‘Sutler argued the same. Lady Isolda, because of her status, was committed to trial before the King’s Bench and a jury of citizens from Westminster hastily assembled. Sutler prosecuted the case before justices Tressilian, Gavelkind and Danyel. Believe me, Brother, three of the harshest and most grim judges, an unholy Trinity who have little love for their fellow men, and women in particular, high-born ladies especially. They regarded Isolda Beaumont as hawks would a coney. Little mercy was to be expected. The case against her was compelling. She was the last to hold the goblet, the last to feed her husband. Then there was the disappearance of the goblet, the purchase of a new one and the discovery of the old one in the cesspit. On these five issues, Sutler built his case then developed it with further evidence.’
‘And Lady Isolda’s motive?’
‘Freedom, liberty and the opportunity to seize her husband’s great wealth, not to mention her involvement with Vanner.’
‘Was he indicted?’
‘Certainly. Lady Isolda was arrested on a Friday but Vanner abruptly disappeared on the Thursday beforehand. He has been put to the horn with a price on his head, dead or alive. Every skull-cap, outlaw-hunter to you, Brother, in London is searching for him.’
‘And Lady Isolda’s defence?’
‘She was advised by one of the best attorneys this side of Hell, Nicholas Falke. If rumour be true, Master Falke was deeply taken, as most men were, by Lady Isolda, but to no effect. He could protest and argue but both judge and jury thought different.’
‘And her maid?’
‘Rosamund Clifford, although very loyal to her mistress, appears to have no dealings with her in this matter. I understand she was grievously sick, confined to her bed when Sir Walter was poisoned. She was not called to give evidence by either party.’ Cranston sighed noisily. ‘In the end Lady Isolda was found guilty by a jury of her peers. I suspect those three justices delighted in passing harsh sentence on her.’
‘And the ancient punishment for a wife murdering her husband,’ Athelstan murmured, ‘is death by burning.’
‘Sine misericordia,’ Cranston agreed, ‘without mercy. All three justices insisted no gunpowder pouch be hung around her neck to hasten death. Nor could the Carnifex, the Smithfield executioner, go through the smoke to strangle her or slit her throat.’
‘There is more?’
‘Oh, yes, my good friend, much more, a veritable maze of mystery. Lady Isolda was lodged in Newgate for almost a month before her execution. She met death bravely enough. I learnt this from Lady Anne Lesures. Lady Anne is the widow of a former comrade I stood shoulder to shoulder with in France. He used the ransoms gathered there to amass wealth as an apothecary and a spicer. Adam Lesures also served with the Luciferi and returned here with Sir Walter. He died some time ago. Since then Lady Anne has devoted herself to noble causes. She is Abbess of the Order of St Dismas, a secular order which visits the city prisons and ministers to those condemned to die – she and her mute servant, Turgot, who follows her everywhere like Samson does Flaxwith. Anyway, she visited Isolda virtually every day to give her comfort.’
‘Did she believe Isolda was innocent?’
‘No.’ Cranston paused. ‘Not really. Lady Anne is shrewd – she keeps her own counsel. I do respect her. Others, however, believe Lady Isolda to be a true innocent, such as Edward Garman, who also served in the Luciferi, a former Hospitaller and now prison chaplain, appointed to Newgate by the Bishop of London. Garman may have shriven Isolda. He certainly accompanied her to execution and always believed she was innocent. Like her lawyer, Falke, he worked desperately to obtain a pardon or some form of commutation but he was crying into the dark. Gaunt was obdurate. No pardon, no mercy.’ Cranston turned in his seat and lowered his voice, ‘Brother, have you ever heard of “The Book of Fires”, or to be more precise, “The Book of Fires attributed to Mark the Greek”?’
‘Yes,’ Athelstan replied slowly. ‘Our library at Blackfriars possesses a few extracts, though not very clear ones. A greatly prized manuscript?’
‘It certainly is! That book, together with the writings of the Franciscan Roger Bacon, provides a treasury of information about gunpowder and other such combustibles. Mark the Greek in particular describes what is known as Greek, sea or water fire, supposedly invented centuries ago by Kallinikos of Heliopolis.’
‘Sir John,’ Athelstan exclaimed, ‘you have been very busy!’
‘Yes, and I will tell you why. I visited the great library in Westminster Abbey. Dominus Matthew the archivist was a treasure of information about secret manuscripts.’
‘Sir John, what were you pursuing?’
‘Beaumont had a copy of “The Book of Fires”, which went missing from his chamber either just before or after his death. He had promised to allow Gaunt’s chancery clerks to copy it for our noble Regent. We all know why Gaunt would want such information.’
‘As would others?’
‘Yes, Brother, so we come to Lady Isolda’s defence. She maintained she knew nothing about Vanner buying new cups. She could not understand why a goblet was found in the privy and believed it was placed there. She maintained that if her husband was poisoned it could have been administered by Vanner earlier in the day without her knowledge. More significantly, she maintained that her brother-in-law, Sir Henry, or Buckholt, or both, allegedly stole “The Book of Fires”, as they were secret adherents of the Great Community of the Realm and its leaders the Upright Men. She depicted Buckholt as a fervent adherent of the rebels, and Sir Henry as a rich merchant eager to appease them.’
‘A shrewd move.’ Athelstan nodded. ‘Gaunt and his henchman, Thibault, Master of Secrets, would be horrified at that.’
‘Sutler, however, openly ridiculed such an idea, as well as Lady Isolda’s attempt to argue that others, even Vanner, with whom she denied any tryst, could have been involved in her husband’s death. He dismissed her allegation that the story of the goblets was merely a pretence to entrap her.’
‘She actually argued that?’
‘Yes, as she did, time and time again, that Vanner might be the guilty party.’
‘Was any explanation offered about Vanner’s disappearance or flight? Sir John, Vanner has gone into hiding. That is proof of guilt. But of course,’ Athelstan scratched the side of his face, ‘Vanner might be guilty but that doesn’t prove that Lady Isolda was innocent and, I suppose, Sutler argued the same?’ He sipped from his cup. ‘Yes, I can see why Sutler’s prosecution held firm. He could prove everything: the goblet being handed over; Isolda making her husband drink; the goblets being exchanged; Vanner buying new ones. Did Sutler touch on the relationship between Sir Walter and his lovely young wife?’
‘Oh, there were hints but nothing serious. Questions were raised about Sir Walter’s stomach ailments. Of course, that’s a dangerous path to go down, isn’t it, Brother? Sutler could not prove Sir Walter’s belly sickness was caused by poison, whilst the intimate relationship between husband and wife is very difficult to judge. Sutler was very careful as Falke argued how there was great tenderness, friendship and cordiality between Sir Walter and his wife. Sutler replied there was no real proof for that. He let the facts speak for themselves. Lady Isolda had a great deal to gain by becoming a very rich widow, whilst the balance of proof that she murdered her husband indicates a deep malevolence, at least on her part, towards Sir Walter. If Vanner was seized and questioned, perhaps he could have helped Isolda’s case. But let’s say he has fled, Brother, and is deep in hiding; surely a trained clerk such as he would have done something to help his former lover – a letter to the justices or the sheriff?’