According to William Thorne, chronicler of the abbey of Saint Augustine in Canterbury, after the English prince Richard of Bordeaux came to the world in that city on January 6, 1367, A few days later the baptism of the newborn was celebrated, attended by three characters representing the Magi (the child had been born on the feast of the Epiphany of the Lord), whom the chronicler identifies as the kings of Spain, Navarre and Portugal. It was a vision that contained a powerful symbolism for a medieval audience and to which the protagonism itself gave great importance during his life. But is the story true? And, if so, who were these three kings and why were they present at the ceremony playing the role of Three Wise Men?
Although the source is relatively reliable and very close in time to the events it describes, it has traditionally been discarded not only because the King of Portugal, Pedro IV, was at that time very ill (he died on January 17, 1367), but because it was difficult for the king of Spain to be present at an event that occurred in 1366, since he did not exist as a political entity at that time. However, recent studies have raised the possibility that the event actually took place with the presence of three peninsular kings and that Thorne had made a mistake when identifying them.
To situate ourselves it is necessary to identify the protagonist of the baptism, who is none other than the future Richard II of England, son of Edward the Black Prince and Joan of Kent. If three Spanish kings were present at the baptism of the child, there must have been a powerful bond with the parents of the baptized one at that time that would justify their being at the English court at that time and lending themselves to playing such a significant role as that of the three wise men. And that's where the story begins to gain plausibility.
In various blog entries we have referred to the support that England gave the King of Castile Pedro I in the civil war for the Castilian throne that he maintained with his half-brother Enrique de Trastámara . In 1366 Pedro had been dethroned by Enrique and had sought refuge in the court of the Black Prince in the then English Gascony. And on September 23, 1366, both had signed the Treaty of Libourne by which the English undertook to help Pedro to recover the throne, in exchange for him offering the support of the Castilian fleet in the war that England maintained with France, the famous Hundred Years War. It is possible, therefore, that the king of Spain that Thorne was referring to was actually the king of Castile.
And in that treaty we are also given an answer to the question of whether the king of Navarre, whom the chronicle cites, could be present in Bordeaux at that time and linked to the Black Prince . Carlos de Navarra was involved in the negotiations that concluded in the Treaty of Libourne, because his support was necessary to ensure that when the English army and Pedro crossed the Pyrenees, the Roncesvalles pass would remain open.
And the third king? Among all the possible ones there is one that becomes a clear candidate. And for this we have to follow in the footsteps of the Anglo-Castilian army that crossed Roncesvalles and entered the Peninsula in 1367. Shortly after it would meet the forces of Enrique de Trastámara and achieve a great victory in the battle of Nájera, on April 3 of 1367. Among the contenders on the side of Pedro I and the Black Prince was a curious and little-known character, whom I learned about in a friend blog entry Tempus Fugit:Jaime IV of Mallorca. He was the son of Jaime III, King of Majorca, who had lost his throne and his life in 1349 in the battle of Llucmajor at the hands of Pedro IV the Ceremonious of Aragon, who had seized the Majorcan throne. In the complex game of alliances of the time, Pedro IV had allied himself with Enrique de Trastámara and it was natural that Jaime IV sought the support of the Aragonese enemies to recover the throne of Mallorca. And if Jaime was present in Nájera in April together with Pedro I and the Black Prince, it is natural that he was also with them in Bordeaux in January. And some sources suggest that Jaime was godfather at the baptism of Richard II.
Another argument that ratifies the credibility of the story is given by what happened in a ceremony in the English Parliament that the young Richard presided over as Prince of Wales in January 1377. In it, the bishop of Saint David called on the attendees to honor the prince as the three kings of Cologne did (referring to the Reliquary of the Magi in Cologne Cathedral, whose image heads this post). In addition, the king himself identified with the story, since among his collection of silver jewelry there were some with the names Melchor, Gaspar and Baltasar.
However, other eyewitness chroniclers of the events of the time such as Jean Froissart or Chandos who refer to the Black Prince's departure for Castile on January 11, do not mention the presence of three kings at the baptism, which would have been something worthy of note.
Another piece of information that is very illustrative in this regard is provided by the archives of King Carlos of Navarre. This was a monarch whose loyalty to the cause of Pedro I was questioned and, according to the Navarrese's own archives, he went to give guarantees to the Black Prince and began his journey on December 29, 1366. The Navarrese chronicle continues indicating that Charles caught up with the English in Bordeaux in early January 1367 and then headed south to meet Pedro I of Castile, who was in Bayonne (185 kilometers south of Bordeaux) before returning to Pamplona on January 8, 1367. 1367. Comparing these dates it is almost impossible that not only Carlos de Navarra, but also Pedro I were present in Bordeaux at the prince's baptism.
According to Jean Froissart's chronicle, Richard's birth was a rather chaotic event, with Joan of Kent upset by her husband's forthcoming departure on an uncertain adventure and that made the baptism was hastily celebrated for fear that the child would not survive long.
We must bear in mind that the Black Prince died in 1376 and that, when his father Edward III died a year later and the boy Richard II ascended the throne at only ten years old, his future on the throne did not seem very promising, especially considering that his older brother passed away when he was only twelve years old. That may be the explanation of a fable to announce a supposed divine intervention in his birth with the presence of the three wise men. It is possible that Ricardo II clung to that beautiful story, but everything seems to indicate that it is a myth constructed later.
Image| Wikimedia Commons