Book Corner: The Castle in the Wars of the Roses by Dan Spencer

The Wars of the Roses is one of the most dramatic and fascinating periods in medieval history. Much has been written about the leading personalities, bitter dynastic rivalries, political intrigues, and the rapid change of fortune on the battlefields of England and Wales. However, there is one aspect that has been often overlooked, the role of castles in the conflict.

Dan Spencer’s original study traces their use from the outbreak of civil war in the reign of Henry VI in the 1450s to the triumph of Henry VII some thirty years later. Using a wide range of narrative, architectural, financial and administrative sources, he sheds new light on the place of castles within the conflict, demonstrating their importance as strategic and logistical centres, bases for marshalling troops, and as fortresses

Dan Spencer’s book provides a fascinating contribution to the literature on the Wars of the Roses and to the study of siege warfare in the Middle Ages.

The Castle in the Wars of the Roses by Dan Spencer provides a unique perspective on that most famous of civil wars in England. Dr Spencer combines the story of the Wars of the Roses with the varied uses of the castle during the period, as defensive structures, administrative centres and homes for the nobility. Dan Spencer establishes that the castle as a military structure was still an important asset to any army and served to guard the marches of Wales and Scotland and to act as muster points for gathering armies. Castles were strong defensive structures that could be garrisoned whenever the war came too close, though as Dr Spencer highlights, permanent garrisons were rare by this time, they could provide effective defence and intimidation when needed.

I was aware of a number of sieges during the Wars of the Roses, mainly those at Dunstanburgh and Bamburgh. However, I was not aware that that was just the tip of the iceberg. According to Dan Spencer, there were 36 definite sieges and several more possible sieges – for which there is little contemporary information, so we can’t say for certain. These possible sieges include where there are written orders for a castle to be invested, but no further report of whether the siege was undertaken or the castle surrendered without a fight.

In The Castle in the Wars of the Roses, Dan Spencer argues that while the use of the castle was declining, it still played an important role in the conflict. The book is written in a narrative, chronological style, whereby Dr Spencer tells the whole story of the Wars of the Roses, but with particular focus on the siege warfare and the use and provision of castles. It is an excellent read.

The fall of Bamburgh marked the end of a four-year-long struggle for control of Northumberland. This was part of a wider dynastic conflict between the Yorkist and Lancastrian factions for control of the kingdom of England. For much of the second half of the fifteenth century these two rival houses fought a series of wars to win the English throne, which since the nineteenth century has been commonly called the Wars of the Roses. This era is without a doubt one of the most popular topics in medieval English history. Numerous books, articles, plays and films have been produced over the centuries. Looking at all sorts of aspects ranging from the dynamic personalities of key figures, such as Richard III, the causes of the conflict, its long-term legacy and the military campaigns, particularly the major battles. Given this vast output on the subject, it may be pertinent to ask why it is necessary for yet another book to be written. The answer is that one important area has been almost wholly neglected: the role of the castle in the Wars of the Roses.

Why has this been the case? One explanation is the perception that the campaigns of the Wars of the Roses were dominated by decisive battles, in which castles played a very minor role. This argument does have some substance. The era was unusual for the frequency with which significant battles took place. Nevertheless, this does not tell the whole story. As we will see, there were many campaigns in which castles were used in a significant way. Similarly, the late Middle Ages has been characterised as a period in which castles were in a state of transition and decline, in which their traditional role as fortresses was increasingly no longer necessary due to changes in warfare and society.

While there are many books on the Wars of the Roses, none have looked at the conflict in quite this way before. Dan Spencer covers every aspect of the conflict and the actions of the leading players involved, including Henry VI, Edward IV, Warwick the Kingmaker, Richard III, etc. While the major battles are also covered, the spotlight is on the castles, their role in the conflict ad the tactics used to successfully prosecute a siege. Dan Spencer’s impeccable research means that he can build a deep understanding of the layout of each castle, the provisions it stored and the garrison that manned it.

The Castle in the Wars of the Roses analyses not only the strength of a castle, but the prosecution of these sieges and the reasons for their success or failures. Using primary sources, archaeological evidence and his own extensive experience of castles, Dan Spencer has produced a fascinating book that can only add to our knowledge of the Wars of the Roses. The text is supported by wonderful colour images of the castles mentioned, and detailed floor plans. It is whole knew way of looking at the conflict, providing a freesh perspective.

Well written in an engaging narrative, The Castle in the Wars of the Roses is a fascinating, addictive read. And a perfect Christmas present!

The Castle in the Wars of the Roses is available from Amazon or direct from Pen & Sword Books (with 30% off in December!)

About the author:

Dr Dan Spencer has made a special study of late medieval warfare, focusing in particular on gunpowder artillery and castles. Recent publications include The Castle at War in Medieval England and Wales and Royal and Urban Gunpowder Weapons in Late Medieval England. To find out more visit danspencer.info or follow him on Twitter and Instagram @Gunpowderdan.

*

My Books

Ladies of Magna Carta: Women of Influence in Thirteenth Century England  looks into the relationships of the various noble families of the 13th century, and how they were affected by the Barons’ Wars, Magna Carta and its aftermath; the bonds that were formed and those that were broken. It is now available from Pen & SwordAmazon and from Book Depository worldwide.

Also by Sharon Bennett Connolly:

Silk and the Sword: The Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066.  Available now from Amazon,  Amberley Publishing, Book Depository.

Heroines of the Medieval World tells the stories of some of the most remarkable women from Medieval history, from Eleanor of Aquitaine to Julian of Norwich. Available now from Amberley Publishing and Amazon and Book Depository.

*

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter and Instagram.

©2020 Sharon Bennett Connolly 

Conisbrough Castle – its Life and History

ConisbroughCastle

Growing up near Conisbrough Castle, South Yorkshire, I did not know much about its history. It was rather underrated. We always thought it was just a bland old place – it was great for exploring and rolling down the hills and playing hide and seek in the inner bailey. However, being so far from London, the centre of power,  it didn’t seem to have much history or national importance. The most famous thing about it was that it was used as the Saxon castle in Sir Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe.

The castle’s early history

English Heritage have spent a lot of money on it in recent years. When I worked there in the early 1990s there was no roof, it was open to the elements, with green moss on the walls and erosion caused by acid rain. And there was just a very narrow walkway around the inside of the keep. It was just a shell. Now it has a roof, floors on every level, sensitive lighting, information videos on each floor and a fantastic little visitor centre with a small museum. It looks so much better (although I still wouldn’t want to stand on the battlements on a windy day like today).

020
Conisbrough’s hexagonal keep

When I joined the castle team as a volunteer tour guide, I started looking into the actual history of the Castle, seeing it more for what it has been, than for the visitor attraction it is now. Instead of being a forgotten, unimportant little castle in the middle of nowhere, Conisbrough Castle comes to life through the history it has been a part of, and the people who have called it home.

According to Geoffrey of Monmouth, in his Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), Conisbrough was founded as ‘Conan’s Burg’ by a British leader called Conan. It was said to have later belonged to Ambrosius Aurelianus, a candidate for the legendary King Arthur. As Geoffrey of Monmouth says, Ambrosius captured the Saxon leader Hengist, once a mercenary for Vortigern, at the battle of ‘Maisbeli.’ And brought him to his stronghold at Conisbrough. Hengist was then beheaded on Ambrosius’ orders and buried at the entrance to the castle of ‘Cunengeburg’, that is Conisbrough. A small hill, locally called Hengist’s Mound, is in the grounds of the outer bailey.

What we know, for certain, is that by 1066 the Honour of Conisbrough belonged to Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex and later King Harold II of England, though there is no evidence that he ever visited. On a prominent, steep hill, the castle guards the main road between Sheffield and Doncaster to the east, and the navigable River Don to the north.

010 (2)
The kitchen range in the inner bailey

Following Harold’s defeat and death at the Battle of Hastings, and shortly after the Harrying of the North of 1068 Conisbrough was given to one of William the Conqueror’s greatest supporters, William de Warenne. Warenne was a cousin of Duke William of Normandy and fought alongside him at the Battle of Hastings. He was given land in various counties, including Lewes in Sussex and Conisbrough in Yorkshire; and although he developed his property at Castle Acre in Norfolk, little was done at Conisbrough. In those days the castle itself was little more than a wooden motte and bailey construction, surrounded by wooden palisades and earthworks.

*

A thoroughly modern Castle

It was not until the reign of Henry II that the Castle began to take on the majestic appearance we know today. Conisbrough came into the hands of Hamelin Plantagenet, illegitimate half-brother of King Henry II; Hamelin had married the de Warenne heiress, Isabel, 4th Countess of Warenne and Surrey, and became 4th Earl of Warenne and Surrey by right of his wife.

029
Fireplace in the bedchamber in the keep

It was Hamelin who built the spectacular hexagonal keep that we can see today. The stairs to the keep were originally accessed across a drawbridge, which could be raised in times of attack. The ground floor was used for storage, with a basement storeroom below, housing the keep’s well,  and accessed by ladder.

The first floor holds the great chamber, or solar, with a magnificent fireplace and seating in the glass-less window. This is where the Lord would have conducted business, or entertained important guests. Henry II, King John and King Edward II are known to have visited Conisbrough: King John even issued a charter from Conisbrough Castle in March 1201.

030
The chapel’s vaulted ceiling

The second floor would have been sleeping quarters for the lord and lady. Both the solar and the bedchamber have impressive fireplaces, garderobes and a stone basin, which would have had running water delivered from a rainwater cistern on the roof.

On this floor, also, built into one of the keep’s buttresses is the family’s private chapel. This may well have been the chapel endowed by Hamelin and Isabel in 1189-90, and dedicated to St Philip and St James (although there was a, now lost, second chapel in the inner bailey to which the endowment could refer). The chapel is well-decorated, with quatrefoil windows, elaborate carving on the columns and a wonderful vaulted ceiling.

036
Chapel carvings

There is a small sacristy for the priest, just to the left of the door, with another basin for the priest’s personal use, and cavities for storing the vestments and altar vessels.

The winding stairs, built within the keep’s thick walls, give access to each successive level and, eventually, to the battlements, with a panoramic view of the surrounding area.

These battlements also had cisterns to hold rainwater, a bread oven and weapons storage; and wooden hoardings stretching out over the bailey to aid in defence. The keep and curtain walls – which were built slightly later – were of a state-of-the art design in their day. The barbican, leading into the inner bailey, had 2 gatehouses and  a steep passageway guarded by high walls on both sides; an attacking force would have been defenceless against missiles from above, with nowhere to run in the cramped corridor.

041
View from the battlements

Although the encircling moat is dry (the keep is built high on a hill), all the detritus from the toilets and kitchens drained into it; another little aid to defence – imagine having to attack through that kind of waste?

None of the buildings in the inner bailey have survived, although you can see their stone foundations in the ground. Along one wall there were kitchens and service rooms leading into a great hall, with a raised dais at the far end, and a solar and living quarters above. Another range of buildings attached to the western wall also held living quarters, possibly for the garrison and any guests. There’s even a small jail cell just to the side of the barbican.

Although Conisbrough is not a large castle, the extensive range of buildings, the magnificent decorations of the fireplaces and chapel, suggest it would have been impressive in its day; and reflects the importance of the castle’s owners and occupants.

*

The Castle’s Residents

008 (2)
The inner bailey

The Warenne Earls of Surrey were close to the crown, and the centre of government, for the best part 3 centuries. The daughter of the 2nd Earl, Ada, had married the heir to the Scots throne and was mother to 2 Scottish kings; Malcolm the Maiden and William the Lion.

Hamelin’s son and heir, William, 5th Earl of Warenne and Surrey, married Maud Marshal, daughter of the Greatest knight, William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke and Regent during Henry III’s  infancy. A cousin of King John, William was deeply involved in the Magna Carta crisis, though not always in support of his cousin. Their son John, the 6th Earl, was Edward I’s lieutenant in Scotland and beat the Scots at the Battle of Dunbar in 1296, though he had been defeated by William Wallace at Stirling Bridge the following year. John’s daughter, Isabella, married John Balliol, King of Scots, and was mother to Edward Balliol, another Scottish king. John’s sister, Isabel, married Hugh d’Aubigny, 5th Earl of Arundel, and is remembered as the countess who stood up to Henry III, invoking Magna Carta, when he appropriated land that was rightfully hers.

The 7th – and last – Warenne earl, John, was a colourful character who lived through some of the most dramatic events of English history; the reign of Edweard II. John was the grandson of the 6th earl; his father, William de Warenne, had diedbeen killed in a tournament at Croydon, in December 1286, when John was just 6 months old. Although he was married to Joan of Bar, a granddaughter of Edward I, John lived openly with his mistress and made several unsuccessful attempts to obtain a divorce from his wife. A private feud with Thomas Earl of Lancaster saw John arrange the kidnapping of Earl Tomas’ wife, Alice de Lacey, possibly in retaliation for Lancaster standing in the way of Surrey’s longed-for divorce. The result was the 1st – and only – siege of Conisbrough Castle.

Lancaster sent forces to seize the Warenne castles at Sandal and Conisbrough. His men found the gates of Conisbrough closed to them. The castle was defended by only six men, including the town miller and three brothers, Thomas, Henry and William Greathead, who were men-at-arms. The siege lasted less than two hours and the defenders appear to have relinquished the castle after apparently putting up a token resistance; the three brothers were fined for drawing blood. The chapel in the castle’s inner bailey may have been damaged in the brief altercation, as the following year, Lancaster sent orders to his castellan at Conisbrough, John de Lassell, to ‘repailler la couverture de la chapele de Conynggesburgh.’1

028
The bedchamber in the keep, with wash basin and stairway leading to the garderobe and battlements

The last Earl of Surrey died without heirs in 1347 and Conisbrough passed to John de Warenne’s godson, Edmund of Langley, fourth son of Edward III. Edmund’s wife Isabella of Castile gave birth to her 3rd child, Richard Earl of Cambridge (also known as Richard of Conisbrough) at Conisbrough, possibly in the lavish bedchamber within the keep itself. Cambridge had the dubious reputation of being England’s poorest Earl and was executed following his involvement in the Southampton plot against Henry V; however, he is remembered to history as the grandfather of the Yorkist kings, Edward IV and Richard III.

Following Cambridge’s execution for treason in 1415 his 2nd wife, Maud Clifford, made Conisbrough her principal residence until her death in 1446. Maud entertained her Clifford family here and her great-nephew and godson John Clifford, known to Yorkists as the Butcher of Skipton was born there in 1435. In a strange twist of fate, John Clifford is the one accused of murdering the Earl of Cambridge’s 17-year-old grandson Edmund, Earl of Rutland, following the Lancastrian’s defeat of the Yorksists at the Battle of Wakefield on 30 December 1460. Maud died at the castle in August 1446 and is buried in Roche Abbey, about 10 miles from her home.

The castle underwent repairs during the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III, in 1482-3, but by 1538 a survey revealed the it had fallen into neglect and decay, with parts of the curtain wall having slipped down the embankment.

From then on, although it has had successive owners until it came under the protection of English Heritage, Conisbrough Castle has been a picturesque ruin, a wonderful venue for picnics and exploring its many hidden treasures.

Conisbrough Castle from the outer bailey

*

All photographs are copyright to Sharon Bennett Connolly, 2015.

Footnote:

1 Hunter’s South Yorkshire ii; Deanery of Doncaster ii quoted in F. Royston Fairbank, The Last Earl of Warenne and Surrey, and the Distribution of His Possessions, Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, p. 213

*

Sources:

Further reading: East Yorkshire Charters Volume 8: The Honour of Warenne, edited by William Farrer & Charles Travis Clay; English Heritage Guidebook for Conisbrough Castle by Steven Brindle and Agnieszka Sadrei; English Tourist Board’s English Castles Almanac; http://www.kristiedean.com/butcher-skipton; On the Trail of the Yorks by Kristie Dean; F. Royston Fairbank, The Last Earl of Warenne and Surrey, and the Distribution of His Possessions, Yorkshire Archaeological Journal.

*

My Books

Ladies of Magna Carta: Women of Influence in Thirteenth Century England  looks into the relationships of the various noble families of the 13th century, and how they were affected by the Barons’ Wars, Magna Carta and its aftermath; the bonds that were formed and those that were broken. It is now available from Pen & SwordAmazon and from Book Depository worldwide.

Also by Sharon Bennett Connolly:

Silk and the Sword: The Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066.  Available now from Amazon,  Amberley Publishing, Book Depository.

Heroines of the Medieval World tells the stories of some of the most remarkable women from Medieval history, from Eleanor of Aquitaine to Julian of Norwich. Available now from Amberley Publishing and Amazon and Book Depository.

*

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter and Instagram.

©2020 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Guest Post: Anne FitzHugh Lovell by Michele Schindler

Today it is a pleasure to welcome Francis Lovell’s biographer Michele Schindler to the blog, with an article about Lovell’s wife, Anne FitzHugh Lovelle. Michele’s new book, Lovell Our Dogge, is out now. Over to Michele:

The discovery of Richard III`s remains in a car park in Leicester, seven years ago, has caused a surge of interest not only in the life of this controversial monarch, but also in his contemporaries. A particularly positive trend during these last years has been the interest showed in the women in Richard`s life, in the Wars of the Roses period in general. Whereas most of them have been typecast, if not outright ignored, over the last few centuries, many talented authors have focused on their lives, their influence, their politicial opinions, showing the fully rounded personalities they have been denied for so long.

Minster Lovell

Sadly, however, one influential woman has been strangely excempt from this trend. While her contemporaries have finally been allowed to emerge from the mists of history, Anne Lovell has not been given any attention. Ignored in history books, maligned in fiction, Anne`s importance in life has been all but forgotten.

Her life did not begin in a way that promised anything but rich and comfortable obscurity. Born as the third daughter and fourth child of Henry FitzHugh, 5th Baron FitzHugh, and his wife Alice Neville in 1460, Anne`s future probably seemed predictable, comprising of marriage to a member of the gentry or lower-ranking nobility and motherhood.

At least, this appears to have been what her parents were planning for her. In February 1465, when Anne was not more than barely five years old at the most, they married her to the then eight-year-old Francis Lovell, who had become Baron Lovell only around five weeks earlier after his father`s sudden death. It was a marriage made possible by Anne`s uncle Richard, Earl of Warwick, and would doubtlessly have been seen as a good match for the little girl.

It cannot be said how much Anne and Francis saw of each other in the first years of their marriage. It is known, however, that it was in the summer of 1466 that Anne`s mother-in-law, Joan Beaumont died, leaving Francis and his sisters Joan and Frideswide full orphans. After their mother`s death, it seems the girls were raised together with Anne and her siblings in her parents` household.

It is probable that during this time, Anne knew her sisters-in-law far better than her husband, who did not live in the same household she did. It was only some years later that he seems to have started living in her parents` household,  but it is known that by 10th September 1470, he was definitely there, for he is included, together with Anne, her siblings and his sisters, in a pardon granted to Henry FitzHugh for his rebellion that year. It is one oft her very few early mentions of Anne in the sources, though it does not say anything about her personally. Only ten years old when the pardon was issued, her inclusion being a nominal one, not indicative of any of her actions.

The next mention of Anne found in contemporary sources is from 1473, by which time quite a lot in her life had changed. Now thirteen, she had lost her father the year before and seen her brother Richard become Baron FitzHugh. Though her father`s death meant that she and her siblings were the king`s wards, it seems that their mother Alice, had been allowed to keep custody of them, and in the summer of 1473, she and her children, Anne among them,  joined the prestigious Corpus Christi Guild in York.

FitzHugh Arms

An interesting fact about this is that Anne`s husband, Francis, was present then as well and joined the guild with Anne and her family. This suggests Francis stayed with the FitzHughs regularly until Anne was old enough to be his wife in more than name, perhaps to give Anne the chance to get to know him, but there is no way to be certain. Nor do we know exactly when Anne was considered old enough, though some guesswork can be made. Francis made sure his sisters were not married before they were sixteen. It seems likely that he and Anne therefore also delayed cohabition and consummation until she had reached that age.

There evidence that this was also the age that Anne began living together with Francis, such as a letter written by Elizabeth Stonor in early March 1477. This letter refers to her and Francis, clearly as the Stonors`  Oxfordshire neighbours. The context makes it clear that their relationship, while friendly, was still comparatively new and uncertain, which would fit perfectly with the Lovells, aged 20 and 16, first moving into Francis`s ancestral home of Minster Lovell Hall together around half a year before the letter was written.

The letter also contains an interesting minor mention of Anne, as the recipient of a present, like her husband, to win their good will. This indicates that the Stonors knew, or at least assumed, that Anne held some sway over her husband or meant something to him, as well as that she held some influence of her own, and that her friendship as well as his was worth cultivating.

Sadly, as so much of Anne`s life, evidence about her in the following years is scarce. She often visited her mother, usually together with her husband. Quite possibly, she also often saw her sisters, both of whom named their first daughter after Anne, and her brothers as well.

Even if she did not, she definitely saw her older brother Richard at court on 4th January 1483, as he acted as one of Anne`s husbands sponsors when he was created a viscount and Anne became a viscountess, and event that must have been splendid for her.

It was the beginning of a steep career for her husband and following events would catapult Anne, too, more into the limelight than she had been until that point. Only four months later, King Edward IV died and six months later, Edward`s brother Richard had become king, in a way that remains controversial to this day. Since the new king was her husband`s closest friend, he was favoured a lot, which was to reflect on Anne as well.

It is known that when Richard became king, Anne was present for his coronation. She was in the new queen`s train, like her mother Alice and older sister Elizabeth, and like them and several other ladies of high standing, she was given “a long gown of blue velvet with crimson satin” and “one gown of crimson velvet and white damask” for the festivities.

Unlike her mother and Elizabeth, Anne was not made a lady-in-waiting to Queen Anne, who was her first cousin, and unlike them, she does not seem to have been favoured in any other way by the new queen. In fact, it seems that after the coronation, she was not ever present in her household, which means that her presence at the coronation had been an exception made for the special occasion.

As to why Anne did not join her mother and sister in becoming a favour lady of the queen, we can once more only speculate. It is possible, of course, that the two women simply did not like each other. However, had Anne wished to be a lady-in-waiting, it is almost impossible Queen Anne could have denied her this, as she was the wife of one of the most important men in the government. It is therefore most likely Anne herself decided that she was not interested in the position, though the reasons for this must remain lost to history.

Lovell Our Dogge by Michele Schindler

Anne appears to have chosen to remain close to her husband whenever possible, which would mean she was at court often, and witnessed a lot of the events that remain so controversial to this day. Her opinions on them can never be known, but it seems that at the very least, she did not dislike Richard III.

Richard`s reign, famously, was not to last long, and within only two years of his accession, he was faced with an invasion, by an exiled Lancastrian earl named Henry Tudor. He employed Anne`s husband, among many others, to help him ward off this invasion. Perhaps with the danger of this task in mind, on 10th June 1485 Francis Lovell created an indenture in which he arranged for Anne to receive several manors in the event of his death, not just to keep for the rest of her life, but to own and be able to pass on to her descendants after her death. This was an unusual arrangement, and not at all one he would have needed to make, indicating that Anne was priced by her husband.

The fact that this arrangement would have enabled her to pass these manors on to her descandants also shows up an oddity. It is certain that Anne never had a child by Francis, yet even after what were likely nine years of living as man and wife, he does not seem to have at all blamed her for it, or, as can be seen from the indenture, even doubted she could have children. Since this arrangement could have disadvantaged any children Anne had by him, giving their half-siblings she potentially could have had by another man after Francis`s death a claim to these manors, it seems he thought or knew that their childlessness was his fault, though there is no telling why.

What Anne thought of this is, as always, up for speculation, but it does seem that she did not hold it against her husband. Nor does she seem to have held it against her husband that when Richard III was killed in battle, he chose not to accept the newly made Henry VII`s pardon. It is of course possible that she would have wished for him to do the same her brother Richard FitzHugh did, accept Henry VII, but once Francis`s decision decision was made, she supported it.

In march 1486, less than a year after Henry`s accession, Francis started a rebellion with two supporters, the brothers Humphrey and Thomas Stafford. It was a dangerous but not well thought-out undertaking, probably born more of desperation than any political thought, and not surprisingly, it failed. The brothers Stafford were captured and faced the consequences of their actions, but Francis was never caught, which seems to have been at least partly because Anne helped him. After the failure of the rebellion, the Countess of Oxford relayed information where Francis was hiding, which turned out to be inaccurate. Shortly afterwards, Anne`s brother Richard was stripped of several offices and the whole FitzHugh family, Anne included, watched with suspicion by the new government. Since Countess Margaret was Anne`s aunt and quite close to her mother, it is certainly far from impossible that the faulty intelligence where Francis was hiding came from Anne.

Anne remained under suspicion, and perfectly uncaring of the fact, for at least the next year. Famously, in 1487, with the support of Margaret of York, Dowager Duchess of Burgundy and John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, Francis started another rebellion in 1487, which would go down in history as the Lambert Simnel uprising. It was far better planned than the rebellion of 1486 had been, and once more, Anne appears to have been in contact with her husband and to have supported him.

In a letter to John Paston written on 16th May 1487, Sir Edmund Bedingfeld warned him that there were rumours he had met with “Lady Lovell”, and cautions him that he should act wisely about this rumour. Bedingfield does not spell out why he considers that such a meeting would be unthinkable, apparently certain Paston would know. Since only three months earlier, Paston had been chided by the Earl of Oxford, one of Henry`s closest men, for accidentally passing on wrong information regarding Francis`s whereabouts, it might very well be that Anne was suspected, or even known, to have once more deliberately spread bad intelligence. It can naturally not be proved today, but it certainly is remarkable that two people connected with Anne were provided with wrong information about Francis`s whereabouts at moments crucial for his escape.  

It is obvious that the rebels, while in Ireland and Burgundy, must have had a contact in England, as they when they were landed on Piel Island in June 1487, they were already awaited by supporters. There is some evidence that this supporter in England was in fact Anne, and it seems that after Henry VII`s men had won the battle, she was surreptiously investigated. But whatever she did, it was apparently never proved, for Henry VII`s government enacted no punitive measures against her.

Interestingly, Anne does not seem to have been afraid of being punished, or else her concern for Francis overrode her fear, for in 1488, she was looking for her husband. We know this from another letter to John Paston, this one from Anne`s mother, in which Alice FitzHugh mentions that Anne was looking for Francis, supported by unnamed “benevolers“. For this purpose, she had send one of Francis`s men and fellow rebels, Edward Franke, to look for him, but he had been unsuccessful.

What is especially intriguing about this is that  that Edward Franke was himself a traitor at that point, and knowing of his whereabouts without reporting them was treason in itself. It speaks volumes about Anne`s feelings for her husband that she did not care for the danger to herself when trying to find out what had happened to him. It is also an indication that she was courageous, and determined to find the truth.

The mention of the “benevolers”, whom she seems to have trusted and who seem to have supported her in this risky undertaking, appear to show that she was a well-liked woman who had several close, trusted friends.

We do not know if Anne ever found out what happened to her husband. It seems that sometime before  December 1489, she gave up looking, as we do know that by then, she had taken a religious vow, for when Henry VII`s government granted her an annuity of 20 pounds then, she was called “our sister in God”. It means that at the age of 29 years at the most, Anne was certain she did not want to marry another time. Though of course her marriage prospects were diminished significantly due to her being a traitor`s widow, she could have found someone interested in her family connections, or even married for affection, but chose not to. Again, it can be taken as an indicator of feelings of affection for Francis.

We do not know what sort of vow she took, nor do we know what happened to her after that. The last mention of her in any source is in a second attainder passed against Francis in 1495, at which time she was spoken of as still alive. She might have died in 1498, but was definitely dead by January 1513.

Huge thanks to Michele for such a fabulous post!

About the author:

Michele Schindler is a language teacher, teaching German and English as second languages. Before that, she studied at Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, reading history with a focus on mediaeval studies, and English Studies. In addition to English and German, she speaks French, and read Latin.

Links to Michele Schindler’s book, Lovell Our Dogge: Amazon UK; Amazon US.

Links to Michele’s social media:

Facebook; Twitter

*

My Books

Silk and the Sword: The Women of the Norman Conquest

From Emma of Normandy, wife of both King Cnut and Æthelred II to Saint Margaret, a descendant of Alfred the Great himself, Silk and the Sword: the Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066.  Available now from Amazon UK,  Amberley Publishing, Book Depository and Amazon US.

Heroines of the Medieval World

Telling the stories of some of the most remarkable women from Medieval history, from Eleanor of Aquitaine to Julian of Norwich, Heroines of the Medieval World,  is available now on kindle and in paperback in the UK from from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon, in the US from Amazon and worldwide from Book Depository.

*

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter and Instagram.

©2019 Sharon Bennett Connolly and Michele Schindler

The First Marriage of Katherine Parr

Katherine Parr

We often hear the story that Katherine Parr was used to marriage to older men when she accepted the proposal of Henry VIII in 1543. Her second husband, Lord Latimer, was a widower with young children and twenty years older than his bride. And her first husband, it has often been said was a man much older in years. However, this story has arisen from a case of mistaken identity, between a grandfather and grandson of the same name, Edward Burgh.

Katherine Parr’s first husband was Edward Burgh (pronounced Borough) of Gainsborough in Lincolnshire. And Katherine’s early biographers appear to have assumed that this was Edward Burgh senior, Lord Burgh from 1496 to his death in 1528.

The Burgh family were descended from Hubert de Burgh, 1st Earl of Kent and Justiciar for King John and Henry III. Hubert had even been married, briefly, to King John’s first, discarded wife, Isabel of Gloucester. The first Thomas Burgh had fought at Agincourt and married Elizabeth Percy, a co-heiress of a junior branch of the mighty Percy family, the Earls of Northumberland. It was through Elizabeth Percy that the manor house at Gainsborough came into the Burgh family, inherited from her father; she then left the estate to her son Thomas (II) Burgh, Baron  Gainsborough, on her death in 1455.

Thomas (II) Burgh was a trusted Yorkist, named sheriff of Lincoln in 1460 and, later, an Esquire of the Body for King Edward IV. By the end of 1462 he had been knighted and was a member of the Privy Council. By 1464 he had married a wealthy widow Margaret, dowager Lady Botreaux and daughter of Lord Thomas Ros. It was Sir Thomas Burgh who, along with Thomas Stanley, rescued Edward IV from his imprisonment in Middleham Castle by the Earl of Warwick.

The sacking of Burgh’s manor house at Gainsborough was the opening move of the rebellion of Richard, Lord Welles, in 1470, which eventually saw Edward IV escaping to Flanders and the brief readeption of Henry VI; Edward IV recovered his kingdom in 1471, with the Battle of Tewkesbury, and Henry VI’s mysterious death in the Tower of London just days later, putting an end to Lancastrian hopes. On Edward IV’s death, Sir Thomas had initially supported the succession of his brother, Richard III, but switched his allegiance to Henry Tudor shortly after King Richard visited the Sir Thomas’s Hall at Gainsborough. What had been said to make this staunch Yorkist transfer his support to a Lancastrian pretender, we can only guess….

Gainsborough Old Hall

In 1496, Thomas was succeeded as Baron Gainsborough by his son, Edward Burgh, who married Anne Cobham, daughter of Sir Thomas, 5th Baron Cobham of Starborough, when he was 13 and she was just 9 years old. It was from this marriage that the Burgh’s would inherit Starborough Castle.

Although he won his knighthood on the battlefield at Stoke in 1487, and was a Member of Parliament for Lincoln in 1492, Edward appears to have been less politically capable than his father. He soon fell foul of King Henry VII, whether it was because of the fact he associated with those the king distrusted, or due to early signs of mental illness, in December 1496, Edward was forced into a legal bond where he was obliged to present himself to the king wherever and whenever it was demanded, and to vow to do his subjects no harm.¹ He was even remanded to the custody of the Lord Chamberlain and had to seek royal permission if he wanted to leave court for any reason. For a time, he was incarcerated in the Fleet Prison, but managed to escape, despite his promise and financial guarantee not to; an action which put him in thousands of pounds of debt to the king.

From his mother, Margaret de Ros, it seems Edward had inherited a mental illness, one which also affected his Ros cousins, Sir George Tailboys and Lord Ros of Hamlake. As a result, in 1509, ‘distracted of memorie’, he was declared a lunatic.² His wife died in 1526 and he died in 1528, never quite recovering his wits. He was succeeded as Baron Burgh of Gainsborough by his son, Thomas (III).

In 1496, aged just 8-years-old, Thomas (III) had married Agnes Tyrwhitt. The marriage had been arranged by his grandfather, Thomas (II) and gave the younger Thomas useful contacts within Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, contacts he would need to counteract the damaging effects of his father’s mental illness and royal disfavour. Thomas (III) pursued a dual career, combining service as a justice of the peace in Lindsey with his service at court. In 1513 he was knighted on the battlefield of Flodden, the same field on which James IV of Scotland met his death. He was Sheriff of Lincoln in 1518-19 and 1524-25. He was appointed Anne Boelyn’s Lord Chamberlain in May 1533, and held the middle of the queen’s train at her coronation. He was also one of the twenty-six peers who sat at Anne’s trial in 1536.

Thomas (III) and his wife had as many as 12 children. The eldest of which was Edward, who died in 1533. It was this Edward who was the 1st husband of Katherine Parr, a marriage that had been arranged in 1529 by Sir Thomas and Katherine’s widowed mother, Maud Parr; her husband, Thomas Parr of Kendal, had died in 1517. Maud had taken it upon herself to arrange her daughter’s future. After a failed proposal to marry Katherine to Henry Scrope, the son of Lord Scrope of Bolton, due to the prospective groom’s lack of enthusiasm, Maud turned to another of her late husband’s relatives and arranged for Katherine to marry Edward.

Young Edward was of a similar age to his wife, not the old man as was stated in Katherine’s early biographies, when he was mistaken for his grandfather. Katherine was 17 at the time of the marriage, with Edward in his early twenties. It is impossible not to muse on how life could have been so different for Katherine, had this first marriage proved longer-lasting.

The great hall of Gainsborough Old Hall viewed from the solar

Sir Thomas, however, was renowned for his violent outbursts and wild rages (possibly due to the inherited mental instability in the family) and had a tyrannical control over his family. The first two years of the marriage, spent at Sir Thomas’s Hall at Gainsborough, was a miserable time for Katherine. She wrote, regularly, to her mother of her unhappiness and it seems the situation was only resolved following a visit by Maud Parr, who persuaded Sir Thomas to allow Edward and Katherine to move to their own, smaller, house at Kirton-in-Lindsey.

We don’t know whether Edward was a sickly individual (he may have inherited his grandfather’s mental illness), or whether or not he succumbed to a sudden illness, but their happiness was short-lived, as he died in the spring of 1533. Having no children, Katherine was left with little from the marriage, and, with her mother having died the previous year, and with her siblings in no position to assist her, she was virtually alone in the world. It was possibly as a remedy to her isolation that Katherine married her second husband, John Neville, 3rd Baron Latimer, who was twenty years her senior, in the 1534. There is no record that Katherine served any of Henry VIII’s queens. Her first appearance at court seems to be in 1542, when she became a lady-in-waiting in Mary Tudor’s household, before she caught the King’s eye.

Katherine had not forgotten her time with the Burgh family, however, and when she became queen Katherine paid a pension from her own purse to her former sister-in-law, Elizabeth Owen, widow of her husband’s younger brother, Thomas. Poor Elizabeth had been accused of adultery, during her husband’s lifetime, by her domineering father-in-law, Sir Thomas, and her children were declared illegitimate by a private Act of Parliament in 1542. Although, it does appear that Thomas had a partial change of heart before his death in 1550, as his will included a bequest for ‘700 marks towards the preferment and marriage of Margaret, daughter of Dame Elizabeth Burgh, late wife to Sir Thomas my son, deceased …’ ³

Gainsborough Old Hall

Sir Thomas, Baron Burgh of Gainsborough, was eventually succeeded by his third surviving son, William, born in the early 1520s. He married Katherine Fiennes de Clinton, daughter of Edward Fiennes de Clinton – the future Earl of Lincoln – and Elizabeth (Bessie) Blount, a former mistress of Henry VIII and mother of the king’s illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset.

Lord Latimer died on 2 March 1543 and Katherine became Queen of England when she married Henry VIII on 12 July the same year. Her marriage to the king would last less than 4 years and ended with Henry’s death on 28 January 1547. In May 1547 Katherine secretly married her 4th and final husband, Sir Thomas Seymour, brother of her predecessor as queen, Jane Seymour, and uncle of King Edward VI. She died at Sudeley Castle on 5 September 1548, having given birth to a daughter, Mary, 6 days earlier. She was buried in the chapel at Sudeley on the same day. Her daughter was given into the custody of Katherine Willoughby, Duchess of Suffolk, but disappeared from history whilst still a toddler.

*

Footnotes: ¹ ² & ³ Gainsborough Old Hall, Extended Guide Book by Sue Allen

Sources: Gainsborough Old Hall, Extended Guide Book by Sue Allen; In Bed with the Tudors by Amy Licence; oxforddnb.com; The Life and Times of Henry VIII by Robert Lacey; England Under the Tudors by Arthur D Innes; The Earlier Tudors 185-1558 by JD Mackie; Elizabeth’s Women by Tracy Borman; Henry VIII: King and Court by Alison Weir; In the Footsteps of the Six Wives of Henry VIII by Sarah Morris and Natalie Grueninger; Ladies-in-Waiting: Women who Served at the Tudor Court by Victoria Sylvia Evans; The Life and Times of Henry VII by Neville Williams; The Six Wives and Many Mistresses of Henry VIII: The Women’s Stories by Amy Licence; Tudorplace.com; John Leland Leland’s itinerary in England and Wales 1535-43 edited by L Toulmin Smith (1906-10); Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII 1509-47 edited by JS Brewer, James Gairdner and RH Brodie, HMSO London 1862-1932; Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry VIII from November MDXIX to December MDXXXII edited by Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas 1827.

*

My books

Heroines of the Medieval World tells the stories of women, famous, infamous and unknown, who shaped the course of medieval history. It is available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK. It is now available in Hardback from Amazon US  and worldwide from Book Depository.

 

From Emma of Normandy, wife of both King Cnut and Aethelred II to Saint Margaret, a descendant of Alfred the Great himself, Silk and the Sword: the Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066. Silk and the Sword: the Women of the Norman Conquest will be released in the UK on 15 November 2018 and is available for pre-order on Amazon UKAmberley Publishing and Book Depository.

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.

*

©2018 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Book Corner: Edward IV by David Santiuste

Indisputably the most effective general of the Wars of the Roses, Edward IV died in his bed, undefeated in battle. Yet Edward has not achieved the martial reputation of other warrior kings such as Henry V – perhaps because he fought battles against his own people in a civil war. It has also been suggested that he lacked the personal discipline expected of a truly great commander. But, as David Santiuste shows in this perceptive and highly readable new study, Edward was a formidable military leader whose strengths and subtlety have not been fully recognized. This reassessment of Edward’s military role, and of the Wars of the Roses in which he played such a vital part, gives a fascinating insight into Edward the man and into the politics and the fighting. Based on contemporary sources and the latest scholarly research, Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses brings to life an extraordinary period of English history.

I was very happy to be asked to review Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses by historian David Santiuste. I had dipped in and out of it for my research of various characters of the period, but never had the time to sit down and read it from cover to cover. To read it with a view to review was a prime opportunity. Now, I don’t review books that I didn’t enjoy, so I do only give positive reviews.. However, if a book gets reviewed by me, it means it’s good. And Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses was brilliant. It is a fabulous, in-depth analysis of one of England’s most underrated kings.

Dealing predominantly with the first  part of Edward’s life and reign the book concentrates on his political and military skills. It analyses his personal qualities and skills as a leader and politician, while also looking at the bigger stage of the conflict that became known as the Wars of the Roses. This is not an ‘I love Edward IV’ book, but rather a balanced portrayal of the strengths and weaknesses of the charismatic king, and of the people around him.

… Perhaps surviving portraits do not do Edward justice, although observers were often impressed by his physique as much as his face. When Edward’s coffin was opened in the eighteenth century his skeleton was measured at 6 feet 3½ inches and it was broadly proportioned. Edward had a tremendous presence, of which he was keenly aware. Even later in life, when his looks had faded and he had put on weight, the Italian observer Mancini reports that Edward ‘was wont to show himself to those who wished to watch him, and seized any opportunity occasion offered of revealing his fine stature more protractedly and more evidently to onlookers.’ In 1459 Edward was still untested, but his potential was clear: Yorkist verses from the following year were to describe him as ‘Edward, Earl of March, whose fame the earth shall spread’.

Where this book shines is in the author’s portrayal of the relationship between Edward IV and Richard, Earl of Warwick. David Santiuste makes it clear that the relationship was complex and far from dominated by Warwick. He shows how Edward was able to be his own man and explains clearly how the relationship broke down, with blame on both sides, and how this relationship affected both Edward and his kingship.

Making good use of primary sources and his own vast knowledge of the era, David Santiuste presents his arguments in a clear, concise manner, stating his own opinion and discussing where facts and historians differ in a respectful, engaging style. He handles the significant moments of Edward IV’s career with great empathy and understanding, demonstrating how the king’s life, future and country were changed by his ability to make the most of events – and heavenly phenomena – thrown at him.

The Illustrated Life of Edward IV presents Edward, at the moment the parhelia appear, appealing to God for guidance, just like Paul at Damascus: ‘Lord, what will you have me do?’ Coppini had described Edward as ‘prudent and magnanimous’, but we should remember that Edward was still eighteen years old, The loss of his father and brother must have shaken him to the core. For Edward, then, this was a moment of great personal significance…..

David Santiuste displays an impressive level of understanding of fifteenth century warfare and generalship, and of the political atmosphere of the time. Every page of the book demonstrates the author’s enthusiasm for his subject and for history in general. Easily readable, enjoyable and engaging, the author avoids technical speak and draws the reader in.

This is a must-read for any fan of the Wars of the Roses, or any student of kingship and medieval history. Enjoyable and engaging, it takes the reader to the heart of the civil war which raged across England in the second half of the fifteenth century.

 

About the author:

David Santiuste teaches history at the Centre for Open Learning, University of Edinburgh. His most recent book is The Hammer of the Scots. His other publications include Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses, as well as various articles.

David’s website can be found at davidsantiuste.com, where he writes an occasional blog. You can follow him on Facebook at David Santiuste Historian or on Twitter @dbsantiuste.

Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses is available from Amazon.

*

My Book:

Heroines of the Medieval World,  is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018. It can also be ordered worldwide from Book Depository.

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.

*

©2018 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Book Corner – The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts by Matthew Lewis

The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts by Matthew Lewis

The Wars of the Roses were a series of brutal conflicts between rival branches of the Plantagenet family – the Lancastrians and the Yorkists. The wars were fought between the descendants of Edward III and are believed to stem from the deposition of the unpopular Richard II by his cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, who became Henry IV. The wars were thought to have been fought between 1455 and 1487, and they saw many kings rise and fall as their supporters fought for their right to rule.

The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts covers this dangerous and exciting period of political change, guiding us through the key events, such as the individual battles, and the key personalities, such as Richard, Duke of York, and the Earl of Warwick, known as ‘the Kingmaker’. Matthew Lewis takes us on a tour through the Wars of the Roses, fact by fact, in easy-to-read, bite-size chunks. He examines some of the most important aspects of this period, from the outbreak of the conflict at the First Battle of St Albans, to Henry VI’s insanity, and the character of Richard III and his final defeat at the hands of Henry Tudor.

What can I say? I love these little books. This book series – I have already reviewed The Anglo-Saxons in 100 Facts – is a fabulous introduction to some of the most fascinating events in history.

The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts by Matthew Lewis is a wonderful little book giving details of 100 of the most important and significant events of the Wars of the Roses. From the deposition of Richard II to the death of Cardinal Reginald Pole, arguably the last Yorkist descendant, Matthew Lewis tells the tale of the most divisive conflict in English history in an entertaining and engaging manner.

20. King Henry Could Have Died at the First Battle of St Albans

During the First Battle of St Albans, as Warwick’s archers fired at the men defending the king, Henry VI was struck by an arrow that cut him on the neck. As the fighting grew closer, the king was taken into a tanner’s shop to receive treatment and to keep him out of the way of further harm.

Benet’s Chronicle records that once the battle was won, York, Salisbury and Warwick burst into the tanner’s shop and found Henry, wounded and at their mercy. Instead of finishing off the king, as York might have done had he truly wanted the crown at this stage, Benet’s Chronicle explains that the lords fell to their knees and pledged their allegiance to the king, ‘at which he was greatly cheered’.

Henry was escorted to the comfort of the abbey to continue his treatment and, although he was dismayed to learn of Somerset’s death, he was well treated and on the following morning he was escorted to London by the Yorkist lords. York might well have widened the wound at Henry’s neck and ensured that there were no witnesses. He could then have blamed the stray arrow for killing the king. This is possibly the clearest sign that at this point, Henry’s crown was safe and secure.

What I love about this book is it is a wonderful combination of the best known facts, the battles and the politics, and some little known facts and events that mean even a seasoned Wars of the Roses enthusiast will find something to engage their interest. The brief, 1-2 page chapters mean the reader can drop in and out of the book at their leisure, or whenever they have 5 minutes to spare.

These little snippets are utterly enthralling and informative. They combine to give a wonderful, universal picture of the conflict; the battles and the characters involved. The book is beautifully written and well researched. It is organised in a loosely chronological manner, with fabulous insights into the major players and events of the Wars of the Roses.

Although The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts is restricted to 100 facts, it is not short on insight and analysis. Matthew Lewis does a great job of achieving a balance of facts with the analytical approach of the historian. It would be a wonderful addition to the library of anyone interested in the Wars of the Roses, or the later fifteenth century as a whole.

*

Matthew Lewis is an author and historian with particular interest in the medieval period. His books include a history of the Wars of the Roses, a biography of Richard, 3rd Duke of York, and two novels of historical fiction telling the life of King Richard III and the aftermath of the Battle of Bosworth. He also writes a history blog, sharing thoughts and snippets. He can be found on Twitter @MattLewisAuthor.

The Wars of the Roses in 100 Facts is available from Amberley and Amazon.

*

Heroines of the Medieval World:

Heroines of the Medieval World,  is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.

*

©2017 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Book Corner: Interview with Michael Jones

Myself and Michael Jones at the Harrogate History Festival, October 2015

Today it is a pleasure to welcome historian and broadcaster Michael Jones to the blog.

Hi Mike, thank you so much for agreeing to an interview for my blog History…the Interesting Bits. The last time we chatted was at the Harrogate History Festival a couple of years ago. I seem to remember asking you to convince me that Henry IV and Henry V were worth reading up on. I must say, your own arguments and your book 24 Hours at Agincourt certainly piqued my interest; all 3 of Henry IV’s sisters will appear in my book. And your latest book is a biography of Edward III’s eldest son, The Black Prince. I don’t need any convincing with him, he’s a fascinating character and I am really enjoyed reading your book.

And so, without further ado, to the interview. I hope the questions are not too onerous for you.

What do you love most about history?

 Well, firstly, hello Sharon and thank you for your blog and website, and your enthusiasm for all things medieval. And good luck with your own book!

As a child, I loved history for its portrayal of men and women in challenging circumstances. I was fascinated by how they were – sometimes at least – able to triumph against all the odds. Now, as a historian, it is still those personal stories I am most drawn to. I wanted to write a biography of Margaret Beaufort, the mother of Henry VII (The King’s Mother) because she showed such courage and resourcefulness in adversity – and it was through this that I got to know Philippa Gregory, first advising her on her book The Red Queen, and then writing with her and David Baldwin The Women of the Cousins’ War. And in my most recent work, The Black Prince – a biography of Edward of Woodstock (the oldest son of Edward III and foremost military commander of his age) – I have enjoyed depicting the Prince’s charisma as a leader, the way he forged a remarkable esprit de corps amongst his fellow fighters.

What is your favourite period of history – and why?

I write on a number of subjects – ranging from the late middle ages to World War Two – and, as a tour guide, lead military and cultural tours covering many historical eras. But the reason I focus on the late middle ages is because of the quality of teaching I received at Bristol University (as an undergraduate and postgraduate), particularly from Charles Ross and James Sherborne. They shaped my abilities as a historian and I remain grateful to them to this day. And the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are tumultuous yet vivid times, marred by plague and warfare yet possessing an acute sensibility to beauty and the uplifting power of ritual and display.

Which historical personality fascinates you the most – and why?

Tomb of the Black Prince, Canterbury Cathedral

People are so interesting – and history is full of fascinating characters. In the middle ages we have so many choices. I immediately think of the Black Prince and Joan of Kent and Richard III and Anne Neville. In these instances, to learn about these remarkable men I believe we also need to get to know the women who helped shape their views and guided their counsel.

You have written books on the battles of Agincourt and Bosworth, what is it about medieval warfare that fascinates you? 

Well, I have also written books on World War Two’s battle of Stalingrad and siege of Leningrad – and these events remain, for me, incredibly moving.

However, Agincourt and Bosworth are indeed fascinating: clashes that shaped our history and where the key turnaround happened very quickly, within hours, even minutes – and I will always be interested in them. When I wrote 24 Hours at Agincourt I was particularly struck by the headlong dash of Anthony, duke of Brabant (the younger brother of the duke of Burgundy). In his rush towards the battlefield – desperate to join the French army – he rode day and night, leaving behind most of his retinue and all of his armour. When he finally arrived at Agincourt he was accompanied by only a dozen men – and he was killed within minutes. Some applauded his chivalric idealism; others marvelled at his crass stupidity. And writing The Black Prince gave me the chance to bring to life three more extraordinary battles – Crécy, Poitiers and Nájera – so I am grateful for that as well.

How did you get involved in the ‘Looking for Richard’ project with Philippa Langley?

I got to know Philippa through the publication of my book Bosworth 1485 – Psychology of a Battle, which offered a different way of seeing Richard III – a mirror opposite of the picture presented by Shakespeare. Instead of removing Richard from the story of his family, the house of York, I placed him at the heart of it. Philippa had been writing a screenplay about the king, but had become stuck and was on the point of giving up. After we met, she rewrote the screenplay with my interpretation underpinning it, and then set out to visit the places that were significant in his life. We had said to each other that the only counter to the power of Shakespeare’s play would be to actually find the king’s physical remains. And that journey took Philippa to a social services car park in Leicester in the summer of 2004. Later, when Richard’s remains had indeed been uncovered, under the very spot where she had had her intuitive feeling, we wrote a book about it, The King’s Grave: the Search for Richard III.

Michael Jones

The Black Prince is a controversial figure these days – what made you want to write his biography?

I admire the Black Prince and feel that modern scholarship has sometimes become overly critical of him, losing sight of the ideals that governed his life and won the respect of his contemporaries. While there is a place for such criticism, I wanted to write a sympathetic biography – putting the man back into the context of his times.

If you could talk to any person from history, who would it be and what would you ask them?

That has to be Richard III on the fate of the Princes in the Tower.

If you had a time machine, what specific event would you like to go back and witness – and why?

It would be the final stages of the battle of Poitiers, where the Black Prince turned the tables on a numerically superior foe and captured the French king, Jean II, by mounting up and charging straight at his opponent. It cannot be equalled for sheer drama.

What is your next project?

I am working on a book about the beginning of World War Two – and will then return to the late middle ages and write an account of the last stages of the Hundred Years War.

I owe huge ‘thank you’ to Michael Jones for taking the time to do this fabulous interview.

I can highly recommend Michael Jones latest book, The Black Prince, which is out now and is available from Amazon.

Michael Jones is a fellow of the Royal Historical Society and member of the British Commission for Military History. He works as a writer, battlefield tour guide and media presenter. He is the author of Bosworth 1485: Psychology of a Battle, 24 Hours at Agincourt and co-author, with Philippa Gregory and David Baldwin, of The Women of the Cousins’ War; and, with Philippa Langley, of The King’s Grave: The Search for Richard III. He lives in South London.

*

Photos from Harrogate and the Black Prince’s tomb in Canterbury Cathedral ©2015 Sharon Bennett Connolly. Photo of Michael Jones with thanks to Michael Jones.

*

My book, Heroines of the Medieval World,  is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.

Sharons book cover

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.

*

©2017 Sharon Bennett Connolly

 

The Infamous Jane Shore

The Penance of Jane Shore by William Blake

Jane Shore is one of the most renowned of medieval royal mistresses, rivalling only Katherine Swynford in her fame. However, Jane was not so fortunate as Katherine; there was no ‘happily ever after’ with her royal lover. As she has gone down in history, the poor woman didn’t even get to keep her own name.

So, who is Jane Shore? Well, she’s not called Jane, for starters. In fact, that name seems to have only been attributed to her more than 50 years after her death, and by a playwright, of all people.

The young woman in question was born Elizabeth Lambert; she was the daughter of John Lambert, a citizen and mercer of London who died in 1487. Her mother, Amy, was the daughter of Robert Marshall, a London grocer, and died in 1488, the year after her husband. Elizabeth was probably born sometime before 1450 and was married, in her middle or late teens, to William Shore, a London goldsmith.

Elizabeth eventually became mistress to King Edward IV, the larger-than-life king who reigned from 1461 to 1483, except for a little interval in 1470-71 when Henry VI briefly regained the throne. Mistress Shore first appears in the historical record in the mid-1470s, possibly when she was already mistress to the king, when she petitioned for an annulment to her marriage. The grounds for the petition was her husband’s impotence.

The recent petition of Elizabeth Lambert alias Schore, of London states that she continued in her marriage to William Schore, layman of the diocese of London, and cohabited with him for the lawful time, but that he is so frigid and impotent that she, desirous of being a mother and having offspring, requested over and over again the official of London to cite the said William before him to answer her concerning the foregoing and the nullity of the said marriage and that, seeing the said official refused to do so she appealed to the Apostolic See.¹

King Edward IV

While it was not unheard of for a wife to petition for the dissolution of a marriage, it was certainly a rare occurrence; such appeals were expensive and rarely granted against the husband. It may well be that Elizabeth was already mistress to the king when she brought the divorce petition, it would certainly explain her ability to finance the case. The whole proceedings would have been as humiliating for Elizabeth as it was for her husband, William; but her developing relationship with the king may have given her the encouragement to endure it. However the petition came about, a woman’s right to bear children was considered sacrosanct and the annulment was granted, the papal mandate being dated to 1 March 1476.

Edward IV is as famous for his love life as he is for his prowess in battle. His irregular, secret marriage to Elizabeth Wydeville  provided enough ammunition and doubt for his brother, Richard of Gloucester, to declare his sons, Edward V and Richard (the Princes in the Tower), illegitimate and take the crown for himself. Gloucester claimed that Edward IV had already been married – again secretly – to one Eleanor Butler when he married Elizabeth Wydeville, making his children by Elizabeth illegitimate and therefore unable to inherit the throne. Of course, proof was lacking, but Edward’s own record with women provided sufficient doubt to enable Richard to seize the throne.

There is little doubt that Edward IV and his queen, Elizabeth, were happily married; the couple had numerous children together, of which 6 girls and 2 boys survived infancy. However, this did not prevent Edward from taking mistresses, of which Elizabeth Shore is said to have been his favourite.

There is a near-contemporary description of Mistress Shore, from Thomas More, who described a bright, intelligent woman;

“Proper she was and fair … yet delighted not men so much in her beauty, as in her pleasant behaviour. For a proper wit had she, and could both read well and write, merry of company, ready and quick of answer, neither mute nor full of babble, sometimes taunting without displeasure and not without disport … The merriest [of Edward’s mistresses] was this Shore’s wife, in whom the king therefore took special pleasure. For many he had, but her he loved, whose favour to say truth … she never abused to any man’s hurt.”¹

Edward IV’s queen, Elizabeth Wydeville

Of course, we cannot truly say whether or not Edward loved Elizabeth Shore, nor how deep was their relationship. Nor can we say how Elizabeth Wydeville felt about her husband’s relationship with Mistress Shore. In fact, very little contemporary evidence exists to prove the existence of a relationship. At least, not while Edward was alive. However, when Edward died in 1483 and his brother, Richard seized power, Elizabeth Shore was brought into the limelight, caught up in the power struggle following the king’s death and the accession of his 13-year-old son.

On the king’s death, Elizabeth Shore was in need of a protector and transferred her allegiance and affection to William, Lord Hastings, the late king’s best friend. As the political situation deteriorated in 1483, following Richard Duke of Gloucester’s arrest of Anthony Wydeville, the new king’s uncle and brother of Queen Elizabeth Wydeville, the queen fled to sanctuary at Westminster Abbey. Elizabeth Shore was accused of carrying messages between the queen in sanctuary and Lord Hastings, who was serving on the Privy Council. Whether she did or not, or even whether the queen and Hastings were plotting, we’ll probably never know.

Richard, now Lord Protector for his nephew Edward V, accused Hastings of treason and had him summarily executed within the Tower of London, on 13 June 1483. Elizabeth Shore was caught up in Hastings’ downfall; her goods being attached by the sheriffs of London, she was made to do public penance ‘for the lyfe that she ledd with the said lord hastyngys and other grete astatys’.² More praises Mistress Shore’s demeanour during her penance, stating;

“In which she went in countenance & pace demure so womanly, & albeit she were out of all array save her kyrtle only: yet went she so fair & lovely … that her great shame won her much praise.”²

There is some suggestion that, following the king’s death, Elizabeth Shore was a mistress of both Hastings and the late king’s stepson, Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset. In October 1483, when Grey joined Buckingham’s rebellion against Richard III, he was accused of holding ‘the unshameful and mischievous woman called Shore’s wife in adultery.’²

After her public penance, Elizabeth Shore was imprisoned in Ludgate Gaol for a time. During the same period, she attracted the attention of Thomas Lynom, the King’s Solicitor, who wanted to marry her. An undated letter, written to the Bishop of Lincoln by Richard III, himself, asks the bishop to intervene and persuade Lynom against the marriage, saying Lynom had been ‘merveillously blynded and abused.’²

Elizabeth was eventually released from gaol, into her father’s custody, on the payment of sureties; however, it seems Lynom was not dissuaded by the entreaties of the king and the bishop. He and Elizabeth were married before her father’s death on 1487, as is made clear in his will, in which he left his daughter a bed of arras and a painted cloth of Mary Magdalen and Martha.

Thomas Lynom survived the regime change of 1485, successfully transferring his services to the Tudors; he served bother Henry VII and Henry VIII and was a councillor for Arthur, Prince of Wales and controller of the rolls for the prince’s household.

Theatre poster for ‘Jane Shore’

Thomas Lynom was dead by July 1518 and, according to More, Elizabeth fell on hard times after that, even claiming she had to resort to begging, although this seems unlikely.

Elizabeth Shore probably died around 1527, although she had long since retreated from the limelight. There is no evidence that she ever had any children – the reason for the dissolution of her first marriage – and her story may have ended there, were it not for the Tudor playwrights.

Her literary life was born through the works of William Shakespeare, Thomas Heywood and Nichols Rowe. It was Thomas Heywood who rechristened her ‘Jane’ and made her the focal point of his play, Edward IV, in 1599. However, despite the name change, the plays have, to say the least, guaranteed Elizabeth Shore’s place in history.

*

Footnotes: ¹Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville: A True Romance by Amy Licence; ² quoted by Rosemary Horrox in Oxforddnb.com.

*

Sources: Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville: A True Romance by Amy Licence; Elizabeth Shore – Jane by Rosemary Horrox in Oxforddnb.com; Richard III, England’s Black Legend by Desmond Seward; Edward IV, Glorious Son of York by Jeffrey James; Elizabeth Woodville, Mother of the Princes in the Tower by David Baldwin; Lancaster & York, The Wars of the Roses by Alison Weir, Richard III by Michael Hicks; Edward IV and the Wars of the Roses by David Santuiste.

Pictures courtesy of Wikipedia

*

My Books

Silk and the Sword: The Women of the Norman Conquest

From Emma of Normandy, wife of both King Cnut and Æthelred II to Saint Margaret, a descendant of Alfred the Great himself, Silk and the Sword: the Women of the Norman Conquest traces the fortunes of the women who had a significant role to play in the momentous events of 1066.  Available now from Amazon UK,  Amberley Publishing, Book Depository and Amazon US.

new

Heroines of the Medieval World

Telling the stories of some of the most remarkable women from Medieval history, from Eleanor of Aquitaine to Julian of Norwich, Heroines of the Medieval World,  is available now on kindle and in paperback in the UK from from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon, in the US from Amazon and worldwide from Book Depository.

*

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter and Instagram.

©2017 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Book Corner: Henry by Tony Riches

Bosworth 1485: After victory against King Richard III, Henry Tudor becomes King of England. Rebels and pretenders plot to seize his throne. The barons resent his plans to curb their power and he wonders who he can trust. He hopes to unite Lancaster and York through marriage to the beautiful Elizabeth of York.

With help from his mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort, he learns to keep a fragile peace. He chooses a Spanish Princess, Catherine of Aragon, as a wife for his son Prince Arthur. His daughters will marry the King of Scotland and the son of the Emperor of Rome. It seems his prayers are answered, then disaster strikes and Henry must ensure the future of the Tudors.

“A fine end to a superbly researched and well-written trilogy, one I would recommend to anyone with an interest in this period of history.” Best-selling author Terry Tyler.

Henry is the final installment of Tony Riches‘ excellent Tudor Trilogy which has followed the rise of the Tudors from Owen’s relationship with Catherine of Valois, through his son, Jasper, and now to his grandson, Henry, the first Tudor king.

Opening as Henry  is victorious at Bosworth, it follows Henry VII from the moment he becomes king, through the many trials and tribulations of kingship and establishing a new dynasty. This is an enjoyable story of one of England’s least loved and most misunderstood English kings. Tony Riches does an excellent job of giving us an entertaining novel while offering the reader an insight into the life and problems of a man who was not born to be king and who knew little of his subjects after spending his entire adult life in exile in Brittany.

I love the fact that Henry is not the finished product from the very beginning. The author has thought hard about how a man, who suddenly becomes king, may act when feeling his way through the maze of court politics, factions and family divisions, and the actual day-to-day challenges of ruling a country that has suffered 30 years of intermittent warfare and political instability.

Henry paints a portrait of Henry as a man who grew into his role as king, learning from his mistakes and facing up to his insecurities; insecurities arising not from his right to the throne, but from the challenges facing him and not knowing what happened to the Princes in the Tower. Henry Tudor is portrayed as a all-too-human; a man whose decisions about others way on his soul, but are made to ensure the security of himself and his family. He walks a  fine line in an attempt to appease his opponents whilst establishing his authority – and his dynasty.

‘On what grounds do we imprison young Edward Plantagenet?’

Jasper sat in the spare chair and the stubble on his chin as he considered the question. He’d chosen to shave his beard on the journey from Wales. He looked younger clean-shaven, but a beard suited his uncle, and Henry guessed he was already growing it back.

‘King Richard considered the young earl enough of a threat to declare him illegitimate.’

Henry allowed himself a smile. ‘King Richard declared everyone illegitimate, other than himself. Young Edward is a cousin of Princess Elizabeth.’

Jasper returned his smile. ‘Half of England is related to the Woodvilles one way or another.’ His face became serious. ‘We need time, Henry. Time to win over the doubters. We could say it is for young Edward’s own safety?’

Henry picked up his quill and dipped it in Mayor Olney’s inkpot before signing the warrant. ‘We must ensure the boy is well treated – I wish no harm to him.’

Henry is the story of one man’s life and kingship. Moments of crisis and sincerity are interspersed with little moments of tenderness and humour. Tony Riches has taken time to seriously consider the character of his subject, and this comes across in every page of the book. He seems to have spent no less time on the supporting characters. Jasper Tudor and Margaret Beaufort, who have played prominent parts in all 3  book of the Tudor Trilogy are pivotal characters and are well thought out, complex figures. Henry respects them deeply and is well aware of the sacrifices they have made that got him to the throne. Each character in the book is credible, believable, and has his, or her, own unique qualities. The headstrong future king, Henry VIII is wonderfully contrasted with quiet and studious Prince Arthur, while the delightful Mary Tudor steals every scene in which she appears.

thumbnail_Late 16th-century copy of a portrait of Henry VII - Wikimedia Commons
Henry VII

The novel tells the story of Henry and Elizabeth with sensitivity and compassion; charting their life together from the first moments of getting to know each other, through the births and deaths of their children, and the toll that takes on them, not only as individuals, but also as a couple. Indeed, the author seriously considers the effect that being king must have had on Henry’s family life, the compromises he had to make. You get the impression that the poor chap never had enough time in the day to do everything he wanted and that every personal loss takes away a little part of him.

‘I like it here.’ He reached across and took her white-gloved hand in his. ‘We shall make Sheen into a palace fit for a royal family.’

Elizabeth squeezed his hand in agreement. ‘I would like that.’ She gave him a conspiratorial look. This is my most secret place. A sanctuary.’

Henry stared into her bright amber eyes. ‘You spent many months in sanctuary … yet you’ve never spoken of it?’

‘At first I didn’t understand the danger we were in.’ She stared, wide-eyed, into the far distance as she remembered. ‘My mother made a game of it, said it would be a great adventure. Years later she told me my father abandoned us and she thought our enemies might murder us all.’

There are many novels set during the Wars of the Roses. The huge majority revolve around Richard III and the disappearance of the Princes in the Tower. If a novel sees Richard III as a hero, then you can practically guarantee that Henry Tudor is the villain. With Henry, you would therefore be forgiven for expecting the opposite; Henry the hero and Richard the villain.  Richard, of course, gets mentioned, but the story does not revolve around the fallen king and his guilt or innocence, rather it puts him firmly where he was when Henry was king – in the past!

As a novel, Tony Riches has created a fast-paced, enjoyable tale that is virtually impossible to put down – at least until your eyelids are so heavy they need matchsticks to hold them up. It also gives you a deeper understanding of the founder of the Tudor dynasty. I defy anyone – except, maybe, the most ardent of Yorkists – to read this book and not develop a deeper understanding of Henry VII, of the challenges he faced and compromises he made in order to secure peace for the realm and the continuation of his dynasty. Henry is a must-read book for anyone who has a love  of medieval history, the Wars of the Roses and the Tudors.

Although part of a series, Henry can definitely be read as a standalone. Entertaining and insightful, it tells a story that has rarely been told – the one from Henry’s own viewpoint. This is the story of the foundation of, arguably, England’s most famous royal house – and is not to be missed!

*

Ten Things You Might Not Know About Henry Tudor, by Tony Riches

During the four years of research for my trilogy about the early Tudors, I discovered many little known facts about one of our most overlooked kings, Henry Tudor. Here are a few of my favourites:

  1. Instead of Tudor, Henry could have been called ‘Tidder’ or ‘Tetyr’ or even Tewdwr It seems the name Tudor was a simplification used by scribes in the time of Henry’s grandfather, Owen Tudor.
  2. After his victory at the Battle of Bosworth Henry led a procession through the narrow streets of York, where he was attacked by a man with a dagger. His bodyguards saved him but his reign was nearly over before it began – and he later travelled with some fifty ‘Yeomen of the Guard’ for protection.
  3. Henry didn’t invent the ‘Tudor rose’ – the combined red and white roses had long been known as symbols of the Virgin, representing sacrifice and purity – he simply adopted it as his ‘branding’.
  4. Henry loved gambling with cards and dice and lost huge sums more often than he won. He also kept detailed records of who he’d played against (which included his wife, Elizabeth of York)– and how much he’d lost.
  5. As well as lions and other dangerous animals, which he kept at the Tower of London, Henry kept a pet monkey, thought to be a marmoset, in his private chambers. One day he discovered it had torn up his detailed diary, so there is a gap in his meticulous records.
  6. When the pretender Perkin Warbeck was finally captured, Henry was so enamoured of Warbeck’s wife, Lady Katheryn Gordon, that he kept them both in his household – but wouldn’t let them sleep together. He also bought Lady Katheryn expensive dresses and she became a close companion and confidante, even after Henry had her husband executed.
  7. Henry nearly lost his crown to a mob of Cornish rebels, who marched on London in an armed protest against his tax raising. More men joined them on the way and the rebels reached Blackheath before they could be stopped.
  8. Henry kept various ‘fools’ to entertain his court, including one named ‘Diego the Spaniard’ (possibly as a joke at the expense of Catherine of Aragon’s father, King Ferdinand, who failed to provide the dowry he’d promised.)
  9. At Christmas 1497 Henry and his family were woken in the night by a fire in his private chambers at Sheen Palace. They barely escaped with their lives but the old palace was ruined and Henry had it rebuilt as the Palace of Richmond.
  10. Towards the end of his life Henry suffered from a throat disease referred to as ‘the quinsy’ which his physicians treated (unsuccessfully) with a remedy of celandine, fenugreek and hedgehog fat.

Tony Riches is the author of the best-selling Tudor Trilogy as well as other historical fiction set in the medieval era. He lives by the sea in Pembrokeshire, West Wales with his wife and enjoys sailing and kayaking in his spare time. For more information about Tony’s other books please visit his popular blog, The Writing Desk and website www.tonyriches.com and find him on Facebook and Twitter @tonyriches.  The Tudor Trilogy is available on Amazon UK  Amazon US and Amazon AU

*

My book, Heroines of the Medieval World,  is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.

*

©2017 Sharon Bennett Connolly

Guest Post: Vikings to Virgin – The Hazards of Being a King by Trisha Hughes

thToday it is a pleasure to welcome Trisha Hughes to the blog, with a guest post about her latest book, Vikings to Virgin – The Hazards of Being a King, which will be released on 28th February, 2017.

When we think of Britain’s monarchs, most of us would agree that early periods of time are clearly muddled. Many are hidden in the mists of time while some have almost completely disappeared. What we do know is that there were kings who ruled for only a few months and there are some who ruled for over fifty years. There are also some who should never have ruled at all. They include, among their number, the vain, the greedy and the downright corrupt as well as adulterers, swindlers and cowards.

Yet this group also shares one thing in common. In their lifetimes, they were the most powerful individuals in the land.

My story, ‘Vikings to Virgin – The Hazards of being King’ spans 1500 years and is full of lust, betrayal, heroism, murder, cruelty and mysteries. It’s a journey through time when the Romans began their march through Britain and travels through Saxon times, the Vikings, the Normans, the Plantagents and finally the Tudors.

History is full of savagery and cruelty but there are none more brutal than the Wars of the Roses during the Plantagenet dynasty.

This period of time was basically a terrible family squabble that ended up a bloodbath between royal cousins where each house was eager to snatch the crown and the throne of England for themselves away from other family members. But as with most rebellions, it left both sides vulnerable since it usually meant that battles were fought ‘to the bitter end’, leaving fewer contenders alive after every battle.

It was a dangerous period full of unfathomable brutality, shifting alliances, murders, betrayals, plots and savage elimination. It ended when Henry Tudor usurped the throne from Richard III, the last of the Plantagenets, and a different sort of battle began as he continued on the bloodbath with gusto.

Richard III’s story is not too different from many others in history. It’s a story of ambition gone awry and the damage it leaves in its wake. He was the twelfth of thirteen children of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York (a strong claimant to the throne himself) and Cecily Neville (who was also a direct descendant of John of Gaunt, a son of Edward III).

What makes Richard different from most of his ancestors is the crime that’s been associated him. His interest in the throne was plain and his character has proven to be ruthless. We are led to believe that his young nephews were held captive in the Tower, never to be seen again, while he simply stepped in and took the throne from under everyone’s noses. Presumably he had them murdered.

But was it actually Richard who ordered their murder as it’s been assumed throughout history?

th1That the princes were murdered is certain. But the question is, by whom and I have an opinion or two of my own that I’d like to share with you from my book.

“Suspect Number 1. There have been a few names pulled out of the hat and the first one is definitely Richard III. He had the most to gain from their death and he had the personality to do it. He had been implicated in the death of Warwick as well as the suspicious death of his brother Edward IV, which is something we should not forget as Richard gained dramatically because of that.

Suspect Number 2. No man had done more to place Richard on the throne than Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham. Yet strangely and suddenly, during the first three months of Richard’s reign, Buckingham suddenly changed his allegiance completely and became Richard’s mortal enemy. Why did he do that? Was it perhaps his dislike at being an accomplice in what was seen as the usurpation of the throne and the murder of two young children? Perhaps he feared for his own safety? Ah, and then we ask … wasn’t he of royal blood as well, being a descendant firstly through John Beaufort, son of John of Gaunt, and secondly, through the bloodline of Thomas of Woodstock, Edward III’s fifth son? If anything happened to Richard’s son, Buckingham’s bloodline could be strong enough to claim the throne. Knowing the Yorkists’ relish for using the chopping block, it wouldn’t have made him feel very safe. Not at all.

So very soon after the coronation, Buckingham changed sides dramatically and no one knows why. What we do know is that his job was one of responsibility and he was in charge of the safekeeping of the boys between June and July. Suffocation was probably the method of killing them, especially when you consider their youth and frailty, and it was a tried and true means of getting rid of someone you didn’t want around.

Suspect Number 3. In the background was Lady Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry Tudor. No other mother in history seems to have been as dedicated as she was to have her son sit on the throne. But she would not have done it herself. There would have been a third party involved.

In 1472 after the death of her second husband, Margaret did the unthinkable and arranged for her own marriage to a prominent widower, Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby who was in good standing with Edward IV. By all accounts, the marriage was one of pure convenience. This marriage enabled her to return to the court of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville and she was chosen by Elizabeth to be her daughter’s godmother. After Edward’s death and Elizabeth’s rush to sanctuary in Westminster Abbey, Margaret became Anne Neville’s lady-in-waiting carrying the train at Anne’s husband’s coronation. Richard had already stripped Margaret of her titles and estates and had given them all to her husband, Lord Stanley, which was a meaningless gesture as he would already have had the rights to her property as her new husband anyway. During all of this, she was actively plotting with Elizabeth Woodville and had betrothed her beloved son Henry to Elizabeth’s daughter, young Elizabeth of York. She has been called a formidable opponent of Richard III, a habitual conspirator and a dedicated promoter of her son’s cause.

Within a couple of months of Richard’s coronation, Margaret’s nephew Buckingham from her previous marriage, (yes it is complicated), raised a rebellion against Richard in favour of Henry Tudor and you can bet she used every bit of her influence on him to encourage the rebellion. She would have promised him anything for his support.

I guess my question right now is: why did Buckingham raise the rebellion in favour of Henry and not for the princes since nobody apparently knew they were already dead? Did he actually know they were dead and was he the one who gave the orders to kill them? In view of that and the fact that Buckingham had no immediate motive to move against Richard except that he had a very distant claim to the throne himself, what could he hope to gain by attacking the king in such a wild and reckless rebellion after having sworn his loyalty one month previously? My guess is Margaret Beaufort had a hand in it. As a consequence of the failed rebellion and Buckingham’s death, Margaret’s current husband, Lord Stanley, was promoted to the position of High Constable in charge of all prisoners in the Tower. Food for thought.

All Margaret wanted was for her son Henry Tudor to sit on the throne at any cost. At the beginning of Buckingham’s rebellion, she sent word to Henry who was living in abject poverty in France with his uncle Jasper Tudor and told him to gather forces and hurry home. To me, it seems she was pulling the strings and had everything planned and under control.

And here is something else to think about – if Henry Tudor defeated Richard III in battle, Henry would not necessarily become king, as the throne would theoretically be restored to young Edward V who might have been in the tower. However, the princes’ ‘removal’ would leave her son Henry as the prime candidate for the throne. Are bells ringing in your head yet?

Suspect Number 4. Henry Tudor had a great need to be king and he was the plausible alternative … but only if the two princes weren’t around. Henry was a Welshman, whose grandfather, Owen Tudor had been a page in the court of Henry V and as we know, Owen is reported to have secretly married Henry V’s widow, Catherine of Valois. One of their sons was Edmund Tudor, who in turn married Margaret Beaufort at the age of twelve.

Perhaps at this stage, I should remind you that Henry Tudor’s grandmother Catherine of Valois was the sister of Charles VI of France who had sadly inherited a ‘crazy’ gene and we saw this gene pop its nasty head up during Henry VI’s reign. Although Henry Tudor’s claim to the throne was through his mother and the House of Beaufort as far back as John of Gaunt and Edward III, this gene from his paternal French grandmother should not, perhaps, be forgotten regarding future generations and their actions.

It has been suggested by some historians that Richard had stashed the princes in the Tower of London for safe keeping while he ruled in peace after having declared them illegitimate. It has also been suggested that it was in fact Henry Tudor, when he was King Henry VII, who had the princes executed between June and July of 1486 when his stepfather, Lord Stanley, was High Constable of the Tower two years later. Richard was long gone by then. It was only after this date that orders went out to circulate the story that Richard had killed the princes. This could easily have been to cover up Henry’s own involvement in their murder. It has also been suggested that Elizabeth Woodville knew that this story was false, and so Henry had to have her ‘silenced’ by confining her to a nunnery where she died six years later. All very plausible.

When you think about it, it seems impossible that no one knew what happened to the Princes after they entered the tower. Richard III, Henry VII and Elizabeth Woodville would have had their spies out and all of them would have known the boys’ whereabouts and welfare. If both boys had died, the matter could have been discussed and the culprit would have been blamed openly. But neither Richard III nor Henry VII did so with the reason being that if the princes were alive, the boys’ claim to the throne was better than either of theirs. The princes would simply have had to go in either case. It’s something we will never know and it is history’s best-kept secret.”

Vikings to Virgin – The Hazards of being King’ is a rambling narrative beginning when the Britons first glimpsed a square sail and a dragon-headed prow on the horizon, churned by oars through the waves as blue water foamed around the hull of a mighty ship one cold, miserable January morning. No one heard the muffled sounds over the water. They were still rubbing sleep out of their eyes after a savage night of arctic air had cut its way through cracks in the walls.

 It’s a story of kings who struggled to hold on to their throne, of horrendous bloody battles, of tiny boys becoming rulers, of ruthless usurpers and of queens who proved to be more powerful than anyone could have ever imagined. It’s a story of invading armies, of rival family members, of spies and conspiracies.

 And I’ve loved every minute of it.

About the author: th2Trisha Hughes started her writing career with her autobiography ‘Daughters of Nazareth’ eighteen years ago. The debut novel was first published by Pan Macmillan Australia and became a bestseller in 1997 beating the current Stephen King book to the top 10 bestsellers at the time.  Since then she has discovered a thirst for writing.  She’s written crime novels but her latest book, the first in her ‘V 2 V’ trilogy, ‘Vikings to Virgin – The Hazards of being King’ is her passion and due for release on 28th February 2017. She is currently working on the second in the series ‘Virgin to Victoria – The Queen is dead. Long live the Queen.’

 You can connect with Trisha through:

 Trisha’s Website: www.trishahughesauthor.com

Or: www.vikingstovirgin.com

you can find Trisha on Facebook at Trisha Hughes Author and Twitter at @trishahughes_

©2017 Trisha Hughes

*

My book, Heroines of the Medieval World,  is now available in hardback in the UK from both Amberley Publishing and Amazon UK and worldwide from Book Depository. It is also available on Kindle in both the UK and USA and will be available in Hardback from Amazon US from 1 May 2018.

You can be the first to read new articles by clicking the ‘Follow’ button, liking our Facebook page or joining me on Twitter.