ANNO 1344.]
ORDER OF THE GARTER.
5
Knights from beyond the sea; from Flanders, from Hainault, and likewise fromBrabant, but from France there was not one.”
Although Froissart be inaccurate, in calling the number of the Knightsforty, instead of twenty-five (exclusive of the Sovereign); in saying that thechildren of Edward the Third were among the original Companions, whereasthe Black Prince only was then chosen; and in asserting that the Order wascompletely established, instead of having been merely instituted, in 1344, thesubstance of his narrative is corroborated by so many circumstances, thatlittle doubt can be entertained of its general accuracy. * * * 4
The history of King Arthur and of the Knights of the Round Table, thoughnow treated as fabulous, was considered in a very different light in the four-teenth century. Not satisfied with allowing the renown of British Chivalry torest upon their own deeds, or upon the prowess of their immediate ancestors,the nobles who adorned the court of Edward the Third, and acquired im-perishable glory for their country at Cressy and Poictiers, sought for it aloftier origin, and more extraordinary heroes than mortality affords, in the wild
Anstis, in the additions to his work (Preface, vol. I. p. xvii), says, “ The narrative of Froissard,that this Order was instituted in 1344, the 18th Edw. III., seems to receive some strength, in that it
was the current opinion, in an age not far remote from it; for Peter de Alliaco, Bishop of Cambray,who was born in the year 1350, and who himself is mentioned by Froissard, 1. 4, c. 96, concurs in thisera. Among several tracts printed under the title Sibylla Francica at Ursell, 1606, 4to is, “ PetriEpiscopi Cameracensis Dialogi ij de Querelis Franciae et Anglise et jure successionis utrorumque
Regum in regno Francise,” p. 35, wherein a Frenchman is introduced, who after complaining of theaggressions of the English, refers to the battle of Cressy, and adds, “ Demum Rex Anglus ordinavit”festum in die Georgii et Ordinem de Jarretiere cum 40 Militibus et 40 Scutiferis et Regina presente,cum 300 dominabus et domicellis inductis eadem libertate [liberatione] anno [13] 44.
4 Anstis (vol. i. pp. 97, 98) has stated various reasons to shew the probability of Froissart’s havingbeen well informed respecting the Order. He resided in England a few years after 1344; he was“ very conversant with the English Court and customs, and especially such as related to the Lordsin whose frequent acquaintance he lived here; he presented the first part of his History to QueenPhilippa, (who, according to his statement, was present at the first Feast,) and after her death, hecontinued it at the instance of Sir Robert de Namur, who is said to have been elected a Com-panion, about the 43rd Edw. III. 1369. Hence, Anstis justly observes, “ Under these circumstancesit appears scarce conceivable that Froissart should be guilty of such a solemn piece of indiscretion,if the same may not be termed an extreme impudence, as to dedicate an History wherein he pro-fesses to write truth, to persons of such distinguished quality, who must themselves be well apprisedof the time of this fact which must be so notorious and fresh in memory, that they as well as thenobility of that age must have immediately detected his error, and laughed at his credulity. Itwould seem an appeal in some measure to them, as vouchers for this his error, if it was one; forhere is no room to suppose he was under any temptation to mislead his readers, for the antedatingthe Order, for so little a time, cannot fall under any suspicion of an incense of flattery.”