Line 17.—"And the Monday was the terment of the Lorde Moumbrey
at the Whytte Freerys in [t]e cytte of London ys subbarbys."
Stowe also says in his account of Whitefriars: "There lay buried
also, in the middle of the new Choir, Sir John Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham, 1398." But according to all our Peerage Historians Thomas
Lord Mowbray, who was created Earl of Nottingham in 1383, did not
die in 1398, but was created Duke of Norfolk in 1397.
Line 8.—"And the same yere, the xxx day of October, the Erle of
Saulysbury was hurte." The chronicle in Vitell. A. xvi., which is here
derived from the same source as Gregory's, gives "the xxxj daye of
Octobre" as the date. As the second of November is given as the date
of his death, this is in harmony with the statement in Grafton, that he
died two days after his wound. But Monstrelet, who is followed by Hall,
states that he languished eight days; and the inquisitions post mortem,
as cited by Dugdale, find that he died on the third of November. This
date, it may be added, is given in no fewer than twenty-three different
Line 14.—"And the secunde daye of Advente there were ij heretyks
objuryd." For "daye," of course, we should read "Sonday," which is
the reading in the Vitellius MS.
Lines 19, 20.—"And the xij evyn aftyr was i-broughte unto London,
and hadde hys masse at Poulys, and hys bonys buryde at Birsham."
Owing to an omission in the MS. this sentence reads as if it referred
to Wycliffe, which is absurd. In the similar chronicle, Vitell. A. xvi.
(at f. 87) the passage stands as follows:
"And on the xijth even after the bonys of the Erle of Salisbury were
brought to London, and had his masse atte Powles; and than caried
unto the priory of Birsham, and there y-buried with his auncestours the
which were fownders therof."
Even here, however, there is a strange inconsistency, for in the preceding paragraph it is said that he was interred at St. Paul's on the
first Sunday in Advent.