[69] He was a peer as duke of Burgundy, and again a peer as count-palatine of Burgundy.
[70] John, called count de Ligny, third son of John count of Brienne, brother to the count de St Pol.
[71] James de Châtillon was appointed admiral in 1408, in the room of Clugnet de Breban. He was lord of Dampierre, and son of Hugh de Châtillon, formerly master of the cross-bows.
[73] The advice which, according to Stowe, king Henry gave to the duke of Burgundy on this occasion was deserving of more attention than he was disposed to pay to it. ‘The duke of Burgoyne, desiring the king’s aid against the duke of Orliance, promised many things,--amongst the which he promised his daughter in marriage to the prince, and a great sum of gold with her. To whom the king answered: ‘We advertise you not to fight with your enemie in this case, who justly seemeth to vexe you, for the death of his father by you procured, but as much as in you lyeth endeavor yourself to mitigate the young man’s wrath, and promise to make him reasonable satisfaction, according to the advice of your friends; and if then he will not cease from persecuting you, get you into the strongest place of your dominion, and there gather such power as may be able to put off his force. If then, after this, he will make war against you, you shall have the juster occasion to fight with him,--and in such case we will shew you such favour as yee have demaunded.’ Thus there were sent over to his ayde Thomas earl of Arundell, Gilbert Umfreville earl of Angus, or earl of Kyme, sir Robert Umfreville, sir John Oldcastle, lord Cobham, sir John Grey and William Porter, with twelve hundred archers,’ &c. &c.
[74] According to the catalogue in Moreri, Arnauld de Corbie, lord of Joigny, was at this time chancellor.
[76] Q. If this is not _Umfreville_ earl of Angus and _Kyme_ (as Stowe calls him)? There was at this period no Neville earl of Kent. The only earl of Kent of that family was William Nevil lord Falconbridge, created 1461. I find this conjecture somewhat confirmed by the original, which is, ‘Ousieville comte de Kam.’ It is true, that Holinshed mentions the earls of Pembroke and of _Kent_ as being of the expedition: but he cites Monstrelet as his authority, and is therefore likely to be mistaken.