Henry IV later married the girl's mother.
(Shakespeare fans please note: Although Shakespeare made Henry V and Harry "Hotspur" Percy contemporaries, Hotspur was a generation older. In 1388, just a year or two after Henry's birth, Hotspur -- already a young adult -- would command at the Battle of Otterburn. Hotspur was killed in 1403, a seasoned veteran of about forty, at a time when Henry of Monmouth was still in his mid teens. Allmand, p. 19, in fact notes that, initially, Hostspur was appointed to lead the council that managed Wales for the young Prince!)
Perroy, p. 255, declares that Henry was "the first King of England [since the Norman conquest, presumably] who had some English blood in his veins." This is not quite true -- Henry II and all succeeding kings were descended from Saint Margaret of Scotland, the sister of Edgar the Atheling, the last scion of the dynasty of Wessex who was briefly chosen King after the Battle of Hastings. And Richard II's mother was Joan "the Fair Maid of Kent." Still, Perroy is right in that Mary de Bohun brought some blood of the English nobility into the family. This meant that Henry was culturally English, even if his ancestry was mostly from Normandy and other European monarchies.
Prince Harry was born soon after a "changing of the guard." The late 1370s was a bad period for deaths of kings and noble. Just one year after Edward III died in 1377, Pope Gregory XI, who had taken the Papacy back to Rome, followed him into the grave (Renouard, p. 66).
If the Papacy had been a poor peacemaker during its stay in Avignon, things now became far worse. Gregory had done a terrible job of managing Italian affairs; most of the Papal States had rebelled (Saunders, pp. 206-207) and Italy was almost completely out of control. The 16 cardinals who met to choose Gregory's successor were besieged by a Roman mob which wanted an Italian Pope (Renouard, p. 68). They chose an Italian -- but one who promptly made himself disliked by many; Urban VI, according to Renouard, p. 69, "showed himself to be coarse, rude and tactless to an extraordinary degree." The disgusted French cardinals declared the election invalid and chose another Pope, Clement VII. The result was the "Great Schism" (not to be confused with the real Great Schism of 1054 which split Orthodoxy from Catholicism; this one simply split Catholic Christianity, without producing any doctrinal differences).
It is ironic to note that Clement VII, whose election was certainly more irregular, had probably more and stronger supporters (Renouard, p. 69). Being the "French" Pope had clear advantages; he certainly had more revenue (Renouard, p. 73), though both Papal pretenders came in with empty treasuries. The split lasted through the next several reigns (Saul, pp. 84-85; Seward, p. 123). France and England naturally supported rival Popes, so there was now no available mediator. It would be difficult even to call in a third party, since one side or the other would claim the mediator supported the wrong Pope. The Schism, for instance, killed plans for Richard II to marry an Italian noblewoman (Saul, p. 84. We might note that Geoffrey Chaucer had been one of the negotiators who set up the preliminary arrangements). It was not until 1415, at the Council of Constance, that a real attempt was made to heal the schism, and even that did not convince the deposed Benedict XIII, who claimed the Papal title until his death in 1422 (Renouard, p. 78). The last successors of this anti-Papal line were not put aside until 1431 (Renouard, pp. 136-137).
If the English managed to retain some land in Guyenne in the reigns of Richard II and Henry IV, it was only because the French were distracted. The French constable du Guesclin was killed in 1380, and three months later Charles V died (Seward, p. 125). Charles was only in his early forties, but of course he had always been sickly. He had still done a brilliant job of reviving France after the disastrous reign of his father (Perroy, p. 145).
Charles V made perhaps only two mistakes: On his deathbed, he bankrupted his son's government by abolishing the hated hearth tax (Perroy, p. 174). And he started the process which created the mighty Dukedom of Burgundy (Perroy, p. 148) -- though, to be fair, his only other real alternative was to give a smaller Duchy of Burgundy to Charles the Bad of Navarre, who had been fighting him off and on for years. Charles the Bad had been cheated many times -- he should have been king of France! -- but this final insult led him into a rebellion which at last ended his pretensions. And Edward III, who felt bound by his treaty with France, was unable to intervene; Perroy, pp. 151-152. Charles V's diplomacy had the peculiar effect of making a Flemish heiress wife of two consecutive Dukes of Burgundy -- and of founding the dynasty which nearly overthrew France.
Most English historians seem to be amazed that the French did not win the war in the period immediately after Charles's death. The Frenchman Perroy, p. 177, has a different take: "During his sixteen years' reign, at once healing and exhausting, Charles V had accomplished a great task: the destruction of the Treaty of Calais [=Bretigny], which was the master-thought of this persistent and crafty man. But he had rekindled the war, and his slender resources did not enable him to end it. The dilemma in which he had placed the kingdom was not removed by his death. Unable to win the war, France was forced to continue it, without hope of a definite success.... By fits and starts the two countries had outrun their strength. Neither one nor the other could achieve a decision." He notes on p. 189 that tax revolts continued even after the hearth tax was abolished.
In addition, the death of Charles V turned loose the royal dukes, many of whom spent their strength on ventures irrelevant to the reconquest of France -- several, e.g., started meddling in Italy (Perroy, pp. 204-205).
Charles V was succeeded by Charles VI, who went mad early on (he actually killed four of his own attendants before being restrained; Seward, p. 143. This is based on Book IV, section 44 of Froissart's Chronicles, though much of it is corroborated elsewhere). The disease was at first intermittent (Perroy, p. 194), but the problem became worse and worse over time. His genes for madness would, in time, come close to destroying both France and England.
(I really wish we could go back and do genetic testing on the family of Charles VI -- among them Henry VI of England, who went catatonic in the 1450s, leading to the first Yorkist protectorate and then to the first battle of Saint Albans when he recovered [Wilkinson, p. 176]; Henry VII, the majority of whose children died young and whose uncle Jasper was childless; Henry VIII; who left no legitimate grandchildren and whose partners suffered many miscarriages; aand Henry's sister Margaret Tudor, who managed to bear an heir to the King of Scotland but later suffered her own miscarriage.)
(Seward, p. 144, suggests that Charles VI's problem was porphyria, which is often said to be the afflicted George III of England; this is probably based on the fact that Charles suffered his first bout on a bright, hot day -- Earle, p. 79 -- and light and heat can bring on porphyria. Charles also had the sort of delusions typical of porphyria; Jarman, p. 24, says that he was "a gibbering figurehead who sat unwashed in a threadbare palace convinced that he was made of glass and would shatter at a touch"; compare Gillingham, p. 75. But I must admit that I think there is more involved; though Charles VI does sound very much like a victim of porphyria, too many of Charles VI's descendents had problems which do not fit the disease.)
Nor were the Charles VI's sons able to help; the first two Dauphins died young (Seward, p. 179), and the third, the future Charles VII (Jean Darc's Dauphin, Charles the Well-Served) was still young (born 1399) and completely lacking in energy.
With the King unable to rule, the reign of Charles VI turned France over to the factions led by his relatives. Guerard, p. 105, describes the situation this way: "Charles VI (1380-1422) was a child of twelve showing but little promise. Power fell to his uncles, the dukes of Anjou, Berry, Burgundy, and Bourbon. The royal system, as organized under Philip the Fair, was still so precarious and so ill-understood, it had proved so oppressive and at time[s] so incompetent, that there was a demand for... a complete return to feudal custom.... [T]he royal dukes proceeded to ransack the treasury for ambitious purposes of their own, Naturally, the bourgeois counselors of Charles the Wise, contemptuously called the Marmousets, were dismissed.
"In 1389, on attaining his majority, the young king thanked his uncles and recalled the Marmousets. But three years later, Charles VI, whose frail wits had not been able to stand a mad pace of pleasure, went insane; and, although he had lucid moments, he was unfit to rule for the remaining thirty years of his life."
Throw in the monetary crises in France, and the French government was unable to accomplish much for the next several decades. Even without the hearth tax, the burden on the peasants was very high, partly due to the potmetal currency (Perroy, p. 189) but mostly due to the fact that different factions, when they came to power, had to bring in their own office-holders, and scoop up every cent of cash to pay them (Perroy, pp. 222-224). In effect, the population was paying for two governments rather than one, and neither one any good.
(There were some curious parallels between England and France in this period. Both were ruled by underage kings, neither of whom was very effective. Both had trouble with uncles and councils. Richard II at least didn't leave any children with genes for madness; he seems to have left no children either legitimate or illegitimate, and no extramarital affairs; Saul, p. 94. Though he does seem to have loved his wife Anne of Bohemia genuinely; her death was very hard on him. The problem with Richard's otherwise exemplary sexual conduct was that he left no heir -- which in turn led to the succession quarrels which occupied England, off and on, for a century.)
It is interesting to note that the precipitating event for Richard II's deposition was his treatment of Henry of Bolingbroke, the future Henry IV, whom Richard exiled. Yet Richard kept the young Henry of Monmouth at his court and treated him well; Earle, p. 31 -- though he also took him to Ireland during the invasion of that country (Allmand, p. 14), just possibly as a hostage.
Richard II, in the late 1380s, had been brought to heel by the "Lords Appellant" -- Humphrey of Gloucester, Richard's uncle; the Earl of Arundel; the Earl of Warwick, the Mowbray Earl of Nottingham (later Duke of Norfolk), and Henry of Bolingbroke. The latter two eventually came over to Richard's side, and the former three were eliminated in the 1390s (though Goodman, p. 186, argues that they had created a precedent for opposing a monarch which came back into play in 1399.) Then Nottingham/Norfolk and Bolingbroke had a falling-out. It came to the point where they were about to hold a trial by combat in 1398 -- when Richard stepped in and exiled *both*, even though at least one of them was certainly on Richard's side (Allmand, p. 11).
Mowbray, who was banished for life, would die in exile. Not Bolingbroke. Initially his exile was supposed to be temporary -- but when, in early 1399, Bolingbroke's father John of Gaunt died, Richard II made the exile permanent (Allmand, pp. 11-12), probably so Richard could take over the Duchy of Lancaster that Bolingbroke should have inherited.
Richard seemed completely oblivious to his danger. He actually went to Ireland with an army to try to settle the messy situation there. Bolingbroke invaded England in Richard's absence -- and quickly gained enough support to overthrow the King (Allmand, p. 13, though on p. 14 he describes how it was made legally to appear an abdication).
Even without his treatment of Bolingbroke, it's possible that Richard would have eventually been deposed anyway, because he was clearly attempting to create an absolute monarchy. Indeed, a semi-divine monarchy; Perroy, p. 200, notes that Richard actually petitioned the Pope to canonize his great-grandfather Edward II (who, no matter how badly he was mistreated by his subordinates, was no saint!). But Bolingbroke's invasion meant that the crown went to the House of Lancaster, rather than to the youth of the Mortimer family who was Richard's proper heir (at least if succession in the female line was allowed in England -- which it was generally agreed that it was). The key effect of Bolingbroke's invasion was to make Henry of Bolingbroke into King Henry IV, and to make his son Henry of Monmouth, the future Henry V, the Prince of Wales.
Allmand, p. 15, makes an interesting point here: "Richard [II] might be said to have destroyed himself, politically at least. None the less there remained the uncomfortable fact that the new king's de facto possession of the throne was his only true claim to power. He might be the head of by far the richest family in England.... [y]et his possession of the throne of England had stemmed from a decision to use force to secure it. Early on the young man whose right to the title 'Prince of Wales' depended on his acceptance, albeit tacit, of his father's usurpation had learned that a legal claim was always rendered stronger if military might was there to support it. As his father had done in England in 1399, so the future Henry V would do in France some twenty years later."
Henry of Monmouth quickly became a major landowner: As heir to the throne, he became Prince of Wales (a title which still meant something in 1399 --Henry would spend much of his father's reign fighting Owen Glendower and other Welsh rebels), Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester. Those titles were standard for the king's heir. But Henry IV also made him Duke of Lancaster and Duke of Aquitaine (Allmand, pp. 16-17). This at once gave Prince Harry a lot of responsibility and an interest in the French conflict.
It is ironic to note that, in 1406 when Parliament officially acted on the succession, it officially declared that "heirs general" could succeed to the English throne -- that is, that females counted in the succession. Thus Henry IV, whose claim to the throne -- insofar as it was not rule by conquest -- was due to being Richard II's heir male, declared that the succession should not be by heirs male! (Allmand, ppp. 30-31).
In France, by this time, the leading contenders for power were the Dukes of Burgundy, the first of whom (Philip the Bold) was the uncle of Charles VI, and the Dukes of Orleans, the first of whom was the king's brother. The Queen, who had much influence, initially supported the Burgundian faction, but when Philip of Burgundy died in 1404 and was succeeded by his son John the Fearless, Isabel instead gave her attention to the Orleans faction (so much so that she was accused, possibly accurately, of sharing his bed). The rivalry soon became war to the knife; John the Fearless (who succeeded Philip the Bold in 1404; Seward, p. 148) assassinated Orleans in 1407 (Guerard, p. 106; Perroy, pp. 226-227).
The assassination was twice fortunate for the English, since Orleans, though not a very good soldier, had been pushing back the English in Guyenne; his death may have saved the remaining English territory (Barker, p. 17; Seward, p. 145), and Henry IV (who was always broke because of the rebellions against him; Seward, p. 144) had no means to fight back. The French became particularly hostile to the English after the deposition of Richard II in 1399 -- since Richard was married to a French princess, and had not pursued the war, his overthrow was regarded as a hostile act (Ashley-Stuart, p. 35. The French were about the only ones who still liked him -- Seward, p. 142, comments that Richard had become "almost insanely tyrannical" and notes that he had very little support from the barons at the end).
Even better for the English, from the time Orleans was assassinated, France was split into two factions, the Burgundians and the Armagnacs (the latter named for the Count of Armagnac, whose daughter would marry the son of Orleans a few years after the assassination). The mad king of course could not intervene, so there was nothing to keep the factions from each others' throats. The Burgundians took control of Paris in 1409 (Barker, p. 18), but it did not last. The Armagnacs drove them out -- only to spoil their prospects by inaugurating a reign of terror (Barker, p. 60, notes an instance of the Armagnacs slaughtering a city full of their own supporters, and doing so with great cruelty). Even when the government managed to produce useful legislation, the power of the factions meant that it could not be enforced (Perroy, p. 229).
Talk about an opportunity for an outsider! The English did not intervene at first, partly because Henry IV was still not secure on the throne (Perroy, p. 213, notes that at one point Henry IV actually tried to rewrite history to make his ancestor, the younger brother of Edward I, an older brother, since that would strengthen Henry's claim; seemingly to support this argument, Henry halted the regular maintenance King Edward I had ordered for his tomb; Hutchinson, p. 54), partly because the king was in poor physical condition (suffering from an undiagnosed by extremely debilitating disease; Earle, p. 69) and partly because they couldn't figure out which French faction would offer the better deal (Barker, p. 19).
It is possible that this issue caused some friction between Henry the father and Henry the son; both, according to Allmand, p. 48, wanted to regain the large Acquitaine promised by the Treaty of Bretigny, but the son probably wanted a more activist policy. Indeed, two English forces landed in 1411 and 1412 -- and supported different sides in the French struggle (Perroy, pp. 230-231; Allmand, p. 54, thinks that the 1411 intervention, on behalf of Burgundy, was arranged by Prince Henry, while teh 1412 intervention was set up by Henry IV when the Armagnacs offered far better terms.).
This seems to have led to a distinct coolness between father and son. Henry IV, perhaps with the support of parliament, dismissed his entire council, including the prince (Allmand, pp. 50-51). There was talk that the prince might be disowned entirely, with his younger brother Thomas of Clarence being declared heir to the throne (Clarence, not the prince, was given command of the 1412 intervention in France). It appears two factions were forming: Henry IV and his second son Thomas, and Prince Henry and his half-uncles the Beauforts. From 1411, the Prince's faction was entirely out of power (Allmand, p. 53).
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C164B

King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164] --- Part 04


DESCRIPTION: Continuation of the notes to "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of FranceÓ [Child 164]. Entry concludes in "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164]" --- Part 05 (File Number C164D)
Last updated in version 2.5
NOTES: THE REIGN OF HENRY V
Then Henry IV died in 1413, and Henry of Monmouth, now Henry V, decided to play for bigger stakes. The rebellions that had plagued Henry IV were mostly quiet (Earle, pp. 101-104, notes that there were 17 higher nobles in England at the time Henry V succeeded, and 14 of them were adult and physically fit, and all 14 fought for Henry in France at some time or another. Incidentally, we should remind people that Shakespeare is not to be trusted *at all* on this count. Plays such as Henry V are not nearly as false as, say, the Henry VI trilogy or Richard III, but Jarman, p. 64, looks at the list of leaders Shakespeare claimed were at Agincourt and finds that half of them were not. Shakespeare here at least had contact with reality -- but not much). The British economy had largely recovered from the Black Death and the exactions of Edward III and the inefficiency of Richard II. The exchequer was empty (Barker, p. 24) -- but how better to fill it than with foreign loot?
Henry V is often portrayed as a humorless crusader, and there is no question but that he was single-minded in his pursuit what he considered his "rights" in France. Ashley-Great, p. 155, describes him as "much more like Oliver Cromwell than the chivalrous Tudor hero of Shakespeare's plays"; he quotes other historians who called Henry a fanatic and a bigot. Earle, p. 99, while admitting his rigid orthodoxy, thinks he wanted to reform the papacy -- but offers no specifics. What we can say specifically is that Henry watched heretics being burned (the burning of alleged Lollards, many of whom were probably not heretics but political enemies -- Rubin, pp. 188-190 -- had been introduced under Henry IV; Rubin, p. 187), and that Henry V once sent a friend (Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham), whose opinions were slightly theologically shaky, to the stake (Earle, p. 99, though Oldcastle escaped custody just long enough to be taken and burned by a churchman without Henry himself being present; Earle, p. 101). Seward, p. 164, mentions "Ruthless authority and cold cruelty," says he was "puritanical," and speaks of "brutal single-mindedness."
Perroy, who of course writes from a French perspective, refers to his "hypocritical devoutness, the duplicity of his conduct, his pretence of defending right and redressing wrongs when he sought solely to satisfy his ambitions, [and] the cruelty of his revenge" (p. 235). This strikes me as a little exaggerated -- I don't think Henry was a hypocrite; I think he was badly messed up emotionally. But the effect is the same. It was eventually costly, too -- as Allmand notes on p. 438, since Henry said his victories were God's will, his successors could hardly negotiate with the French, since that was against Henry's version of God's desires.
Henry was well-educated, speaking and writing English, French, and Latin. There is some dispute over whether he had a lighter side. He certainly owned a harp (Earle, p. 28), and is believed to have been able to play it; he supposedly took one with him to France (Barker, p. 26); he also took an 18 minstrels along (Barker, p. 134). Jarman, p. 38, claims he also played cithera and gittern, without listing a source.
But the claim that he read Chaucer is somewhat dubious. It is true that one of the sixteen surviving substantial manuscripts of Chaucer's Troylus and Criseyde (Pierpont Morgan Library MS. M 817) is imprinted with his arms as Prince of Wales. But this does not prove that he read it; his grandfather John of Gaunt was one of Chaucer's patrons, so the family may have handed him a copy whether he wanted it or not. (There was a strong literary tradition in the family. Henry IV also seems to have supported Chaucer, and he definitely supported John Gower, who dedicated an edition of the Confessio Amantis to him; Goodman, p. 156. Henry IV passed his love of books on to his fourth son Henry, one of the greatest collectors of the era, but we do not find much evidence of Henry V as patron of literature.)
What's more, Mauldwyn Mills, in the introduction to the Everyman edition of Troylus and Criseyde, which is based on the Morgan manuscript, notes that it contains a significant number of uncorrected errors (Troylus and Criseyde, Everyman; original edition 1953; revised edition, 2000; p. xxxv). Despite its very early date (one of the two earliest manuscripts, written within a dozen years of Chaucer's death), most critical editions do not use it as a copy text. The strong sense I get, in reading the notes, is that it was too poorly corrected to be a copy that was actually regularly read. Also, it is thought by many to have been taken from a not-final draft of the book, and would Henry V have accepted that if he really cared about the volume?
It should be remembered that this period was relatively impoverished in the arts. The reigns of Edward III and Richard II had been graced by Chaucer, Langland, the Gawain-poet, and John Gower. The era of the Lancastrian kings had nothing -- the only author from this period you're likely to have encountered is Sir Thomas Malory. I checked three literary anthologies, and in poetry, all skipped directly from Chaucer (died 1400) to Skelton (born c. 1460). Several books on literary history comment sourly on how barren the fifteenth century was. If Henry V patronized any writers, they certainly weren't worth what he spent on them.
Allmand, p. 42, notes that Thomas Chaucer (the son of Geoffrey) was three times speaker of parliament (1407, 1410, 1411), and thinks that this is a sign that Henry of Monmouth had great power and support in parliament, because Allmand thinks Chaucer was Henry's ally. But these three parliaments were during Henry IV's reign; I see no reason to think either Chaucer was a close ally of Henry V as opposed to Henry IV.
Henry was clearly physically tough; Barker, pp. 31-32, describes how he had taken an arrow in the face in one of his Welsh campaigns as Prince of Wales, it was said that it penetrated six inches into his head, and required extraordinary surgery to extract. (I can't recall anyone ever saying so, but I wonder if perhaps he may not have suffered minor brain damage resulting in his emotional rigidity.)
It was during the Welsh campaigns that he apparently got to know many of his later associates, such as the Earl of Warwick and the John Talbot, later to be known as "Old Talbot." Of course, he also got to know John Oldcastle, whom he would burn as a heretic (Allmand, p. 32).
The reports of a misspent youth are largely false, according to Barker, p. 43; she declares that they "acquired a veneer of historicity because they were taken up by Shakespeare" -- but of course the amount of actual history in Shakespeare is only slightly greater than the amount of quantum chromodynamics. (My guess is that the stories arose from the conflicts between Henry IV and Henry V before the latter's death; Barker, p. 21, reports that the younger Henry may have feared being disinherited by his father, and Earle, p. 69, observes that parties started forming about King and Prince as early as 1406. To be fair, Earle, p. 86, thinks it is "quite clear that there was some truth in [Henry's] reputation [for wildness]."
Jarman, p. 31, declares that "Although such Shakespearean stories as that of young Hal strking Judge Gascoigne... or Stowe's chronicle depicting him 'mugging' London citizens by night in company with his friends can largely be discounted, he evidently led something of a playboy life before his accession." But what was the usual evidence of wild escapades? Illegitimate children. And Earle, p. 87, admits that Henry "left no bastards from a riotous youth," though were are told that he "followed the services of Venus as well as Mars." Yet it is unlikely that Henry was infertile; once he married, he quickly got his wife pregnant. Even Earle confesses, "For details readers will have to join Shakespeare in using their imagination."
It is interesting to note that a French observer, who saw Henry and his brother Thomas of Clarence just before the start of the Agincourt campaign, Clarence looked like a soldier -- but Henry gave the impression of being a priest (Allmand, p. 438).
Henry V seems to have been unusually good at handling money; Barker, p. 102, reports an instance of him actually auditing some of his own books (Allmand, p. 2, implies that he was the first king before Henry VII to do so), and also notes on p. 114 that he actually kept detailed records of the men serving under him, which was largely unheard of at the time; Earle, p. 127, notes his careful attention to collecting his share of ransoms for prisoners taken by his subordinates. These were skills he perhaps learned by having to survive in penury during the poverty-stricken administration of his father (Barker, p. 34).
Henry V succeeded his father in 1413. He instantly turned things around in England. His father had never been secure on the throne. Henry V was in complete control within months. He also managed to get more money out of parliament than any other king of the time -- perhaps in history (Barker, pp. 104-105; Seward, p. 156; Earle, p. 105, quotes Stubbs as saying Henry's ability to raise money from parliament was "little less than miraculous."). Like many kings before him, he had to resort to forced loans -- but he was careful to borrow against money he new he would receive in the next tax year, and the loans were promptly repaid (Barker, pp. 108-110). He also offered many of the crown jewels as security to some of the nobility (Earle, p. 111; Jarman, p. 51, says that the need to pay retainers was so extreme that at least one crown was broken up by a subordinate).
The strength of the English economy probably helped. Henry came at a very fortunate time: The country had largely recovered from the Black Death, but the population had still not reached pre-plague levels, so the productivity of the land was not eroded by the relative overpopulation of the early fourteenth century (Earle, p. 96). And Henry had not engaged in the mass giveaway of crown properties which would bankrupt his son Henry VI.
Plus Henry knew where the power lay. Henry IV had tried to ally with the "men of lesser rank," according to Allmand, p. 62. This was not a very successful strategy in the fifteenth century; Richard III also tried to build a faction of common people plus a few nobles, and it failed spectacularly. Henry V would rely on the great lords such as the Earl of Warwick and the Earl of Salisbury.
Having put his country, and his army, on a firm financial footing, he sent envoys to Paris demanding "his" property in France. The best guess (Ashley-Great, p. 156) is that he wanted to regain Normandy and all of Acquitaine. (The English still controlled perhaps a third of the latter, none of the former). He also wanted to marry a French princess so there would be no more nibbling (Barker, p. 71). He asked for even more than that: The hand of Catherine, plus a close approximation of full empire of his great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather Henry II, two and a half centuries earlier: Aquitaine, Normandy, Anjou, Touraine, Poitou, Maine, and Ponthieu (Barker, p. 121). The French, naturally, were not interested -- and probably didn't think that England, which had been weak for half a century, could pose any threat. Jarman, p. 47, reports that the French ambassadors went so far as to declare him not the rightful king of England -- though I doubt that any sane negotiator would try such a ploy.
And Henry's military reputation was not established; despite much campaigning in Wales, he could be called an inexperienced general, since most of his time had been spent on sieges and controlling hostile territory (Earle, pp. 64-65). At the time he took the throne, he had been involved in only one pitched battle (Earle, pp. 58-60), and he was not in command. The battle was at Shrewsbury, in 1403; it was part of the civil war that year between Henry IV and rebels led by the Earl of Northumberland, his son Hotspur, Owen Glendower, and members of the Mortimer faction. Henry IV attacked Hotspur, and won a very close battle, and since that put him between the Welsh and Northumbrian factions, that particular rebellion was over. Henry V was to fight only one more pitched battle in his career -- at Agincourt. Everything else was sieges.
Henry very quickly proved those who doubted him wrong. He reached an agreement with Brittany (Barker, p. 63), resulting in a reduction of the piracy which had distracted the two countries for years (Allmand, p. 69), and also giving him a clear supply line from England to France. He also leashed the Scots -- he had in his custody both the new young king James I and the son of the regent Albany (Barker, p. 73). This meant that, if Albany tried anything, Henry could punish his son, but if the Scots tried to overthrow Albany to bring back James, he had control of James and could sic the younger Albany, who was third in line for the throne behind James and his father, on them. Scotland was unable to do anything except the usual border raids (and Albany the elder frankly seems to have liked it that way). By 1415, Henry had largely managed to negotiate an end even to those; he left the border entirely in the hands of the northerners (Barker, pp. 76-78).
Soon after, he crushed a revolt on behalf of the Mortimers, the proper heirs of Richard II (Barker, pp. 78-81). There was now no threat to him from within the British Isles. In the long term, the main effect of all this was to eliminate Richard of Cambridge, the younger brother of the Duke of York, whose son was Richard, the father of the future Edward IV and Richard III. The significance of the execution was that it made the infant Richard the heir to the York dukedom should his uncle die. And young Richard would in time become the Mortimer heir -- a pedigree which could spell trouble if Henry V's line ever failed.
Allmand, pp. 76-77, thinks Cambridge may have been the ringleader, perhaps because he had been given an earldom but not enough endowed land to sustain it. He also suggests that the trials proceeded illegally -- an interesting perspective on Henry's management of the country.
For a time, Henry V continued to negotiate with France, but prepared for war -- indeed, he told London officials to prepare to invade well before the French had made their final offer (Barker, p. 70). He even induced the church to muster their clergy to see who could fight (Barker, p. 128). Henry probably meant them to suppress heresy -- he was offensively orthodox (he was quite happy burning Lollard "heretics," according to Earle, p. 29 -- ironic for the grandson of John of Gaunt, who had had Lollard tendencies, and actually arrested his own stepmother on a charge of witchcraft, according to Rubin, p. 212). But they could also serve as a sort of national guard in the event of a French invasion.
Henry also seems to have tried to hire the most professional specialists he could -- e.g. he imported gunners from Germany (Barker, p. 132). Although he did ban one other sort of specialist -- he banned prostitutes (Jarmin, pp. 79-80, says that he ordered whores who approached the camp to have their left arms broken). He also tried to ban swearing. In an army!
In 1415 Henry appointed his brother John to have charge of England (it is interesting to note that John was the third brother; the second brother, Thomas of Clarence, was given no power and left out of Henry's will -- Barker, pp. 140-141 -- even though he was then heir to the throne and was brought along on the Agincourt expedition. Barker strongly suspects there was no love lost between the brothers!). Henry told his soldiers to wear the Cross of Saint George as a sort of token of recognition atop their ordinary livery (Barker, p. 131), then set sail for Normandy.
Supposedly he needed 1500 ships to transport his army (Barker, p. 147), though of course they were mostly quite small -- and he probably had two to three horses for every man (Jarman, p. 72, estimates 25,000 horses), calling for much greater carrying capacity. It took them three days to make their landing, but they got ashore unopposed (Barker, p. 157). After a brief period of looting, Henry got the army back under control -- and, from then on, discipline was strict (Barker, p. 163; on p. 240, she reports an incident of a man being hanged for stealing a cheap but theoretically holy object from a church). The soldiers doubtless grumbled, but they probably fought better.
This may have been an indication that Henry V really did want to take control of France. He didn't want to damage a country he regarded as "his." We'll never know.
1415: HARFLEUR AND AGINCOURT
The first English objective was the port of Harfleur at the mouth of the Seine -- at that time, before its harbor silted up, a very strategic point. (It had been used as a staging point for raids on England; Barker, p. 168, and was used for attacks on English shipping; Allmand, p. 67. It was at the time the most important port in Normandy, according to Allmand, p. 79, and of course could control traffic to Rouen and Paris.) Undermanned until the French managed to sneak in reinforcements (Barker, pp. 172-173), it nonetheless possessed extremely strong defences on both land and sea sides.
Those strong defences nearly led to disaster for the English. The siege was one of the first to really depend on artillery -- but it was still a long, difficult operation, taking most of a month. That was at least ten days longer than Henry expected (Barker, p. 180). During that time, much of the army came down with bloody dysentery (Barker, p. 181). Casualties were extremely heavy -- probably about a third of their numbers (Ashley-Great, p. 156). Among them was one of the king's best friends, the Bishop of Norwich (Barker, pp. 183-184). It is rather frightening to wonder what might have happened had the English been held before the town much longer. It might perhaps have happened -- the town eventually surrendered, but details are rather lacking; Barker, pp. 191-193, thinks that perhaps the town's residents quit fighting, undercutting the still-determined garrison. It appears the garrison reached a deal with Henry, agreeing to give in if the French government had not sent an army by a certain date. And, of course, the government did nothing (Barker, pp. 193-195).
Henry was severe with the garrison, humiliating them and berating them for fighting against their lawful King (Jarman, p. 109). It was not the last time he would take such a high-handed approach. He also reportedly expelled the aged and the crippled, allowing only the healthy and prosperous to stay (Jarman, p. 111), assuming of cource they accepted him as King.
Losses from disease were so severe (Allmand, p. 80, cites a chronicler who claimed 5000 Englishmen were afflicted, though the source blames the disease on eating unripe fruit. Jarman, p. 106, believes over 2000 men were lost, which seems the minimum possible) that Henry decided not to undertake an additional major offensive that year (Barker, p. 197. Allmand, p. 84, argues that Henry had never had a plan beyond taking Harfleur but intended to respond to conditions when the town fell, though Jarman, p. 114, believes he had considered an attack on Rouen or Paris or a drive toward Guyenne).
Most of Henry's advisors apparently thought he should go directly home (Seward, p. 161). Henry wasn't willing to give up quite that easily -- he still wanted to at least wage a chevauchee. But he decided on a short one, choosing the shortest route to Calais and safety. Even that was a difficult maneuver to undertake in October (the exact date they left Harfleur is somewhat uncertain, due to inconsistent information in the chronicles. Barker, pp. 214-218, says that every date from October 6 to 9 is possible, but thinks the most likely is October 8. This is also the date given by Keegan, p. 82). And the French had been roused from their torpor by the fall of Harfleur (Barker, p. 231).
The French of course had a decision to make: They could try to retake Harfleur, or attack Henry, or split their forces and do both. The experienced military officials apparently favored the former, but most of the nobility, their pride stung, felt that Henry had to be punished. The decision was to pursue him (Jarman, p. 123).
The French almost managed to cut off the English by blocking the passage of the Somme. The famous ford of Blanchetaque which Edward III had used was blocked off (Barker, p. 220; Jarman, p. 129). Other crossings were either guarded or were unusable because the bridges had been destroyed (Jarman, p. 131). Some of the junior officers argued for going back to Harfleur rather than hunt for a crossing they might not find (Jarman, p. 129), but the King ignored the suggestion. Henry had to go far upstream before he found a crossing point (Allmand, p. 86), while the army grew increasingly tired and sick and short of supplies. Henry was so rushed that he made no attempts at taking seriously defended towns along the way. Even so, it looked for a time as if the French might trap him.
In fact, they *did* trap him (Seward, p. 163). There is some question about whether Henry's forces were mounted (Seward, p. 163, thinks the archers were on foot, but given how fast they moved, it seems likely that Henry's entire army was mounted), but heavy rain slowed them down. Henry had made it across the Somme -- the biggest single obstacle in his way -- but it took him far out of his way, and on October 24, when the English army was only two or three marches from Calais and safety (the field of Agincourt is in what we would now call Belgium, not France -- in fact, it's near the great World War I battlefields of the Somme; Jarman p. 178), the French army arrived (Keegan, p. 82). They stood between Henry and Calais, and even if Henry had had the provisions to make it back to Harfleur (which he didn't), they could have hit him in rear. All the French had to do was win the battle, and Henry V and his pretensions would be one with every other pretender in history.
And the French had a substantial superiority in numbers -- so much so that Barker, p. 268, reports that they sent some soldiers home! Keegan, p. 88, believes that Henry had perhaps 5000 archers and a thousand men-at-arms (knights, squires, and others who wore armor and carried short-range weapons); this is also the figure in Featherstone, p. 145, and Allmand, p. 88. Barker, p. 218, suggests 5000 archers, 900 men-at-arms, and unknown but numerous others such as surgeons, heralds, and chaplains -- though many of them were so sick with dysentery that they had had to cut the seats out of their clothing to reduce the fouling (Barker, p. 276). Rubin, p. 218, implicitly supports the figure of 5000 archers and 900 men at arms.
Numbers for the French are far less certain, with English chroniclers coming up with numbers on the order of 60,000; one managed to suggest 150,000 (Barker, p. 263). French estimates were smaller, but no one offered a figure of fewer than 8000, with most guesses far larger; they went as high as 50,000. Keegan suggests 25,000, most of them men-at-arms, some with horses, some not. Barker, after listing the evidence, seems to prefer the figure of 36,000, based on the contemporary estimate of Jehan Waurin (which is the most detailed account). Rubin, p. 218, suggests the French army was "almost three times larger" -- i.e. probably 15,000-17,000 soldiers. Certainly there were plenty of nobles -- four royal dukes (with a fifth on his way), a dozen counts, and "innumerable lords" (Barker, p. 264). Allmand, p. 88, believes the English were outnumbered three or four to one, giving the French probably on the order of 20,000 soldiers. It also probably had the edge in artillery (Allmand, p. 89, thinks the English had no artillery at all, and this seems logical -- Henry had had artillery at Harfleur, but he was using siege guns, too big to carry in the field).
What they didn't have was a real commander (Barker, p. 251; Seward, p. 165). Charles VI and the dauphin were not present, and there was no real boss appointed in their place. Both the Marshall and Constable of France were present, but they couldn't really control their juniors, especially since many of those men stood higher in the feudal hierarchy (Barker, p. 261; Allmand, p. 90, notes that the Dukes of Orleans, Bourbon, and Alencon -- all of whom had been allied with Henry VI in 1412! -- were young men in favor of fighting as soon as possible).
To top it all off, every high lord wanted to be in on the fight, so most of them ended up in the front line, leaving their troops leaderless (Barker, p. 266).
In accordance with the standards of the time, there was one last parley before the battle. What happened is uncertain. French chroniclers have claimed Henry found the French host daunting, and offered to give back all his gains if allowed to avoid battle (Barker, pp. 273-274; Jarman, p. 150; Seward, p. 163, though this sounds suspiciously like the story of the Black Prince at Poitiers). If Henry made the offer, it is certain that the French, believing in their numbers, refused, or demanded impossible terms (Jarman's version is that they demanded Henry renounce the crown of France), and the battle became certain (Earle, pp. 137-128). The French may even have tried to insult the English at the final parley; one of the commissioners was a man who had been an English prisoner and had broken parole (Barker, p. 273).
Having lost the chance for peace, Henry refused to show any sign of fear, declaring that he would not allow himself to be captured and ransomed (Jarman, p. 156); he would win or he would die in the field (Barker, p. 257). With a leader like that, there was no question of command structure on the English side! (Allmand, p. 90).
Henry is also supposed to have addressed his troops before the battle (Jarman, p. 156). Of course, with a line at least half a mile long, already in formation, the majority could not hear a word he said. Presumably this is just another instance of chroniclers putting their words in his mouth. Similarly, there are a few reports of Saint George (England's patron saint) being seen over the field. This probably says more about the chroniclers than conditions during the battle.
It is interesting to note that Henry defied convention to a significant extent in organizing his forces -- no doubt thereby avoiding the command problems the French experienced. He had enough high nobility that he could have placed an earl in charge of each division, but he chose to entrust the left wing to Lord Camoys (Barker, p. 261). Henry himself commanded the center (though he also fought in line himself; Seward, p. 168, reports that a French knight actually damaged the crown he wore upon his helmet). The right was entrusted to the Duke of York, the senior noble to die in the battle (supposedly of suffocation when he fell over, since he was very heavy; Earle, p. 143; Featherstone, p. 151; Jarman, p. 175, calls him "fat and scheming", though Barker, p. 303, declares this a "Tudor invention," and I suspect this is correct -- the Tudors wanted to discredit anyone associated with the House of York).
Seward, p. 169, reports that the other high casualties were the Earl of Suffolk and half a dozen knights. There were, of course, many wounded, including the King's younger brother the Duke of Gloucester. The wound was said to be "in the hammes," which makes me wonder if this might not have had something to do with his childlessness. Of course, his three older brothers combined to have one child between them, so maybe not.
Although Earle, p. 137, says that the field of Agincourt was "almost perfect for the formality of a medieval battle," Henry had chosen what was, for him just about an ideal position (Jarman, p. 140). (There is a map on p 83 of Keegan , one on p. 147 of Featherstone, and another in Seward, p. 165, a fourth on Jarman, p. 159. These differ substantially -- Seward's map shows a much larger field than Keegan's and has the axis of the field, and hence the French attack, coming from northwest to southeast; Featherstone agrees with this construction. Seward's narrative, interestingly, says that the French were directly north of the English. Keegan, whom I would normally consider more reliable, shows the field pointing from northeast to southwest. Jarman's map is almost straight north to south, but angles slightly northeast-southwest. But all agree on the basic formations, and in all of them, the French are the to the north, the English to the south).
It is said that Henry ordered the army to be very quiet on the night before the battle. It is not clear what his reason was; perhaps he wanted to confuse the French or make them think the English weaker or more demoralized than they were. He seems to have succeeded (Jarman, p. 146).
Henry picked a field that was narrow enough that he could extend his line all the way across it (though wide enough that he was left with only a single line; Barker, p. 260). There was no reserve except a few dozen men guarding the baggage (Barker, p. 271; Earle, p. 139; Featherstone, p. 146), but the field had forest on either side and the towns of Azincourt/Agincourt and Tramecourt beyond the woods. This meant the French could not attack his flanks -- men-at-arms, whether mounted or not, simply weren't mobile enough to go through the woods. The only way the French could attack him was by charging down the field in the face of his arrow fire. And, with the ground so muddy from the recent rain, any attack, whether on foot or on horseback, would proceed very slowly (Barker, p. 259).
The French did not cooperate. Unlike the wars of the previous century, they did not immediately charge the English. Impetuous charges had cost them at Crecy, so they decided not to risk it. After all, to this point the longbow had served mostly at a defensive weapon. If they didn't attack, what could Henry do except try to retreat -- which would give the French the opportunity to attack with the English at a disadvantage. As a result, both sides spent several hours adjusting their lines and preparing (Barker, p. 254).
Henry outsmarted the French. After waiting long enough to be sure they would not advance (Keegan, p. 89), he ordered his army to move forward (Allmand, p. 91, estimates they moved forward 700 yards) so that they were just barely within longbow range of the French, and had his archers start firing (Earle, p. 141). They probably did not injure many knights at that range, but they irritated them and hurt their horses (Keegan, p. 94). The French should perhaps have tried a cavalry charge during Henry's advance (Barker, p. 279), but they didn't, and so blew perhaps their last chance to win the battle. No doubt the disorganization of their large force, and the fact that all the commanders had come to the front, contributed to the tactical ineptitude (Barker, p. 279).
(There was a little luck for the English, we should note: Although Agincourt was fought on a rather cold day, it was not raining, as it had been earlier in the campaign; the archers could string their bows. What would have happened had the French caught the English in a rainstorm would have been altogether another matter -- though they might have been unable to *reach* the English in the mud.)
The English archers each carried a stake, which they set in front of them to slow attacking horses. Featherstone, p. 148, says that this was a new technique invented for the Agincourt war (though this seems a bit odd, since even the French were mostly fighting dismounted by this time). It has usually been assumed that they set up a line of stakes all across the front, but Keegan, pp. 91-92, notes that this fence would have been so thick (he estimates the stakes would have been five inches apart) that the English themselves could not maneuver around the line. He suggests that they were in a checkerboard, one stake in front of each archer whether in the front rank or farther back. This would have interfered with the movement of horsemen but not the dismounted archers. This makes sense but cannot be proved.
It should be remembered that the English knights by this time always fought dismounted. Sure, they had horses, and they still practiced with the lance, at least sometimes (even half a century later, tournaments and jousting were popular), but they fought their actual battles on foot. Thus, Agincourt was essentially a contest of mounted French knights against archers and armored footmen. It is true that most of the French also fought dismounted -- but the mounted men often pushed the others forward. The French forces were so jammed together that it actually slowed their advance and reduced their effectiveness -- problems the mud made even worse (Allmand, pp. 92-93).
At least one French charge, probably the first, did reach the English line (Earle, p. 141). But it was uncoordinated and under-strength (Barker, p. 280), and the mud again cost the French: Their men-at-arms were almost immobile in their armor, but the English bowmen could move about and come to the aid of their armored comrades (Seward, p. 167). It is likely that relatively few of the dismounted Frenchmen died from arrows (which rarely penetrated at long range); they died of exhaustion or drowning in mud or falling and being unable to rise and being killed while helpless. The only way they could have avoided this was by charging on horseback -- but the longbows had no trouble killing the horses.
The bottom line was a complete disaster for the French: Nearly their only success was that some robbers had managed to lift much of Henry's personal possessions from the baggage (Barker, p. 295), but that was no help. The English had about 300 losses (Seward, p. 169); Seward guesses French casualties at 10,000. This may be high, but we have little to go on; we can't even count graves (the bodies mostly went in mass graves, and these have not been firmly identified; Barker, p. 317). Rubin, p. 218, says the English lost 500, the French 7000, with more losses from suffocation as the soldiers were buried in mud than from arrow fire.
All this from a battle that lasted only about three hours (Jarman, p. 175).
Our information on the French nobility is more definite: Casualties were three dukes, seven counts, and 120 barons. (In an irony that would become sharper over the next decade, the list included the Duke of Brabant and the Count of Nevers, brothers of the Duke of Burgundy, even though there was no Burgundian contingent in the army; Barker, p. 308.) The French would never again dare fight Henry V in an open battle (Earle, p. 148).
Many of the French dead were never identified, leaving a large number of widows who never knew their husbands' fates (Barker, pp. 312-313).
The local gentry, according to Barker, p. 306, was particularly hard-hit; Agincourt village itself lost Renaud, sire d'Azincourt, and the other nearby village, Tramecourt, lost Jean and Renaud de Tramecourt. This loss of so many locals made further resistance to Henry just about impossible at this time, and (according to Barker, p. 364) made the 1417-1419 conquest of Normandy much easier.
So deeply did the battle embed itself into English consciousness that to be "with King Harry on St. Crispin's day" was still a metaphor for being in the thick of battle half a millennium later. (Of course, the fact that this similar to a Shakespeare quote probably helped.)
The English committed one unquestioned atrocity, though Barker, p. 289, considers it "the only [action] possible" and Jarman, p. 174, justifies it as "a case of medieval expediency." Even after the battle, the French outnumbered the English, and when Henry thought they were about to attack him again, he ordered his prisoners killed; he felt he needed their guards in the line (Seward, p. 168; Earle, p. 142; Keegan, pp. 108-111, discusses the matter but argues at the end that it was not carried out on a large scale and suggests that Henry was simply trying to scare the prisoners to keep them out of mischief; Allmand, p. 95, also thinks the massacre exaggerated). This was definitely against the rules at the time, and many troops refused to do it (though probably out of desire for ransoms rather than higher motives).
One report, unconfirmed, is that Henry forced the most noble of his captives to wait on him at his meal that night (Barker, p. 321; Jarman, p. 178). It's hard to know what to make of this. It obviously would make the captives resent him,perhaps making them less likely to acknowledge him -- but it would also emphasize their vassal status. And it certainly fits Henry's extreme view of his own importance. Barker, p. 322, nonetheless thinks the story untrue.
Agincourt is almost always held up as the high point of Henry's campaigns; the Agincourt Carol, for instance, was composed about it. But, as Seward, p. 170, points out, it was really just an incident in another chevauchee. Perroy (admittedly prejudiced on this point) dismisses it in a couple of sentences on page 239, and declares that "the campaign of Agincourt meant nothing decisive." This is exaggerated -- if nothing else, it meant that Parliament voted Henry a huge subsidy to finance future campaigns (Barker, p. 341), which was a big deal indeed. Also, since the Constable of France had been killed, a new Constable was needed -- and the man appointed was Bernard d'Armagnac (Allmand, p. 102), making the conflict between Burgundians and Armagnacs more bitter.
Still, it is true that, despite Agincourt, Henry so far had made no real progress on conquering France (apart from Harfleur). The next two years were relatively quiet, though the French would try and fail to retake Harfleur (Allmand, pp. 102-103). In 1416-1417, Henry's navy gained naval superiority in the channel (Seward, p. 171); control of Harfleur definitely helped with this (Allmand, p. 99. Allmand, pp. 106-107, calls this battle "the most telling" naval conflict of the Hundred Years' War, but most sources brush it off in a few words). The papal schism healed. Henry managed to gain theoretical recognition as King of France (though no military help) from the Emperor (Perroy, p. 240; Allmand, pp. 104-105 notes that Sigismund made a long and very expensive visit) But Henry made no major moves until 1417.
THE SECOND INVASION AND TROYES: HENRY THE HEIR OF FRANCE
The political situation in this period was very fluid. Originally, Henry seems to have had no deal with Burgundy. He invaded and fought at Agincourt on his own -- though there were few Burgundians in the defeated French army. But the Burgundians,having seen their enemies slaughtered, occupied Paris and killed every Armagnac they could find (Guerard, p. 106). Eventually they made peace gestures to the Armagnacs -- and then, in 1419, the Armagnacs assassinated John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy (Allmand, p. 135; Earle, p. 172; Seward, p. 180). For one act of petty revenge, they opened France to a joint English/Burgundian conquest. It came to be said that the English entered France through the hole in John's skull (Butler, p. xiii; Earle, p. 177).
Henry by then was invading Normandy. His second campaign began in 1417 (Seward, p. 171). Allmand, p. 113, thinks the forces involved were slightly smaller than in the Agincourt campaign, but in practice it was probably a stronger force because it didn't suffer as badly from disease. Their first stop was Caen, Normandy's second city. (Allmand, p. 116, hints that Henry might have been trying to set up a separate Norman administration, since Rouen was too strong to capture at this time, and Caen was easier to support from the sea.) Caen had been heavily fortified since Edward III had attacked it (Earle, p. 157), but apparently the walls were not designed to resist artillery (Earle, p. 158). Henry took the town by assault on September 4, and stayed in Normandy over the winter, capturing Bayeux, Argentan, Alencon, Falais, Cherbourg, and other towns (Allmand, p. 120; Seward, p. 173).
By 1418, Henry was besieging Rouen, which was the hardest operation he had attempted so far; the citizens had gathered much food and also destroyed anything the Englisn could use outside the walls (Allmand, p. 123). It was a brutal siege -- Henry, being the sort of man he was, when the garrison expelled useless mouths, would not let them pass through his lines, but left them outside the walls of the city to starve (Allmand, pp. 124-125, who declared that he had not put them there; this by contrast to Edward III, who had allowed the refugees expelled from Calais during the siege of that town go free; Sedgwick, p. 63). He also staged a mock battle to raise the hopes of the besieged, and perhaps lure them out of the walls (Allmand, p. 124). The city surrendered in early 1419 (Seward, pp. 175-177). That gave him control of effectively all of Normandy.
Unfortunately for him, he could not really colonize it, as he had hoped to; while England was prosperous due to the Black Death, it no longer had surplus population eager to leave home (Seward, p. 178). Henry supplied such colonists as he could, but the Normans remained mostly French -- even the government, although organized as a separate province entirely independently of the old French system (Perroy, p. 249), consisted mostly of Normans, with only a few thousand English troops and a few dozen English officials.
The war was affecting England significantly by this time; it appears no troops were sent to Henry in 1419 (Allmand, p. 130). Still, with the French unwilling to fight, Henry had no trouble conquering more and more territory: Every time he started a siege, he had a local superiority in numbers, and the garrison never had help from outside. (Henry may not have realized that they were afraid of him, but he certainly knew that Armagnacs and Burgundians were so bitter against each other than they would never be able to turn against him; Earle, p. 150.)
It was in 1419 that negotiations started again. Henry apparently saw his future wife Katherine for the first time in that year. At this stage, it appears that Henry was demanding, at minimum, a marriage to Katherine, money, and Normany and a large Acquitaine in full sovreignty (Allmand, pp. 131-132). These conditions remained unacceptable to the French. So Henry went back to trying to take the whole country. By the end of the year, his raiders were appearing outside Paris and the French court had retreated to Troyes (Allmand, p. 134).
Then came the murder of Burgundy mentioned above. Suddenly, the dauphin was discredited, and there was no chance of peace between the Burgundian and Armagnac factions. Allmand, pp. 136-137, thinks that this is the point at which Henry decided unequivocally that he would try to become King of France.
Guerard, p. 108, points out that there was no really inherent reason why the crowns of England and France could not be united. The monarchs had intermarried many times. It was only in the last few decades that the English kings had ceased to speak French as their native language (though, as Perroy comments with a rather French disdain on p. 60, it was "a peculiarly bastard dialect of that language, Anglo-Norman, full of English words and queer twists"); they might easily have gone back to speaking French. Dual monarchies had managed in the past to combine into single nations, though it would be more common in the future (think Great Britain, made up of England and Scotland, or Spain, made up of Castile and Aragon). England itself had incorporated Wales as recently as the time of Henry V's great-great-great-grandfather Edward I, and England itself been built up from smaller nations in the century and a half before the Norman Conquest.
To be sure, Perroy, p. 248, declares that "the 'dual monarchy' was doomed to failure." But Perroy -- who, after all, wrote during the German occupation of France -- has as his one fault an extreme aversion to the idea of enemies on French soil. The fact was, the French didn't have much resistance left, and would find it hard to develop any as long as the Armagnacs and Burgundians remains more hostile to each other than they were to the English.
Certainly the Armagnac court was powerless. The mad king Charles VI had lost several sons, but there was still one left, the future Charles VII. It might, however, be possible to have him declared illegitimate. (Given the behavior of his mother Isabeau of Bavaria, who went along with the story, it might even be true; certainly it was believable, because she had probably had the Duke of Orleans at least into her bed, and maybe others.) That meant that one of the daughters of Charles VI was arguably the heir (so much for the Salic Law). The eldest daughter had already been married to Richard II, but she was now dead. Some of her younger sisters were also married, but the youngest, Katherine, was still available (Perroy, p. 243; Allmand, p. 68, notes that Henry had been negotiating for her hand as early as the beginning of his reign, though balancing that off by discussing a Burgundian wife as well.).
By 1420, the French government was forced to negotiate. And, in the negotiations, Henry gained more than he had probably ever dreamed possible: He became heir to the Kingdom of France (Seward, p. 182). He would marry Katherine, the youngest daughter of Charles VI; the Dauphin was disowned and declared a bastard by his own mother (according to Earle, pp. 191-193, she needed some persuading -- apparently she never actually declared her son illegitimate, and certainly never said who was the father -- but eventually agreed to his abandonment when it was clear she had no other choice, and as a result the Dauphin almost decided to give up his throne).
It was agreed that Henry would follow Charles VI on the throne (Earle, p. 191, thinks that this clause was inserted so that the Duke of Burgundy, who of course was deeply involved in the negotiations, would not be guilty of deposing his own king). Henry would have to conquer the rest of France, but at the rate things were going, it seemed perfectly possible; after all, most of the north was in his hands, and the fighting there was almost over. Burgundy was on his side. Paris would take *anything* in preference to a return of the Armagnacs (Earle, p. 190). And Henry was already acting as regent (Perroy, p. 243). The English king looked unstoppable.
Formally, it was not a union of the two nations of France and England; it was simply a Union of the Crowns (Allmand, p. 149), such as happened when James VI of Scotland became James I of England. The French would keep their national identity. (I would love to know what the fallback plan was should Henry have died without heirs. Allmand, p. 150, says that Henry's English heirs were supposed to be heirs of France also, but they weren't married to French princesses!)
The whole agreement, which took eight months to negotiate (Butler, p. xiii), was known as the Treaty of Troyes. Henry ratified the treaty at Troyes on May 20-21, 1420 (Earle, pp. 193-194; Butler, p. xiv), though it was not until September 1 that he formally entered Paris, along with Charles VI (who by now was barely able to ride a horse) and Duke Philip of Burgundy (Seward, p. 183; Earle, p. 196; Butler, p. xv).
The Troyes agreement is usually called a "Treaty," which is the same term as is used for Bretigny. But as Allmand notes on p. 145, it was really quite different. Troyes was a victor's preace, negotiated less by the French government than by the Burgundians, and the meeting at Troyes was not a negotiation but simply a ratification. (Some Frenchmen would in fact claim that it was improperly agreed to; Allmand, p. 149. But all the forms were followed; technically, it was the French, not the English, who violated the treaty.)
It is interesting to note that Troyes gave France a written constitution for the first time (Butler, p. 2). Naturally it was thrown out when the Lancastrian dynasty was expelled. Perroy, p. 247, declares that it contained flaws of "both form and substance," which is doubtless true (the French at this time were much better lawyers than the English, as the Treaty of Bretigny had shown) -- but it was a deal between conquered and conqueror; in practical terms, it was an agreement by which Henry would govern France; it might well have worked had he survived.
Troyes was a substantial accomplishment, because potentially Henry would actually merge the two countries. Edward III had probably not contemplated that (Perroy, p. 209, thinks Edward would have given France to one of his younger sons after his death, re-separating the crowns, though this strikes me as highly unlikely. Earle, p. 190, declares that Henry was specifically after a "personal union of the two crowns").
On the other hand, Allmand, p. 441, concludes that Troyes was a mistake on Henry's part. He bit off more than England could chew -- and as a result, England eventually lost not just the throne of France but even the English territories in Guyenne. Allmand admits that any settlement would have eventually been challenged, but thinks that Henry would have been more realistic to take only Normandy and an enlarged Guyenne -- in other words, the territories he initially demanded. In other words, success corrupted him.
It will tell you what sort of person Henry was that, only two days after his marriage, he rode back to war (Earle, p. 194; Butler, p. xiv). (I have to insert a side note here, which is rather curious. Henry, as we see, quickly left his wife. Later, he would take no part in her English coronation; Allmand, p. 157. Nor would she be present when he died; Allmand, p. 175. Yet she quickly became pregnant. After Henry's death, she would take Owen Tudor as a secret lover -- possibly a secret husband as well, but this was never proved. Given the seeming sterility of Henry's three brothers, is it possible that she cuckolded her husband? I have never seen this discussed elsewhere; here is yet another instance where DNA testing would be interesting.)
Ironically, the English suffered the first real bad news of Henry's career soon after, when his brother Thomas of Clarence, the heir to the throne, was killed in an impetuous and useless skirmish at Bauge in 1421 (Seward, pp. 185-186; Butler, p. xv. It's easy to understand why he was doing it, though -- Earle, p. 165, notes how Henry during the Normandy campaign "subcontracted" conquest to his lords, granting them French land if they could conquer it. Allmand, p. 159, also notes that Clarence was upset because "he had not yet won honor in battle"; he had missed Agincourt due to illness). Bauge, apart from costing some hard-to-replace troops, did little to change the strategic situation -- but it boosted the morale of the French, meaning that Henry's grip on the country was much weakened; the local lords who had submitted to him started to change their minds. Henry had to hurry back to France to redress the situation (Earle, p. 200-204; Perroy, p. 268).
Later in that year, at Windsor, Queen Katherine bore the child who was to be sole heir to the thrones of France and England, the future Henry VI (Seward, p. 187). It was a significant boost to English morale (Allmand, p. 167), but father and son would never know each other. French towns continued to hold out for the Dauphin, and Henry V was growing increasingly cruel in his methods -- e.g. he hanged the entire garrison of Rougemont (Seward, p. 186). Toward the end of the year, he began the siege of the well-fortified town of Meaux.
It took almost half a year, and once again much of the English army was afflicted by disease. Among them King Henry himself. By the summer of 1422, he could no longer ride a horse and had to be carried on a litter (Earle, p. 212). Still, it looked as if the Dauphinists were on the brink of defeat and France and England on the verge of union. Unfortunately for the world, which was doomed to see another three and a half centuries of conflict between Britain and France, several things went wrong.
For starters, Henry V died.
THE DEATH OF HENRY V AND THE REGENCY OF BEDFORD
It is likely the cause of death was the dysentary Henry contracted at the siege of Meaux (Butler, p. xvi, and Jarman, p. 187, specifically mentions amoebic dysentary, although Allmand, p. 173, says that the precise cause of death cannot be determined), though he managed to take the town (Seward, p. 188). By the time he made it back to Paris, it was clear that he would not survive. He became the first English king since Richard I in 1199 to die outside England, meaning that he could not give final directions to his English council (Allmand, p. 173). And he had not lived long enough to succeed to the throne of France; Charles VI was still alive (though he would not live much longer, dying two months later after a reign of 42 years; Barker, p. xvii).
Henry from his deathbed made arrangements for the government of England and France, appointing his irresponsible youngest brother Humphrey of Gloucester to head a conciliar English government (Perroy, p. 268) and the more reliable John of Bedford to be regent of France (though Bedford was supposed to offer to the job of the Duke of Burgundy. Burgundy turned it down; Butler, p. xvi; Perroy, pp. 269-270). Henry then died, at the age of 35, on August 31, 1422 (Earle, p. 213). His heir, who was now Henry VI of England, was nine months old.
I frankly suspect that the death of Henry was good. He was getting power-mad, and vengeful. At the siege of Meaux, e.g., he demanded -- and got -- the execution of a French trumpeter who had razzed him (Allmand, p. 168). This was not the action of a chivalrous king of France; it was the act of a petty tyrant. It is frightening to think what he might have been like in another twenty years. But it left the question of whether his achievements could stand in other hands.
Had Henry conquered France? No. He had taken over the government, but only the regions north of the Loire acknowledged him, and not all of those. And only the Burgundian alliance made it all possible. Perroy, p. 249, considers that France was actually divided into three parts at this time: Lancastrian France, Anglo-Burgundian France, and Dauphinist France -- and Lancastrian France, the only area from which the English could really gather revenue, was very small (Perroy, p. 253); it really consisted of little more than Normandy.
As Wolffe says on p. 26, "Henry V, in claiming the French crown and then dying, undefeated and unspotted by failure, with the necessary conquest of France half achieved, left behind him a glorious legend, but a task impossible to fulfill."
Perroy, p. 267, suggests that, at this time, the English should have gone all-out to try to catch the Dauphin, even though it would have meant raiding deep into unconquered territory and risking being trapped. Clearly it would have ended the war one way or another. Henry V might have managed it. Bedford, with half a country to hold together without the prestige of kingship, didn't risk it; he tried to slowly bring more and more territory under his control.
Still, the English had control of Paris through the Burgundians (and even, to a large extent, the support of the Parisians, who wanted an end to civil war above all else; Perroy, p. 247. The English garrison was only about a hundred men, according to Butler, p. 27 -- far too few even to stop a riot if on had started). The English had direct control of Normandy, and portions of Guyenne; and Henry VI could at least claim to be a descendant of the beloved French monarch Saint Louis on both his father's and mother's side (something English propaganda made much of; Rubin, p. 225); given enough additional troops and money, Bedford might be able to complete the conquest of France. The death of Henry did not immediately end the war; indeed, for a short time, the English continued to win. It was almost all due to Bedford, the Regent of France. "It was soon clear to all that there was no better person to carry on the task left by the late King Henry. Lacking his brother's harshness (and his religious fanaticism), John of Bedford possessed to the full King Henry's flair for diplomacy and his strong sense of justice. To these he added a sincere desire to establish enlightened government in France" (Butler, p. 5).
In 1423, Bedford managed to forge an agreement between England, Burgundy, and Brittany (Seward, p. 196). To cement this, he married Anne, the favorite sister of the Duke of Burgundy (Butler, pp. 19-20), though she is said to have been rather ugly. (They apparently became very fond of each other even so, though the marriage was childless; Burgundy did not desert the alliance until she died.) If the agreement had been maintained, it would almost certainly have been the end of France. Also in 1423, the brilliant Earl of Salisbury won a medium-sized battle at Cravant (Butler, pp. 24-25; Seward, pp. 196-198), which prevented a French counter-offensive and showed that English tactics could be used by someone other than the dead King.
The French made one last attempt at an offensive in 1424. A large number of Scots had come to join the French armies (Butler, p. 33), and they wanted to fight, and were apparently causing trouble while they waited to do so (Perroy, p. 263). Bedford assembled what was surely the largest army he had ever led. In the confrontation which followed, the Scots wanted to fight, the French did not (Butler, p. 35). The Scots would have been well advised to listen.
Bedford and Salisbury met the French at Verneuil. As usual, the English were outnumbered (two to one, according to Butler, p. 39; on p. 40 he estimates English numbers at eight or nine thousand, French numbers at fifteen to seventeen thousand). It was a much closer thing that Agincourt -- the French managed to get into Bedford's baggage train, and also managed to attack part of his army before the archers had managed to fully dig in their defensive stakes (Butler, p. 38). Much of the long battle consisted of direct battle between the men-at-arms on each side. Yet, somehow, the English drove off the French wing, and then turned to encircle the Scots, who had earlier rejected quarter and were given none (Butler, p. 39). Although a very near-run thing, it ended with a complete victory for the English. This eliminated the last real army of the Dauphin (Seward, pp. 198-201; Perroy, p. 272) and left him too poor to field another (Butler, p. 40). It also caused tension between the French and the Scots; they would not actually fight together for many years after that (Seward, p. 202).
It was the last great English victory of the war.
Interestingly, the newest book I've seen on the subject, Butler's, argues on pp. 41-42 that the English might have won the war if, in 1424 after Verneuil, they had gone straight after the French court-in-exile at Bourges. This is similar to Perroy's suggestion that they should have gone after Charles VII in 1420. It was their last real chance for victory -- the Dauphin might well have been ready to give in.
The English didn't try. Probably they didn't realize how close the Dauphin was to defeat, and they recalled what had happened after Clarence had been killed. A defeat when pursuing the Dauphin would probably have meant the end of Lancastrian France. Better to continue the slow round of sieges and incremental gains. The problem was, of course, that it gave the French time to rebuild. The failure to follow up Verneuil did not automatically mean that the English would be defeated, but it did mean that the long, costly occupation had to continue -- and the money had to come from somewhere.
Which in turn meant that Verneuil was a hollow victory. France had been devastated (Seward, p. 194, comments that "Lancastrian France eventually became a wilderness laid waste by its garrisons, by deserters, by [robbers], and by Dauphinist raiders"), and England was broke (Perroy, p. 255). There was so little silver in Lancastrian France that it was almost impossible even to strike coins (Butler, pp. 40-41). Bedford would never get another chance for a knockout blow -- he couldn't afford to raise a big enough army. Normandy, which had to provide most of the money for England's war, was not up to the task -- Perroy, p. 257, notes that Bedford summoned the Norman Estates more than twenty times in thirteen years, but there was only so much that could be collected. Perroy, p. 262, estimates the revenue available in Dauphinist France to have been five times that which could be raised in Normandy.
Paris in particular was troublesome. The citizens were not rebellious, exactly, since they didn't want the Armagnacs back, but their enthusiasm was limited. Bedford used circus stunts to try to keep the citizens of Paris happy (Butler, p. 51, tells of a contest in which four blind men were engaged to try to kill a pig using hammers), but it couldn't hide the high taxes. Worse, the Parisians were often starving; bad harvests and brigands made it very hard to acquire food (cf. e.g. Butler, pp. 65-68,142-143. Almost every year of his history brings similar reports).
And it was proving difficult to keep the Duke of Burgundy, on whom everything depended, happy. In 1424, Humphrey of Gloucester married the Countess of Hainault, who had first been dubiously married to the Duke of Brabant (Wolffe, pp, 38-39) and then even more dubiously divorced (knowing she couldn't get a divorce from the regular pope, she had gone to an anti-Pope; Perroy, pp. 270-271). Gloucester, who now claimed her lands, led a private expedition into the low countries (Barker, p. 19; Butler, p. 45; Seward, p. 202), which were in the Burgundian sphere of influence. By doing so, he angered a lot of people and distracted the English war effort; Bedford had to spend the period from 1425 to 1427 in England trying to calm things down and raise money and troops (Butler, p. 55). Bedford managed to pick up a little money, but few troops, and meanwhile, the war languished.
(To top it all off, the expedition was a failure and the Countess of Hainault walked out on Gloucester; Perroy, p. 271; Butler, p. 47, points out that Gloucester's disaster was good news for Bedford, since it meant he didn't have to directly intervene militarily.)
The French, meanwhile, had finally found a decent general in Dunois, the Bastard of Orleans, who made his name beginning in 1427. More would be heard from him later.
ORLEANS
Simple economics meant that the war would soon slow down. The question was whether the English could win before the collapse. They would find out at Orleans.
Butler, p. 4, calls Orleans the "real center" of Dauphinist France, though the actual government was carried on elsewhere. If Orleans it fell, it might well cripple the Dauphinists. The Earl of Salisbury, the best English general, therefore pressed hard to attack the city. Bedford finally gave in, even though he had wanted to campaign in Anjou (Butler, p. 78).
It wasn't going to be easy for the English, who had only a small army. Orleans was too large for the besiegers to encircle, and too strong to take by assault (Seward, pp. 209-210). Myers, p. 124, calls it "a travesty of a siege." Still, Salisbury was a genius, who if he could not invest the town was at least cutting off the roads and river passages which led to it (Butler, pp. 78-81). Many think he might have taken the city had he lived. But some sort of artillery, fired "at a venture" (as 1 Kings would put it), injured him fatally (Myers, p. 275; Butler, p. 81, says it was fired by the child!); Salisbury died October 27, 1428, and was replaced by the Earl of Suffolk (so Butler, p. 82, and Seward; Wilkinson, p. 261, says it was Lord Talbot; but Talbot was merely the most famous of the junior officers there and, if we are to believe Butler, p. 82, the one who caused the most fear among the defenders). Suffolk simply sat down to grind out the fight.
(If you want a picture of what Suffolk was like, consider this: When the French attacked Suffolk's army at Jargeau, and Suffolk was captured, he thought it so unbecoming to be captured by a mere squire that he insisted upon knighting him on the spot, even though he was an enemy; Butler, p. 98.)
One attempt to break the siege was defeated by Sir John Fastolfe at the so-called "Battle of the Herrings" (so-called because French artillery damaged the casks containing English Lenten provisions; Featherstone, p, 162 calls it the "Battle of Rouvray," but no one else uses that title), but that just meant the siege dragged on (Butler, pp. 86-87).
Guerard calls Orleans the Verdun, or the Stalingrad, of the Hundred Years War (p. 109). And it was at Orleans that Jean Darc appeared.
The lack of troops meant that the English perimeter around the city was insufficiently manned (Perroy, p. 283); it might be better to call it a blockade. But even that was loose; food could still get in at times -- especially by river, since Suffolk had not done anything to block off the Loire (Butler, p. 94). Plus Suffolk had for a time pulled back his outposts in the fall, allowing the defenders to lay in supplies and improve their defences (Butler, p. 82). And Bedford and Burgundy had a disagreement at this time, resulting in Burgundy pulling his troops out of the siege and from the supply routes leading to it (Butler, pp. 88-89). As a result, those inside the walls were not only more numerous but often in better health than those outside. Perroy, p. 275, thinks the city still would have fallen eventually, but the English historians mostly disagree. The porous encirclement also lead Jean enter the city on April 30, 1429 (Seward, p. 212). And Bedford had no hope of bringing in reinforcements, due to lack of money -- he was already being forced to cut his officials' pay (Butler, p. 91), a problem made worse by significant English casualties during an Armagnac raid toward Paris.
Jean Darc, or Joan of Ark, will always be controversial -- in part because we know so little about her. A peasant girl from Domremy, we don't even know the year she was born; Wilkinson, p. 261, says "probably in 1412." Butler, p. 96, mentions the sort-of-traditional date of January 4, 1412, but admits uncertainty. Perroy, p. 282, says her career began when she was between 16 and 20, which would allow birth dates between 1409 and 1413. Seward, p. 213, says her visions began when she was about 17, before her public career, implying a birth date of perhaps 1411. Keen, p. 257, seems to place her first visions much earlier, "just after the treaty of Troyes," which would hint that the hormonal changed caused by menarche might have caused them.
Her first communication to the English was a letter to Bedford, dated March 22, 1429, calling on the English to withdraw from France or suffer divine punishment (Butler, p. 93).
A modern presented with a list of her behaviors would almost certainly describe her as a schizophrenic; even Perroy, whose attitude on this is not very rational, admits on p. 282 that "In our skeptical days people would be inclined to regard Joan as mad, mentally deficient, visionary, or even bogus. Her contemporaries simply wondered whether she was sent by God or the devil." Butler, while seeming to have a lot of respect for her, on p. 93 calls her letter "highly illiterate." In due time, the English would burn her as a heretic; the French would revere her as a saint. The English were surely wrong; she was an orthodox Catholic. I'm not convinced the French are right, either; she was a nut case. But she had the right message for France. As Guerard comments on p. 109, "For posterity she imparted a mystic prestige to the cause of that sorry personage Charles VII."
And, after she arrived, the English siege of Orleans -- managed by relatively weak officers and conducted by insufficient forces -- failed. It wasn't exactly that Jean Darc had worked magic -- even Guerard, with a Frenchman's inflated opinion of her, admits that "the material and moral aid brought by Joan was sufficient to turn the tide" (p. 111). Wilkinson, p. 260, says that moderns have "magnified... [her] contemporary significance." Perroy, p. 283, concedes, "She knew nothing of the art of war, and thought that abstaining from oaths and brothels was enough to ensure victory for the soldiers." (The claim that she died a virgin seems to have been true; Butler, p. 138.) At least one of her suggestions, if carried out, might have led to the fall of Orleans, since it would have given the English an easy chance to capture a major supply convoy (Butler, p. 94). It was captains, such as Dunois, who led the actual fighting, often refusing to accept her suggestions.
Despite Jean's manifest failings, somehow, her presence was sufficient. A raid on the English fortifications captured a key strong point, and the English were no longer in position to guard all the entrances to the city (Butler, pp. 95-96). They tried to get the French to come out and fight. The French refused, and the English were out of ideas.
On May 8, 1429, the English gave up the siege of Orleans (Seward, pp. 216-219). Jean went on to have Charles VII formally crowned at Rheims, at last giving France a legitimist King. The English responded by finally crowning the seven-year-old Henry VI in England (Butler, p. 119), though it was not until 1431 that they sent him across the channel to be crowned King of France (Butler, p. 148, who notes on p. 149 that this was the first time he ever met his maternal grandmother).
Unfortunately, Rheims -- the place where French Kings were crowned -- was in Dauphinist hands. Henry VI was crowned King of France in Paris -- which was not considered an official coronation; Perroy, p. 287. (Perroy, p. 285, gives the crowning of Charles VII a mystic significance which it clearly did not have, but it definitely improved the anti-English position.)
o make matters worse, Henry's coronation was done in English style, apparently by Cardinal Beaufort rather than a French prelate (Butler, p. 150). The French naturally considered this a significant insult. Plus the whole banquet and celebration was completely mishandled, losing a chance to make the Parisians like their new monarch; he came off as ungenerous and inept (Butler, pp. 150-153). Admittedly the Lancastrian government was broke -- but, at this stage, they really needed to invest in keeping Paris happy, and they didn't.
The French found much encouragement in the fact that the Dauphin was now, finally, King, and when they caught up with Lord Talbot and Sir John Fastolfe at Patay, Jean pushed her soldiers into a quick attack, which proved a significant success; Talbot and several others were captured, though Fastolfe managed to keep a portion of the English army intact (Butler, pp. 103-104). It didn't change the fact that the French had finally won a victory in the field.
In one sense, Orleans, and Patay, and even the crowning of Charles VII was not decisive. The English expansion had been stopped, but they still controlled almost everything they had before, including Paris.
Jean wanted to change that; her next goal was Paris (Butler, p. 113). She failed in an assault (Seward, p. 221; Perroy, p. 285), and a crossbowman put a bolt in her thigh (Butler, p. 114). She lived, but her reputation for invincibility was broken -- she had apparently declared that the attackers would enter Paris that day, and of course they didn't (Butler, p. 115). She had actually weakened Lancastrian hold on the metropolis (the English turned it over to the Burgundians, and the suburbs became even more subject to raiders; Butler, pp. 119-120), but that wasn't even close to capturing the city.
The Burgundians by now were negotiating with the Dauphinists. But Charles VII was not yet willing to make sufficient concessions, and the negotiations broke down (Butler, p. 121).
Somewhat later, Jean was captured by the Burgundians (Perroy, p. 286; Seward, p. 219; Butler, p. 130, says she was wearing a "gorgeous gold and scarlet surcoat" when she was hauled from her horse, implying that she wasn't exactly dressing in poverty as was generally expected of prophets). She was turned over to the English (Perroy, p. 287, says she was sold by John of Luxembourg for 10,000 livres; Butler, p. 133, notes that the need to have her in custody was so urgent that the government actually had to get English gold for it).
Once in English hands, she was accused of heresy. The English did not invent these charges; apparently the University of Paris -- which was entirely French -- was the first to bring charges against her. Butler, pp. 131-132, thinks it was because they were "deeply suspicious of the female sex" and thought her behavior unnatural -- plus it was an era of visionaries, and far too many of those visionaries were women (Saunders, pp. 140-141, lists several examples, though a lot of these, like Catherine of Siena, sound to me more like manifestations of obsessive-compulsive disorder than anything else. Some probably did see visions, though; on the other side of the English Channel, and without the crazy rituals, think of Julian of Norwich). In the end, though, it appears Jean was called a witch less because she heard voices than because she cut her hair in a man's style and dressed like a man (cf. Perroy, p. 282; Rubin, p. 228) and rode astride a horse (cf. Butler, p. 138). Had she not engaged in those allegedly-masculine behaviors, she might simply have been called a nut.
The English subjected her to the sort of abuse inflicted on all suspected heretics (Seward, p. 219; Perroy, p. 288, notes that "[t]he cruelty of the procedure shocks our conscience as modern men. But it was simply that of the Inquisition, which was daily applied, without offending anyone, to any number of poor wretches..."). And she was only one uneducated girl trying to defend herself against legions of canon lawyers. The trial is popularly treated as a farce, but even Perroy, p. 288, admits that the judges had not "sold their consciences"; they were simply prelates who accepted the English cause. Naturally the court convicted her.
The English may not have been too happy, though -- the court did not condemn her to death out of hand. She confessed, and was sentenced to life imprisonment (Perroy, p. 289). But Jean, certainly foolish and very probably mentally disturbed, could not hold to the terms she had agreed to. Only a week after her confession, she was declared to have relapsed. Two days later, on May 30, 1431, she was shown to the crowd in Rouen, still dressed in men's clothing (Butler, p. 143, though it is not clear whether that was her idea or her captors'). After the display and some preaching, she was burned at the stake in Rouen, perhaps not yet twenty years old.
(A French-dominated re-trial in 1456 would overturn her conviction. Again Perroy, p. 280, is forced to admit that this tribunal "tried to prove too much"; already legend was displacing fact. It will tell you something about contemporary politics that her visions were considered by the English as evidence of heresy, by the French as evidence of inspiration, rather either regarding them as being evidence of mental disturbance. And don't even get me started on the fact that she was canonized centuries later -- what was canonized was not Jean Darc, peasant girl who crowned Charles VII, but Joan of Arc, pious fiction hardly even "based on a true story.")
(Incidentally, this was not the only time a woman was burned during the English occupation. Butler, p. 7, observes that Bedford had a woman in Paris burned after she took part in a conspiracy to remove English control of Paris. Butler regards Bedford's tendency toward excessive punishment as one of his few faults. More significant for our opinion of Jean is the burning of a woman named Pieronne, who claimed to have conversed directly with God; Butler, p. 136. Even though she claimed to do much the same thing that Jean Darc did, but in slightly more explicit form, no one has canonized her....)
Guerard, p. 112: "[Jean] was burned in the Old Market Place, at Rouen, on May 30, 1431, with the name of Jesus on her lips. Charles VII had not stirred a finger to save her; the Holy Chrism had made a king of him, but not a man."
Little wonder that Charles was nicknamed "the Well-Served." In himself, he was almost helpless -- "Stunted, knock-kneed, blank-faced, epileptic and suspicious," according to Earle, p. 180. Seward, pp. 214-215, tells that his court included a Satanist who was also a child-murderer, and the king himself suffered from phobias and dabbled in astrology and similar foolishness. At this time, he was almost as useless as his younger contemporary Henry VI of England. But, somehow, France eventually rallied around him.
The tide might have turned even without Jean. Bedford managed by 1431 to recapture all ground lost in 1429-1430 (Seward, p. 221; Butler, p. 105, observes that "During the seven weeks following this calamity for the English and their allies, the Duke of Bedford acted with extraordinary judgment and energy" and adds on p. 134 that 12 fortresses were taken just in the first half of 1430). They even took the brigand captain La Hire soon after Jean was burned -- something taken as a sign that she had not been divinely inspired (Butler, p. 144). Ssomewhat later the Earl of Warwick captured another major leader, Poton de Xantrailles (Butler, p. 146).
Had the economy been stronger, or the fields more fertile, the war might have been won. But it was the Little Ice Age; the English had nothing to spare, and Paris was starving and ready to give up on Lancaster (Seward, p. 222), and the Burgundians -- the only ones who were actually profiting from all this -- were wavering. And Jean has "forced the French military and political class out of a sense of inevitable defeat" (Rubin, p. 228). Charles VII still refused to fight the English in the field (Butler, p. 108), but as Charles V's reconquest of Acquitaine had shown, there were more ways to win a war than with set-piece battles.
Ironically, the French tried to develop a new Jean in the form of "William the Shepherd," whom Butler, p. 145, calls a "poor idiot." He didn't amount to much (the English captured him, displayed him to the Parisians, and caused him to disappear; Butler, p. 148) -- but he didn't need to. The tide was turning. Even Charles VII was starting to devote some energy to ruling (though Keen, p. 257, considers this due to the influence of a mistress).
1432 was a very bad year for the English. As usual, Paris was starving. The French actually made a raid on Lancastrian Rouen, though it failed spectacularly (Butler, pp. 1156-157). A difficult fight at Lagny was regarded as a moral defeat for the invaders, and Seward, p. 225, thinks that Bedford may have damaged his health. Later in the year, his wife, Anne of Burgundy, died in an epidemic of some kind, though she was only 28 (Butler, pp. 161-162) -- weakening the tie between the English and Burgundians, since the Duke of Burgundy was very fond of his sister. It probably also worsened relations with the Parisians, since the Duchess was popular there (Butler, pp. 43, 162).
In practical terms, her death may well have spelled the end of Lancastrian France, because Burgundy had been talking covertly with Charles VII for some time. With Anne gone, Burgundy lost his chief link to the Lancastrians.
The English government was going bankrupt; a detailed audit in 1433 (the first one known to us) showed that revenues were not sufficient to handle even ordinary expenses, let alone the cost of war. King Henry was actually placed in a monastery for a time to reduce expenses (Wolffe, pp. 73-74). We don't know how much this really influenced his later behavior (more than one person has suggested it would have been better had he stayed there), but it was certain that his expenses would go up as he married and built his own household. Under existing financial arrangements, there was simply no way for England to pay for the ongoing war.
In 1433, Bedford rather hastily remarried, to Jacquetta of Luxembourg, daughter of the Count of St. Pol (Butler, p. 166). She was 17 and very pretty (her children by her second husband, the Woodville clan, were among the most beautiful people in England, and her daughter Elizabeth Woodville would snag the future King Edward IV with her looks). Bedford and his wife had no children in their brief time together, and it may have caused further problems for the Anglo-Burgundian alliance, since Philip of Burgundy didn't want the English to increase their influence in the Low Countries (Butler, pp. 166-167). To add to his problems, the English parliament was starting to question the conduct of the war (Butler, p. 168). Admittedly it was going badly -- but they were the ones who failed to supply either adequate troops to win or adequate money for Bedford to finish it off with soldiers from the continet. In the end, Parliament in effect asked Bedford to act as regent for both France and England (Butler, p. 170), which inevitably meant that he would devote less attention to France.
By 1434, Bedford's younger brother Humphrey of Gloucester was offering to take over the war. His proposals, when examined, amounted to very little (Butler, pp. 174-175), But no one else had a better idea. As usual, nothing much was done.
Not surprisingly, the English position continued to decay. There was a rising in Normandy in 1434 (Butler, p. 176), and the garrisons in Paris were going unpaid. Yet when Philip of Burgundy suggested negotiations, Bedford unwisely turned the idea down. In 1435, as Burgundy applied more pressure, the parties actually held peace negotiations -- but they went nowhere (Butler, p. 181). Bedford apparently participated only because he was pressured by Burgundy (Butler, p. 182). He seems to have hoped the French government would fall apart due to lack of money. According to Perroy, p. 294, the best offer Bedford was willing to make to Charles VII was in effect to let him keep what he still held if he would acknowledge English overlordship. This offer was understandably rejected. It is true that,when the English gave up on the talks, the French tried to get them back -- but they really didn't need to. They were winning.
In February 1435, Bedford left Paris (Butler, p. 182) -- for the last time, as it turned out (Seward, p. 230). Soon after, a force under the Earl of Arundel was destroyed while fighting raiders in Normandy, and Arundel suffered a fatal injury from a cannonball -- a foretaste of events in 1453 (Butler, p. 183). The French meanwhile were building works they would use to besiege Paris.
The English still might have salvaged something had they been willing to compromise; Burgundy worked hard to bring this about (Butler, pp. 185-186). But Burgundy was going to have peace no matter what. The moment the peace talks failed, the Burgundians turned about and agreed to the Treaty of Arras, reconciling them to the French monarchy (Myers, pp. 124-125; Perroy, pp. 292-294, Butler, p. 187). In the long run, it was a disastrous move for Burgundy (Seward, p. 234) -- Louis XI would swallow the French portions of it in the 1480s when the male line of dukes failed. But the Burgundian dukes had a record of not thinking very clearly; Perroy, p. 291, suggests that Duke Philip thought he could dominate Charles VII and the French monarchy. He was wrong, but before he realized it, he had rendered the English position impossible. He also blew the chance to create an independent Burgundy, though he gained a great deal of (temporary) power in France itself (Perroy, p. 295). To top it all off, Charles VII never implemented many of his promises to Burgundy (Perroy, p. 332).
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C164C

King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France [Child 164] --- Part 05


DESCRIPTION: Conclusion of the notes to "King Henry Fifth's Conquest of France" [Child 164].
Last updated in version 2.5
NOTES: THE DEATH OF BEDFORD AND THE LOSS OF FRANCE
Bedford had blown any chance of keeping a position in France, and he seemed to know it, for he seemed to fall into despair. He would not live to see Lancastrian France destroyed. Shortly before the Treaty of Arras was formally announced, Bedford died on September 14 at Rouen (and was buried there, one of the few great English nobles buried in France); Seward, p. 231. According to Butler, p. 187, so deep was his despair that he literally turned his face to the wall and died. He was only about 46. His only offspring was a bastard son; he left most of his property to the monarchy (Butler, p. 188).
The English, minus Bedford, quickly discovered how important the Regent had been at controlling their hotheads. The Burgundians were willing to stay at peace with the English, but the English insisted on treating them as enemies from this time forward (Butler, p. 190). This may well have been the young King Henry's idea -- his first serious foray into government (Wolffe, pp. 80-83). Naturally this made their problems worse. A few of the wiser English leaders, such as Cardinal Beaufort, gave in and started thinking about a real peace (Butler, p. 191). They had very little time.
Paris was already in a panic by late 1435 (Butler, p. 191). They sent to the government in England, which scraped up a few troops but did not get them moving in time; they seem to have promptly disbanded (Butler, p. 192).
In 1436, the French captured some small ports in Normandy (Butler, p. 195). Lord Talbot, realizing that Paris could not be held, seems to have withdrawn most of his inadequate force before the French surrounded the town (Butler, p. 196). That left the city commander, Lord Willoughby, with only a token defensive force when the French began their blockade. Even this was whittled down as the garrison was pushed into raids on areas outside the walls, and some of the raiders were captured . Although several bishops wanted to fight on, the townsfolk proved unwilling to defend the walls of Paris (Butler, pp. 200-201), and the English garrison was overwhelmed on April 13. Happily, there was no sack of the city (Butler, p. 203, though he notes on p. 204 that Charles VII would not be so gentle in future), and the besiegers even brought in food.
Lord Willoughby and his troops took refuge in the citadel, but soon had to retreat to Rouen (Seward, p. 235). This hardly brought peace to France -- the war had loosed many brigands who continued to destroy the countryside (Perroy, p. 303) -- but it meant that English revenues fell even more. Seward, p. 234, suggests that some in England were wise enough to realize that they could not win, and would have been willing to settle for Normandy and Guyenne in full sovereignty. But, as usual, there was a war party which made such a settlement impossible. They deluded themselves mostly by looking at the success of Lord Talbot, who actually managed a raid on Paris in 1437 (Butler, pp. 207-208.)
By this time, Henry VI was old enough that he might have been able to influence things. But he was about as unlike his fearsome father as it was possible to be. Although Wolffe, p. 83, describes him as formulating a belligerent policy, he is forced to admit that Henry was "no practical soldier." Wilkinson, p. 257, declares, "[N]o earlier monarch after Ethelred the Unready had been so lacking in the attributes necessary in a medieval king.... Henry VI had only scholarly learning, piety, and good intentions to commend him at a moment in history that demanded heroic virtues, the capacity for great decisions, and inflexibility of purpose." He could not run a war; he couldn't even run his own court! As Ross says on p. 21, "Unfortunately, comments on Henry's character by people writing before the Yorkist usurpation of 1461 are few and meagre, but they lend some support to the notion that he was indeed a man of limited mental capacity who was too much influenced by those around him."
We do know that, by the time he was in his mid-twenties, arrangements were being made to control his impulses -- a set of measures were taken to reduce the amount of crown property he gave away and to ensure that, if he must give it away, he at least did not give it away to more than one person! (Wolffe, p. 114).
From then on, the war in France was all rearguard action: A few chevauchees, a few raids and sieges, the latter led mostly by Lord Talbot, who was turning into "Old Talbot" -- a legendary figure in England but one who lost the only major battles he led (Seward, p. 236-237). The Earl of Warwick, the last of Henry V's great officers, died in 1439 (Seward, p. 239). Various officials were put in charge in France in the next dozen years, including the Duke of York and the Earl of Somerset. York, assisted by Talbot, managed to mostly hold his ground; the English held off attacks on Normandy and Guyenne in 1441 and 1442 (Seward, pp. 240-241). But York was spending his own money to do it (Rubin, p. 271; Lander, p. 29, prints evidence that by 1446 York was owed over 38,000 pounds); it was not something that could last long. And Somerset was a disaster who took a large force to France and accomplished nothing except to bring the government closer to bankruptcy (Seward, p. 242).
It was not yet a civil war in England, but with Bedford dead and Henry VI unable to control the factions, things were moving that way. On one side was Henry V's last brother, Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, who favored escalating the French war though he had no real plan for how to do so. On the other was Henry's half-uncle, Cardinal Beaufort. Beaufort was more realistic; Gloucester had more popularity with the commons. Beaufort had control of the court, but could do little with it.
So bitter was the hatred that Humphrey in the 1420s had accused Beaufort of treason (Butler, p. 63). Bedford had soothed that over -- but with him gone, things got much, much worse. In the early 1440s, Humphrey's latest wife Eleanor Cobham (who had replaced Jacqueline of Hainault) was convicted of witchcraft by the Beaufort party (Wilkinson, p. 265). In 1447, they arrested Humphrey himself, and he died in custody (Gillingham, p. 60). Gillingham thinks he died of a stroke (which was the report of one contemporary chronicler), but most contemporaries apparently regarded it as murder, and in this they are followed by Wilkinson, p. 266. Rubin, p. 231, says the death took place in "mysterious circumstances."
Gloucester's death produced a real political crisis, since he was heir to the throne. With him dead, and Henry VI still childless, who was heir? Henry VI was the only true "Lancastrian" Plantagenet alive. For the first time, the question of a Beaufort succession had to be faced (Perroy, p. 336, thinks their leader, Somerset, "might aim at the succession to the King"). They were partially legitimized descendents of John of Gaunt, Henry VI's great-grandfather; if they were fully legitimized, they were the heirs to the throne. But if they were not considered legitimate, then the Duke of York was heir in male line (Lander, p. 34), and actually senior to the Lancastrians in female line. In 1450, a motion was made in parliament to have York declared Henry VI's heir. The court responded by having the petitioner arrested (Rubin, p. 272; Wilkinson, p. 278). There is much dispute over the extent of York's ambitions, and his abilities (Ross-Wars, p. 28, thinks he had "little capacity or inclination to seek and win support from his fellow-noblemen or from the wider public," while admitting that he tried to provide honest government while regent) -- but it is certain that he was a better leader than Henry VI or his wife Margaret (anyone would be), and that he had been utterly mistreated by the government.
The court party, being so weak, had repeatedly tried to buy support with grants of titles and annuities; by the 1450s, due in no small part to massive grants of land to new peers (Gillingham, p. 56), Henry VI's government had revenues of less than 30,000 pounds per year, household expenses of 24,000, and a debt of 400,000 (Myers, p. 126; based on Gillingham, pp. 66-67, more than 10% of this was owed to the Duke York alone!). With no money available to pay soldiers, naturally garrisons dwindled to almost nothing. Lancastrian France was a hollow shell.
In 1444, the Earl of Suffolk (who took charge of the court party when Cardinal Beaufort retired from his public role) tried to negotiate a peace. So bad was the English situation, and so incompetent was Suffolk, that in return for a royal marriage (Henry VI to the utterly disastrous Margaret of Anjou) and a two year truce, he had to agree to the surrender of the county of Maine (Seward, p. 244; Myers, p. 126, says that Margaret had to talk Henry into giving up Maine; Gillingham, p. 57, suggests that Henry VI made the concession on his own to assert his independence and in a sort of Munich-like attempt at peace through weakness; Wilkinson, p. 271, points out that Henry himself wrote a 1445 letter agreeing to the surrender). Other than the brief truce, Margaret brought no dowry at all (Gillingham, p. 59) -- indeed, she had to be given land in Lancashire to pay her expenses (Rubin, p. 231).
(The above, at least, is the English view. Perroy, pp. 310-311, says that it was only a ten month truce with an option for an extension, and thinks that it was a good deal for both sides, because the marriage of Henry and Margaret was a "promising prospect." Promising it was -- but only for the French.)
In one sense, the surrender was realistic: The English had to give up some lands. The mere fact that they were treating with Charles VII shows that they had abandoned hope of ruling France. But I have to agree with the anti-Margaret faction: they should at least have gotten value for what they gave up! Gillingham, p. 56, notes that they still had a strong position: Guyenne, Calais, Normandy, much of Anjou, and Maine -- the latter well fortified for the defence of Normandy. They were giving up the key to this position -- and all they got for it was a truce too short to do any good, and a Queen who would cause England to fight the Wars of the Roses starting just 11 years later.
To make matters worse, the French used the truce to improve their situation, even as the English sat and twiddled their thumbs. After most past truces, the French soldiers had been cut loose to become brigands, weakening the economy even as it ruined the army. Charles VII cleverly took the best of the soldiers into his peacetime army, strengthening his forces for the next showdown and avoiding the unpopularity the soldiers would have caused in the countryside (Perroy, p. 304). It meant taxes stayed high -- but the centralized French government no longer worried about that.
Margaret was now the real ruler of England, through her husband, but she was "a domineering and uncompromising woman. She had no understanding of English traditions and not much more of English politics, and was soon hated by the plebs as representing an unpopular policy in both foresight and domestic affairs" (Wilkinson, p. 270). Her primary ally was Somerset, the leading Beaufort -- in other words, with Humphrey of Gloucester dead, he probably though of himself as Henry VI's heir unless Margaret bore a child (Gillingham, p. 68). Little wonder there were court conflicts!
Even Perroy, pp. 335-336, admits "Margaret of Anjou was a foreigner, ambitious, active, and intense, and she knew nothing about English affairs. Brought up in the kingdom of France, where no one opposed the royal authority, she wanted to rule without the counsel of the barons and the advice of Parliament.... French at heart, she stood for peace [with France] and did nothing to wrestle from the Valois the provinces recently lost by England.... This was another source of her unpopularity, since public opinion unanimously demanded revenge for these defeats, though it was unready to bear the cost of a fresh war. The more isolated she felt, the more enthusiastically Margaret committed herself to the party that had put her on the throne. This was the clan of the Beauforts... led by Someset, vanquished at Caen but now Constable and all-powerful counselor."
The French meanwhile were building a true standing army (Seward, p. 247; Perroy, p. 300; Keen, pp. 257-258 credits this to the "great ordinance of 1439") -- not even Henry V had really had that, though he had controlled his forces well enough that he might as well have. But lesser English lords had only their household troops -- tough as any regulars, to be sure, but not as numerous. Charles VII also managed to gain control over revenues -- he now simply set the tax rates, and the people had to pay (Perroy, p. 302. I can't help but wonder if the people who fought against the English knew what they were getting themselves into).
In 1449 the French moved on Normandy, given an excuse by some sharp dealings involving the surrender of Maine (Gillingham, p. 61; Perroy, p. 317, notes the extreme folly of the situation, in which allies of Somerset attacked the pro-French Duchy of Brittany). At once, the English house of cards collapsed (Seward, p. 248). Within three months, Rouen was under siege -- and the townsfolk admitted the French, forcing the English back into the citadel. Somerset, who had distributed his forces into penny-packet garrisons that the French could easily swallow, promptly had to surrender -- and to leave Talbot, the last noteworthy English general, in French hands (Seward, p. 249).
The English finally managed to scrape up a few reinforcements in 1450, led by a mere knight, Sir Thomas Kyriell. These blundered into battle at a small town called Formigny (Guerard, p. 113). As usual, estimates of their number vary; Perroy, p. 318 suggests that there were 5000 from England and 2000 from the remaining Norman garrisons, but most sources seem to give estimates in the 4000-4500 range. Featherstone, pp. 168-169, suggests 4000 men but makes it even weaker in practice, since there were only 1500 archers, and a few hundred men-at-arms, meaning that half the army was billmen -- surely the weakest type of soldier for this sort of fight.
What is certain is that the English were decisively defeated; supposedly the French counted over 3700 dead. Perroy, p. 319, says that English casualties, killed, wounded, and captured, were "nearly 5000." Featherstone, p. 171, declares that 80% of the English army was killed. Kyriell himself was among those captured (Seward, pp. 250-251). Caen fell soon afterward. On August 12, 1450 -- supposedly one year to the day after the campaign started (Perroy, p. 319) -- Cherbourg surrendered (Seward, p. 252). English Normandy -- the territory Henry V had apparently wanted above all else -- was gone.
The government by then was completely bankrupt; the officers of state were going unpaid (Rubin, p. 65). There was no possibility of mounting a major counterattack.
Suffolk, who had the support of Queen Margaret, was made a Duke in 1448, but so great was the unrest that Parliament impeached him (Wilkinson, p. 275; Lander, p. 38, notes that most of the charges were false or exaggerated, but in any case the real crime was making such a bad agreement with France). Henry VI tried to save him by exiling him, but before he could escape the country, he was murdered in 1450 (Gillingham, p, 63; OxfordCompanion, p. 758; Seward, pp. 254-255). Two others who had large roles in Henry's government were killed at about the same time (Wilkinson, pp. 273-274; Lander, p. 35). The disaster also led to Jack Cade's rebellion, which didn't really accomplish much but which scared a lot of people. So pig-headed was the court party that the de facto role of Prime Minister now went to Somerset, who had been in charge of the loss of Normandy (Perroy, p. 319).
The popular resentment didn't change the situation. In 1451-1453, the French threw the English out of Guyenne, which they had ruled since 1154. The initial occupation took only a few months in 1451 (Seward, pp. 256-257). It needn't have been final; the Guyennese actually preferred remote English rule to direct French control, and the imported French officials proved harsh masters (Perroy, p. 320). When the English scraped together an army in 1452, Bordeaux rebelled and admitted them (Seward, p. 258); much of the rest of the province followed.
But the general the English sent, "Old Talbot," while a genius in leading raids, was not a great commander at set-piece battles, and was now very old (Perroy, p. 321, says over eighty, though most sources say he was in his seventies; OxfordCompanion, p. 173, says he was 65). And the French had finally found a new weapon to combat the longbow: Artillery. Guns let them destroy Talbot and his troops at Castillon on July 17, 1453 (Myers, p. 127; Perroy, p. 321; Ros, p. 122; Keen, p. 255, calls it the battle of "Chastillon") when Talbot impetuously tried to attack the French artillery park head-on (Seward, pp. 260-262) and without examining the position (OxfordCompanion, p. 173).
The castles and towns of Guyenne promptly gave in to the French. Bordeaux, the last, surrendered only three months after Castillon (Seward, p. 262). This time, they were treated as conquered territory, and suffered badly (Perroy, p. 321). But there was no going back. As Perroy says, the great fief of Acquitaine, and the Angevin Empire, was gone.
The Hundred Years' War was over. It was "the final, though as yet unbelievable, severance of England from the last remnants of the continental empire of Henry II" (Harvey, p. 190). Except for Calais, which the English held for another century, the invaders had been driven from France. Henry V's "conquest" was lost at a time when he would still have been alive had he lived out a normal life (he would have been 66).
No peace treaty was ever signed, and England's Edward IV actually invaded France at one point, to be bought off with a subsidy (Perroy, p. 347). Henry VIII would would fight in France as well, from 1512-1524. Perroy, p. 348, sums it up: "As late as 1487 there was talk of a possible English landing in Guienne.... But to pursue our story further would be playing on words. Though no peace ratified its results, the Hundred Years' War was long since over. It was true that Calais did not become French again until 1553 and that for centuries longer the English sovereigns continued to bear the empty title of King of France. But these were belated survivals of no importance. When the Burgundian State was dismembered, a fresh factor in the history of Europe relegated the old Anglo-French dispute to the background" (because England no longer had an ally within France).
ENGLAND AFTER THE WARS: THE OVERTHROW OF LANCASTER
Even Calais would have been lost much sooner had Henry V's dynasty endured longer; when Margaret of Anjou fled to France in 1462, she promised to turn the town over to Louis XI in return for help (Perroy, p. 344).
But Margaret could not fulfill her promise, because she never regained power; the loss of France was to deal the Lancastrians a fatal blow. The response in France to the end of the war was an attempt to rehabilitate Jean Darc (Perroy, p. 323). The response in England was to seek a scapegoat. Suffolk had not been enough of a sacrifice. It might have been better if Henry VI had put Somerset out of the government. Lander thinks that Somerset, unlike Suffolk, was honest (o. 44). That doesn't mean the populace trusted him, however. But even had Henry wanted to change ministers, he could not -- because he went catatonic (Gillingham, pp. 74-75). Margaret and Somerset tried to cover it up, but eventually their enemy the Duke of York was appointed protector. Somerset went into the Tower, but he was not executed, and York has "made an effort to rule the country with the help of a fairly broad-based council and administration" (Gillingham, p. 84). There might have been peace -- if nothing had changed.
But "If Henry's insanity had been a tragedy, his recovery was a national disaster" (Gillingham, p. 84, quoting an unnamed source). Henry, though again capable of speech, was no longer fit to rule (Ross, p. 52, calls him a "useful political vegetable"; on p. 118, Ross notes that Henry was taken prisoner *three time* during the Wars of the Roses; no other pretender to the throne was captured with such ease). Somerset and Margaret again took charge -- and immediately turned on York, his allies the Nevilles, and others who had opposed their narrow government. York and the Nevilles, who clearly needed to defend themselves, took to arms. The first major fight of the Wars of the Roses, the First Battle of Saint Albans, took place in 1455, only a year after Henry recovered from his madness.
It wasn't a big battle -- Lander, p. 53, thinks only sixty men died. But it set a pattern for the Wars of the Roses: That few soldiers were killed but many leaders disposed of. St. Albans finally got rid of Somerset, who was executed on the field (Gillingham, p. 89). The Yorkists, for the moment, were still willing to accept Henry VI as king (Lander, p. 55; Gillingham, p. 90, thinks Somerset was killed because "York and the Nevilles had therefore pushed themselves into a position where they could either depose the king or kill the king's [councilors]"; these were the only possible ways to reform the government. And they remained loyal to the King).
There followed four years of relative peace in which the Yorkists exercised greater control over the biddable King Henry (Ross, p. 32). But it was fragile -- Margaret of Anjou was still around, and she would not accept anything she viewed as an infringement on her rights.
Ross, pp. 37-40, discusses several reasons why the situation flew so far out of control, including economic difficulties and a large number of local feuds -- but ultimately it was that a weak king was ruled by a partisan wife. Margaret in June 1459 called something that was almost a parliament -- but she excluded York, the Nevilles, and York's allies such as the Bourchiers (Gillingham, p. 102); the Yorkists expected to be indicted (Ross, p. 37). At this point, though York still hesitated to claim the throne, true peace was impossible. Later in 1459, Margaret scattered the Yorkist princes, and seemed to have won a complete victory (Gillingham, p. 105); the Yorkists fled to Ireland and Calais.
It is ironic to note that Charles VII of France thus found himself strongly backing Henry VI (Dockray, p. 54), the king with whom he had contested his own throne and territory for more than thirty years! But Margaret managed to blow her advantages by her abominable behavior. In 1459 the so-called "parliament of devils," which she dominated, passed 27 bills of attainder (Gillingham, p. 106), condemning among others the Duke of York, his sons the Earls of March and Rutland, and the Neville Earls of Warwick and Salisbury. For the Yorkists, it was now win or die.
And Margaret was unable to consolidate her position, because the government was once again broke (Gillingham, p. 108). And her generals and admirals were completely inept; Warwick apparently sailed right past the superior fleet of the Duke of Exeter to invade (Gillingham, pp. 109-110). He captured King Henry (but not Margaret) at the Battle of Northampton (Gillingham, p. 114).
It appears the Yorkists hadn't really worked out what came next. Warwick probably still hoped to rule through King Henry. But the Duke of York himself came to Parliament and, somewhat hesitantly, claimed the throne (Gillingham, pp. 116-117; Ross, pp. 47-49). The uncommitted Lords, though they were tired of the Lancastrian regime, were not ready to go that far. Eventually a compromise was reached: Henry VI would retain his throne (presumably with a new ministry), but York was declared Henry's heirs, and York's heirs after him (Gillingham, p. 117). It was a logical compromise; York might never take the throne (since he was about a decade older than Henry), but it did restore the rightful line.
It also meant that Margaret of Anjou's son Edward was cut out of the succession. That she would never allow. It was she, not the Yorkists, who really ramped up the Wars of the Roses.
The Wars, though they resulted in the overthrow at one time or another of four different kings, were ultimately struggles between noble factions over who would rule England (Perroy, pp. 338-339). The first monarch to go was Henry VI, who was overthrown in 1461. The single biggest reason for his downfall was surely the loss of the territories in France -- and the behavior of the Frechwoman, Margaret. Henry was not captured until 1464 (to spend the next half dozen years in the Tower), but he hardly mattered anyway; it was Margaret who was fighting -- less on behalf of her husband than on behalf of her disinherited son.
In 1470-1471, an attempt was made to bring Henry VI back, but it was made by a coalition of allies who distrusted each other utterly (Dockray, p. 66). The Earl of Warwick, who organized the "re-adaption," had to try to keep everyone happy, and seemingly failed (Dockray, p. 68). When the displaced King Edward IV invaded, the Lancastrian government lost the two battles of Barnet (where Warwick was killed) and Tewkesbury (where Edward the son of Henry VI was killed) and the regime collapsed (Wilkinson, p. 293). In the aftermath, Henry VI was executed. The Lancastrian line was extinct; all of Henry V's other close relatives were dead by then. Henry V's brothers had all died without issue -- Clarence in 1421, Bedford in 1435, Gloucester in 1447. The closest surviving relations of the Lancastrian kings were the Beaufort family, the descendents of the illegitimate half-brothers of Henry IV. The future King Henry VII was descended from that line, but it took a lot of luck....
It is true that, when King Edward IV invaded France in the 1470s, he implicity invoked the memory of Henry V -- but one of his parliaments declared Henry V "late in ded and not in right Kyng of Englond" (Allmand, p. 432). But Henry was already becoming a legend in the sixteenth century, as shown by books such as Fabyan's Chronicle (whose author died in 1513) and Edward Hall's 1547 "history" (Allmand, p. 434) -- a work containing far more propaganda than genuine history. And Shakespeare, of course, strengthened this unhistorical legend (so much so that authors such as Jarman seem to have bought into it almost completely).
Even Allmand, p. 443, concludes, "A careful consideration of his whole achievement reveals much regarding Henry's stature both as man and king. From it he emerges as a ruler whose already high reputation is not only maintained but enhanced." But, on the previous page, he had admitted a more troubling truth: "He therefore passed on to his son an inheritance which may justly be termed 'damnosa hereditas.'''
For the aftermath of the Agincourt War, see especially the notes to "The Children in the Wood" (The Babes in the Woods)" [Laws Q34].
THE HISTORICAL CONTENT OF THE BALLAD
As far as historical accuracy is concerned, this ballad ranks pretty near the bottom. Child's single short text (collated, to be sure, from multiple broadsides) appears to be late, and has few details. And most of those are wrong:
"A tribute that was due from France Had not been paid for so long a time." The French did not owe tribute to the English under any reckoning. They had agreed to a ransom for John II -- but had been unable to pay (Henry V at the start of his reign apparently claimed arrears of 1.6 million ecus; Allmand, p. 68), so John II had gone back into English custody. He died there, so there were no arrears on the ransom. Of course Henry could claim to be overlord of France, and due its revenues -- but the fact that the song recognizes a king of France (since Henry sends to him) means that, in the song, that claim is not being made.
"Your master's young and of tender years." Henry V in 1413 was about 26 years old. Charles VI of France was about 45, but he had been intermittently insane for two decades, and his children were all younger than Henry; the future Charles VII was only ten years old. There was no one in France in position to insult Henry's intelligence or experience.
"Three tennis-balls." The story about the tennis balls is widely told (including in some old chronicles; Shakespeare has it from Holinshed, according to Jarman, p. 47, and Allmand, p. 427, says it was mentioned by Audeley early in the reign of Henry VI), but there is no real reason to believe it true. Barker, p. 69, notes that the then-Dauphin (not Charles VII but an older brother) was a decade younger than Henry and could hardly taunt the English king about his youth (and, to repeat, King Charles was insane and couldn't order such a thing). Some have suspected that this incident derives from a story of Darius III of Persia and Alexander the Great: Darius sent Alexander children's toys. Barker and Jarman in fact note that Henry continued to negotiate for some time after the alleged incident, which would be quite unlikely had the incident actuallly happened.
Allmand, noting that the story is very widespread, thinks it unlikely that the tale is pure fiction, but suggests (p. 71) that someone in France *discussed* such a move and was overheard by an English envoy, who then blew the idea out of proportion. He says, "The most telling and most contemporary account, that of John Strecche, canon of Kenilworth, written probably soon after Henry's death, records the Frenchmen's pride and arrogance, and, as an illustration of this, that they would send Henry balls with which to play and cushions upon which to lie, the implication clearly being that the king was too much inclined to love his creature comforts and too inexperienced in war to do any harm."
In any case, it wasn't modern lawn tennis back in the fifteenth century; lawn tennis is a nineteenth century invention, based only very loosely on the older game of Court Tennis (or Royal Tennis, or Real Tennis). As a matter of fact, it was not until the late 1420s, according to Butler, p. 73, that the French first saw it played with a racquet -- until then, players used their hands. Though the sport seems to have been reasonably well-established on both sides of the Atlantic; Dockray, pp. 55, tells of a top tennis player being executed for political reasons in the 1460s.
"Recruit me Cheshire and Lancashire, and Derby Hills... No marryd man nor no widow's son...." There is no evidence for a special callup of the counties cited, and the claim of exemptions is impossible; we know that married lords, and sons of widows, fought at Agincourt. If there is a basis for it at all, it may have been suggested by the fact that Henry was Duke of Lancaster and Earl of Chester. Or, perhaps, it may have derived from an earlier event in Henry's career; Allmand, p. 18, refers to a time when Henry, as Prince of Wales, led troops from Cheshire to fight against Scotland. The bit about married men and orphans may just be based on the Bible's restrictions on having such men fight.
I will offer one wild speculation: The Stanley family, which eventually became Kings of Man and Earl of Derby, began its rise under Sir John Stanley, who had recruited a Cheshire guard for Richard II in the late 1390s, then gained in power in the area under the early Lancastrians (Bennett, p. 75). The Stanleys spent the next century gradually increasing in power -- and becoming a by-word for trimming. We also know that they had a fairly efficient propaganda machine which churned out a number of songs ("The Ballad of Bosworth Field" certainly comes from one of their supporters, and "The Song of the Lady Bessy" likely does as well; see the notes to "The Children in the Wood" (The Babes in the Woods)" [Laws Q34]). Since the Stanleys would have been responsible for recruiting Cheshire and Derby in this era, might this be from another of their propaganda songs?
"The first shot that the Frenchmen gave, they killd our Englishmen so free; We killed ten thousand of the French." The ten thousand figure may actually be accurate, but note that the English, not the French, fired the first arrows at Agincourt.
"And the finest flower that is in all France, To the Rose of England I will give free." The French did eventually agree to marry the princess Katherine to Henry V -- but not until well after Agincourt. The English did not even march on Paris at that time. - RBW
Last updated in version 2.5
File: C164D

King Herod and the Cock


See The Carnal and the Crane [Child 55] (File: C055)

King James and Brown [Child 180]


DESCRIPTION: Douglas comes to attack the King. The ruler is saved by Brown. Brown convinces the king to pardon Douglas; Douglas reacts by attacking Edinborough. Brown once again defeats the renegade Earl; for this and other services, King James makes him an earl
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1750 (Percy folio)
KEYWORDS: royalty nobility fight rescue
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
April 7, 1571 - hanging of James Hamilton, Archbishop of Saint Andrews, whom Child believes to the the Bishop of Saint Andrews whom Brown defeated
FOUND IN:
REFERENCES (3 citations):
Child 180, "King James and Brown" (1 text, with appendix "The King of Scots and Andrew Browne")
cf. Percy/Wheatley II, pp. 221-225, "King of Scots and Andrew Brown" (1 text, not from the folio manuscript even though the folio includes part of the piece; note that this is the piece Child puts in the appendix, not the main text, though both are from the Percy folio)
BarryEckstormSmyth p. 467, "King James and Brown" (notes plus a modified partial text from Child)
Roud #4009
File: C180

King John and the Abbot of Canterbury


See King John and the Bishop [Child 45] (File: C045)

King John and the Bishop [Child 45]


DESCRIPTION: King John tells the (bishop of Canterbury) he must answer the King's questions or die. The bishop, unable to answer, turns to a shepherd (his brother?). The answers are so clever the king rewards the shepherd and pardons both (makes the shepherd bishop)
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1695 (broadside)
KEYWORDS: questions help riddle royalty
HISTORICAL REFERENCES:
1199-1216 - Reign of King John
FOUND IN: Britain(England,Scotland(Aber)) US(MW,MA,NE,NW)
REFERENCES (15 citations):
Child 45, "King John and the Bishop" (2 texts)
Bronson 45, "King John and the Bishop" (15 versions plus1 in addenda)
GreigDuncan2 281, "The Jolly Abbot" (1 text)
Percy/Wheatley II, pp. 303-312, "King John and the Abbot of Canterbury" (2 texts, one from the Percy folio and one as printed in the _Reliques_)
BarryEckstormSmyth p. 445, "King John and the Bishop" (brief notes only)
Flanders/Olney, pp. 111-112, "The King's Three Questions" (1 text)
Flanders/Brown, pp. 200-203, "The King's Three Questions" (1 text, 1 tune) {Bronson's #11; note that Bronson has the wrong date in his headnotes}
Flanders-Ancient1, pp. 280-298, "King John and the Bishop" (5 texts plus 2 fragments, 3 tunes; the texts are listed A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, C, D, because A1 and A2 were both ultimately derived from the same singer through different informants and B1, B2, B3 are from the same informant at different times) {A1=Bronson's #11}
Gardner/Chickering 155, "King John and the Bishop" (1 fragment, 1 tune) {Bronson's #5}
Leach, pp. 154-158, "King John and the Bishop" (1 text)
Leach-Labrador 2, "King John and the Bishop" (1 text: Newfoundland story related by theme to the ballad)
OBB 172, "King John and the Abbot of Canterbury" (1 text)
Niles 19, "King John and the Bishop" (1 text, 1 tune)
BBI, ZN1364, "I'le tell you a story, a story anon"
DT 45, KJONCANT*
Roud #302
RECORDINGS:
Warde Ford, "The Bishop of Canterbury" (AFS 4196A, 1938; tr.; on LC57, in AMMEM/Cowell) {Bronson's #4}
SAME TUNE:
The Shaking of the Sheets (Chappell/Wooldridge II, pp. 228-229; British Library Add. MS. 15225; entered in the Stationer's Register for John Awdelay 1568/9; Playford, The Dancing Master, 1651; rec. by The Baltimore Consort on The Ladye's Delight)
ALTERNATE TITLES:
The King and the Bishop
NOTES: King John did not have a good relationship with the Catholic Church; he refused, e.g., to accept Stephen Langton, the Pope's choice for Archbishop of Canterbury (Warren, pp. 161-163). From 1208 to 1213 England was placed under Interdict by the Pope. John responded by removing bishops from their offices -- and taking away their mistresses (though he allowed them pensions). The historical story bears only the slightest similarity to the tale in the ballad, however, which may also have been influenced by the war of wills between John's father Henry II and Thomas Becket.
The one thing that is certain is that John (reigned 1199-1216) had a horrid relationship with the church. McLynn, p. 78, says that his early upbringing in Fontrevrault abbey "seems to have turned him violently against the Christian religion," adding that John collected works of theology so he could read them and mock them.
It is also of note that, while his father and brother promised to take part in the Third Crusade (his father Henry II did not live, but of course Richard went), John never took a crusading vow, and never went to the Orient (McLynn, p. 110). The flip side of this is, this was partly in obedience to his father -- and there had been an earlier offer to make John King of Jerusalem, and John had been forced to turn this down because his father reasoned, correctly, that the Crusader State was too internally weak to hold up to serious attack (Warren, pp. 32-33).
McLynn, p. 29, says that "John was notable for quasi-autistic tendencies, and he always seemed to have a grudge against the world." It is noteworthy that older parents are more likely to have autistic children -- and John was born when his mother was at least 41 and very likely 44 or even 45. However, I don't buy the "quasi-autistic" bit -- John had a strong streak of low humor, which indeed cost him badly in Ireland (Warren, p. 36), and this is most unusual for victims of autism, or even of autism spectrum disorders. It strikes me as much more reasonable to assume that John, as the last of many children, had a lot of grudges.
More likely is McLynn's conjecture on p. 94 that John suffered from bipolar disorder, or perhaps simply clinical depression. This would explain his occasional tendency to sit on his hands in the case of trouble (e.g. when Normandy was falling; Warren, p. 99). It would also explain his tendency to extreme anger.
And he was a typical Plantagenet in his violent rages (Warren, p. 2); this was simply the way the family worked. Markale, p. 68, brands him "almost a lunatic," but his father and brothers were equally capable of fury; it's just that they were wiser in their use of their anger. Warren, p. 47, in comparing John to his three older brothers claims that John as king "was to show a grasp of political realities that eluded the young Henry, more fierce determination than ever Geoffrey could boast of, as sure a strategic sense as Richard displayed and a knowledge of government to which the heroic crusader never even aspired." His real fault, in Warren's view, was a lack of forgiveness -- he was always kicking people while they were down, causing them to become permanent enemies. Certainly that was true of his relations with the Church!
Even McLynn, who considers John a very bad king, admits that although John "lacked his brother [Richard]'s military genius he had wider interests. He had more administrative ability, a greater sense of the art of the possible, was more cunning and devious. In time he also turned himself into an above average general. Infinitely more complex than Richard... John was in many ways a psychological oddity.... Yet one should not exaggerate John's unique qualities. Although he was well known to imitate his father by biting and gnawing his fingers in rage... this was a general, shared Angevin characteristic" (p. 94).
Bronson notes that the song has been in constant contact with broadside prints, and doubts that any of the versions arose entirely from traditional stock. Several of the broadsides list the tune as "The Shaking of the Sheets"; see the "Same Tune" reference. - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C045

King Knapperty


See Kempy Kay [Child 33] (File: C033)

King Kong Kitchie Kitchie Ki-Me-O


See Frog Went A-Courting (File: R108)

King o' Spain's Daughter, The


See Lady Isabel and the Elf Knight [Child 4] (File: C004)

King of the Cannibal Islands, The


DESCRIPTION: Sometimes a ballad about castaways marrying the daughter of the King of the Cannibal Islands, but often degenerates into a quatrain-ballad about the odd events on the islands. The use of the title phrase is characteristic.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: before 1839 (broadside, Bodleian Harding B 36(10) View 2 of 2)
KEYWORDS: humorous cannibalism royalty
FOUND IN: US
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Pankake-PHCFSB, p. 195, "The King of the Cannibal Islands" (2 texts, 1 tune)
Roud #15695
BROADSIDES:
Bodleian, Harding B 36(10) View 2 of 2, "The King of the Cannibal Islands," J. Catnach (London), 1813-1838; also Johnson Ballads 536, Harding B 11(322), Harding B 11(1997), Firth c.17(312), Harding B 11(1496), Harding B 11(2830), "[The] King of the Cannibal Islands"
NLScotland, R.B.m.143(147), "The King of the Cannibal Islands," Poet's Box (Glasgow), 1858
CROSS-REFERENCES:
cf."The Settler's Lament (The Beautiful Land of Australia)" (tune)
SAME TUNE:
Hoke Pokee Wonkee Fum (per broadside, NLScotland, R.B.m.143(147))
The Settler's Lament (The Beautiful Land of Australia) (File: PFS101)
NOTES: This doesn't show up in folk songbooks much, but it seems to me that I heard it somewhere in my youth; I suspect it qualifies as a children's folk song. At least, I'm putting it here on that assumption. - RBW
From the commentary for broadside NLScotland RB.m.143(147): "This ballad was written at a high-point of British Imperialism, and is a telling illustration of the superior attitudes which popularly existed among both those Brits who settled abroad, in countries such as Africa, and also among the broadside-buying public back in Scotland. As with another broadside in the National Library of Scotland's collection, 'The Queen of Otaheite', the 'natives' are portrayed as bigamous cannibals, with little regard for Western ways." - BS
This even though most places referred to as "Cannibal Islands" were in fact under European control by the time the song was written (under the above assumption). The etymology of "Cannibal" in Robert Hendrickson, The Ocean Almanac, Doubleday, 1984, pp. 118-119, derives the name "Cannibal" from "Carib," "Inhabitant of the Caribbean," a formation going back to Columbus -- although cannibals if anything were more common in the Aztec areas of Mexico, as wwell as in the South Seas (recall how Captain Cook died; also the fact that kuru, the laughing sickness, the first known prion disease, spread by eating infected brain tissue -- and was found only in the South Seas).
Most of these places were at one time or another called "Cannibal Islands" -- although hardly any of them had an actual king. It was more common to eat one's enemies than one's subjects (the latter is obviously inefficient -- you run out of subjects fast that way), so cannibalism tends to imply a nearby external enemy. - RBW
Opie-Oxford2 re 227, "Hokey, pokey, whisky, thum": Evidently derived from "King of the Cannibal Islands" by A.W. Humphreys. See broadside [Note however that the NLScotland broadside of 1858 states that the tune comes from "Hokee Pokee Wonkee Fum"] - BS
Last updated in version 2.5
File: PHCFS195

King of the Fairies, The


DESCRIPTION: "A wee, wee man came to our toon en', Fiddledum, faddledum, fee, fee, fee," singing the men from their work despite his huge feet and mouth, odd clothes, very long arms, etc. He holds a dance, then frightens them; he becomes king of the fairies
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1930 (Ord)
KEYWORDS: dancing talltale music
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland)
REFERENCES (1 citation):
Ord, pp. 166-167, "The King of the Fairies (Nursery Song)" (1 text)
Roud #5561
File: Ord166

King Orfeo [Child 19]


DESCRIPTION: The wife of (King) Orfeo, perhaps in a fit of madness, flees from him and his court. Orfeo sets out to find her. Encountering her under guard in a high hall, he plays his pipes so well that his wife is returned to him.
AUTHOR: unknown
EARLIEST DATE: 1880
KEYWORDS: music magic separation madness royalty
FOUND IN: Britain(Scotland(Hebr))
REFERENCES (14 citations):
Child 19, "King Orfeo" (1 text)
Bronson 19, "King Orfeo" (1 version plus 1 in addenda)
Davis-More 11, pp. 79-80, "King Orfeo," comments only
OBB 15, "King Orfeo (A Shetland Ballad)" (1 text)
DT 19, KNGORFEO*
ADDITIONAL: Emily Lyle, _Fairies and Folk: Approaches to the Scottish Ballad Tradition_, Wissenschaflicher Verlag Trier, 2007, pp. 63-65, article "King Orpheus" (2 texts in parallel, 1 tune)
RELATED: Versions of the Romance --
Thomas C. Rumble, editor, _The Breton Lays in Middle English_, 1964 (I use the 1967 Wayne State University paperback edition which corrects a few errors in the original printing), pp. 207-226, "Kyng Orfew" (1 text, of 604 lines, seemingly based on Ashmole 61)
Donald B. Sands, editor, _Middle English Verse Romances_, Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1966, pp. 185-200, "Sir Orfeo" (1 text, of 580 lines)
Kenneth Sisam, editor, _Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose_, Oxford, 1925, pp. 13-31, "Sir Orfeo" (1 text, of 604 lines, primarily from Auchinlek with expansions from Harley)
Burrow/Turville-Petre: J. A. Burrow and Thorlac Turville-Petre, _A Book of Middle English_, second edition, 1996 (I cite the 1999 Blackwell paperback edition), pp. 112-131, "Sir Orfeo" (1 text, of 604 lines)
Boris Ford, editor, _The Age of Chaucer_ (The Pelican Guide to English Literature, Volume 1), Pelican, 1954, 1959, pp. 271-287, "Sir Orfeo" (1 text, of 580 lines although it says it is based on Sisam)
Modernized poetic version: J. R. R. Tolkien, translator, _Sir Gawain and the Green Knight * Pearl * Sir Orfeo_, with an introduction (and perhaps some light editing) by Christopher Tolkien, 1975 (I use the 1988 Ballantine edition), pp. 133-148, "Sir Orfeo"
Modernied prose version: Roger Sherman Loomis and Laura Hibbard Loomis, editors (and translators), _Medieval Romances_, 1957 (I use the undated Modern Library paperback), pp. 311-323, "Sir Orfeo"
Roud #136
RECORDINGS:
John Stickle, "King Orfeo" (on FSB4, FSBBAL1)
NOTES: Loosely based on the Greek myth of Orpheus and Euridice. Observe, however, that "King Orfeo" has a happy endings: Orfeo and the Euridice figure are successfully reunited.
The same is true of what may be the direct source of this piece, the Middle English romance "Sir Orfeo." (There is also an independent Scottish romance on the subject; Lyle, p. 66. She thinks it the direct source of the ballad, but her evidence is slight. Burrow/Turville-Petre, p. 113, think that both "Sir Orfeo" and the Scottish piece are translations of the same original, possibly the "Lai d'Orphey," a French musical piece referred to in romances but now lost)
The change to a happy ending is not the only alteration in the tale. Shippey, p. 63, notes that "Sir Orfeo" is fighting the forces of Elfland, not Hell (there may be a link with "Thomas Rymer" [Child 37] or something like it), and that Orfeo's honor as well as his music plays a role.
Incidentally, the romance and the ballad should perhaps be referred to under the same title; Lyle, p. 61, notes that the name of the ballad was supplied by Child based on one version of the Middle English romance. Lyle refers to the song as "King Orpheus" after a Scottish version (also known as "Orpheus King of Portugal" after a title mentioned in the Complaynt of Scotland of c. 1550; Lyle, p. 66).
The interesting question is how "Sir Orfeo" evolved the ending it did. Of the 50-odd Middle English romances, "Orfeo" is generally considered the best not by Chaucer or the Gawain-Poet or Marie of France ("Sir Orfeo," like the works of Marie, is considered a "Breton Lei"; Bennett/Gray, p. 138).
The story of Orpheus was known in the Middle Ages, from Virgil's Georgics (Book four, roughly lines 450-550 -- the very end of the book) and from Ovid's Metamorphoses (Book X, about lines 1-100) -- indeed, it seems to have been better known from Latin than Greek sources. The tale also occurs in the writings of Boethius, much philosophized (Loomis, p. 311; Burrow/Turville-Petre, p. 112), and Alfred the Great had translated Boethius into Old English. But those accounts are clearly classical in their settings, and don't have the happy ending; it's not clear how the tale was converted to a romance, or how the ending changed into the form of the romances. It has been hypothesized that there is a vanished French version, but if so, it's definitely lost (Sands, p. 185).
We do find allusions to a similar tale in the writings of Walter Map (Bennett/Gray, p. 140, who however think this may be a Celtic tale. Perhaps it was the combining of the two which gave us the happy ending. There is a French mention of the story being told by an Irish bard, according to Loomis, p. 312). Certainly the piece has been thoroughly adapted to a medieval setting (Bennett/Gray, p. 143; Loomis, p. 313, notes that the Thrace of the Greek account has been transformed into Winchester!).
To muddy matters further, there is a second Middle English version of the Orpheus tale, a Breton Lei called "King Orfew," a 604 line poem published (with a facsimile of the first page of the manuscript) on pp. 206-226 of Rumble. It is ironic that it is almost exactly the same length as the Romance. But it is far less popular, and seems to have had little literary influence.
"Sir Orfeo" is now found in three MSS, with the earliest and best, the Auchinlek MS., from about 1330; the others, Harley 3810 and Ashmole 61, are of the fifteenth century (Sisam, p. 13). It has been suggested that the Auchinlek manuscript may have been used by Chaucer (Sands, p. 185). It is sometimes suggested that another romance in that manuscript, the "Lay Le Friene," is by the same author (Sands, p. 185; this is partly because the beginning of the latter piece is quoted in the other two manuscripts of "Sir Orfeo." The "Lay Le Friene," although a Breton Lei, should not be confused with Marie of France's Lei "Le Fresne," even though both are on the same theme).
Anderson, p. 136, mentions a further speculation (praising the poet while he is at it): "The author of Sir Launfal is by tradition the same shadowy Thomas Chestre to whom was attributed the Middle English Tristan. Sir Orfeo, believed by some to be also the work of Chestre, is a beautiful and sensitive retelling of the pathetic tale of Orpheus and Eurydice."
The Orfeo poem is #3868 in the Brown and Robbins Middle English Index.
The language of this piece appears to be SW English but with some northern forms, perhaps introduced by a northern copyist; the whole is perhaps from a French or Breton original, and the translation perhaps is from the fourteenth century (Sisan, p. 13; Loomis, p. 313).
Sir Orfeo is, incidentally, one of the few Middle English romances to be generally praised by critics, for both its plot and for its well-handled poetry. Sands, e.g., says (pp. 186-187) that "few narrative poems conceal artfulness under disarming artlessness so well." Similarly Bennett/Gray comment that "Of all the English verse romances, Sir Orfeo is the one that in grace and charm, lightness and neatness, comes closest to the twelfth century lays of Marie de France, and to her conception of... the goodness... of love" (p. 138).
A full apparatus criticus for "Sir Orfeo" has been published by A. J. Bliss (1954); I have not seen it. A critical text of the romance (604 lines) is available in Sisam, pp. 14-31. Unfortunately, it is not glossed (though the book has a complete glossary by J. R. R. Tolkien). A glossed version (580 lines) is available in Sands, pp. 187-200. Tolkien, pp. 133-148, prepared modernized verse version following the same lineation as Sisam (though it is not just a crib; it's a true translation, which was published posthumously; it uses almost none of the language of the original).
Although "Sir Orfeo" is probably a sufficient source for this ballad, Lyle thinks she finds other materials which might have gone into the mix. On p. 67, she mentions the romance of "Guy of Warwick" -- another item with a theme of visiting the underworld. Lyle is right that this is an unusual theme in romance. But with Vergil and Ovid and Homer all telling tales of visits to the underworld, I don't really think it necessary to ring in "Guy." Especially since the Orpheus legend seems to have been popular in Britain; in addition to the two romances and the ballad, Robert Henryson wrote an Orpheus poem (Lyle, p. 75).
Lyle, p. 71, also notes thematic links to the Tristan legend, and to the Orpheus tale as found in Lefevre's Recueil des Hystoires Troyennes." The latter link is made particularly complicated by the fact that the Recueil was translated by Caxton, who then (in order to put it in more people's hands) printed it -- the first English printed book. If the Recueil is an influence, is it from a French source, or did an English writer know Caxton? (The difficulty with the latter hypothesis, of course, is that Caxton lived after the Auchinlek MS. was written. But it might have influenced the later stages of the transmision).
Several other ballads also derive loosely or from Middle English romance, or from the legends that underly it, examples being:
* "Hind Horn" [Child 17], from "King Horn" (3 MSS., including Cambridge Gg.4.27.2, which also contains "Floris and Blancheflour")
* "The Marriage of Sir Gawain" [Child 31], from "The Weddynge of Sir Gawe and Dame Ragnell" (1 defective MS, Bodleian MS Rawlinson C 86)
* "Blancheflour and Jellyflorice" [Child 300], from "Floris and Blancheflour" (4 MSS, including Cambridge Gg.4.27.2, which also contains "King Horn," and the Auchinlek MS, which also contains "Sir Orfeo") - RBW
BibliographyLast updated in version 2.5
File: C019

King Orpheus


See King Orfeo [Child 19] (File: C019)
GSPLITRBalladIndex.HTMLGSplit Archive&{FCCE7D5C-7BB5-4EC3-B04B-4F0350F5B7B7}cƒ ¯.”:Å