1

Ricardian Bulletin Spring 2004

Contents

2

3

4

8

9

11

12

16

17

18

24

27

32

33

34

37

41

45

46

47

48

49

52

56

57

From the Chairman

Facts and Fiction

Society News & Notices

New Members

Media Retrospective

Classified Advertisement

News and Reviews

Barley Hall

Your Society Needs You

The Man Himself

The Debate: Whose Bones?

Stony Stratford: The Case for the Prosecution by Gordon Smith

War Horses at Bosworth by Lynda M. Telford

After Bosworth: A Fork in the Road by P. A. Hancock

The Middleham Window by John Saunders

Correspondence

Barton Library

Letter from America

Book Review

The Beauchamp Pageant

Report on Society Event

Future Society Events

Branches and Groups

Obituaries

Calendar

Contributions

Contributions are welcomed from all members. Articles and correspondence regarding the Bulletin Debate should be sent to Peter Ham-

mond and all other contributions to Elizabeth Nokes.

Bulletin Press Dates 15 January for Spring issue; 15 April for Summer issue; 15 July for Autumn issue; 15 October for Winter issue.

Articles should be sent well in advance.

Bulletin & Ricardian Back Numbers Back issues of the The Ricardian and The Bulletin are available from Pat Ruffle. If you are interested in obtaining any

back numbers, please contact Mrs Ruffle to establish whether she holds the issue(s) in which you are interested.

The Ricardian Bulletin produced by the Bulletin Editorial Committee, General Editor Elizabeth Nokes

and printed by St Edmundsbury Press.

© Richard III Society, 2003

2

From the Chairman

T he fifteenth century has been much in the news of late. First, there was the splendid

‘Gothic: Art for England 1400 – 1547’ exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum,

which closed in January, having brought together many of the treasures of our period, including

Margaret of York’s coronet from Aachen, Richard’s Book of Hours from Lambeth Palace Li-

brary and the Middleham Jewel from the Yorkshire Museum. Our review captures some of the

unique atmosphere of the exhibition. Naturally, we were disappointed with some of the negative

references to Richard III in the accompanying literature and have written to the exhibition curator

about these. At the beginning of the year, Channel 4 broadcast Tony Robinson’s ‘Fact or Fic-

tion’ programme on Richard. The Society had been consulted at an early stage, so we were able

to have some input into the programme, which overall gave a positive impression of Richard.

This is to be welcomed and shows the importance of the Society being proactive in promoting the

historic Richard III. There were some aspects we felt could have been handled more objectively

and these points are expanded in the article that follows. The question of Edward IV’s legitimacy

is a continuing source of controversy and we will have the issue as the subject for the Bulletin’s

next Debate. Michael Jones and Joanna Laynesmith will be the debaters. Joanna has written ex-

tensively on Cicely Neville and is well placed to have views on the supposed extramarital affair.

The same evening, there was a follow-on programme tracing the ‘legitimate’ Yorkist descent

through Margaret Pole, daughter of the Duke of Clarence, down to the current Earl of Loudoun,

who lives quite happily in a country town in New South Wales. Understandably, he does not in-

tend to pursue his claim to the throne, but he could make a good recruit for our Branch in that

state!

In England over the past year there has been a debate about the relevance of medieval history

in schools and universities. Professor Miri Rubin of the University of London recently stressed

the importance of medieval studies, saying, ‘We cannot understand who we are or where we

came from without an understanding of our provenance, which goes way beyond the last few

decades or generations … We lose the Middle Ages at our peril; such a loss will leave us igno-

rant, confused, and impoverished.’ Our Society makes a meaningful and valid contribution to

fifteenth-century scholarship and our understanding of the Middle Ages. The 2004 issue of The

Ricardian with its wide range of articles and reviews is surely ample evidence of this. We can

also take pride in the recent completion of the Society’s Wills Indexing Project. Once published,

this will be of great value to historians of our period. My congratulations to all who have been

involved with the project over the years. In noting the contribution we make to fifteenth-century

studies, we should not forget that we are able to do this because the Society is built on the strong

foundations laid by our early members. Therefore, I am very pleased that in the article on the

Middleham window we recall the work of The Fellowship of the White Boar. Seventy years on,

the window remains one of the most poignant memorials to King Richard. Finally, let me say that

I look forward to meeting and talking to many of you throughout what should be a busy and en-

joyable year for Ricardians.

Phil Stone

3

This is an expanded version of the notice that was placed on the Society’s website immediately

after the programmes were transmitted.

The Channel 4 Programmes

T he Society welcomes the new insights into the life and times of Richard III highlighted in

the two Channel 4 programmes presented by Tony Robinson on 3 January 2004. The first

of these re-examined the King’s character and motives, while the second attempted to trace the

current ‘heir’ to the House of York based on the assumption that Edward IV was indeed illegiti-

mate.

The Society is particularly pleased that the programmes emphasised many of the positive

qualities of Richard as King and Duke of Gloucester. Particular mention needs to be made of the

contribution of The Ricardian editor, Dr Anne Sutton, who was one of the experts interviewed by

Tony Robinson. Anne gave a composed and authoritative performance, which powerfully pro-

moted Richard’s personal qualities and his administrative abilities. Other historians interviewed

included Dr. Michael K. Jones, Professor Tony Pollard and Keith Dockray.

The first programme could have handled the key period between April and July 1483 with

more balance, recognising the realpolitik issues facing Richard and the fact that he was legally

the Lord Protector. For this period there was an over-reliance on Shakespeare’s melodramatic

interpretation. The crucial relationship with William Lord Hastings in particular was over-

simplified and the programme made the assumption that the princes were indeed murdered

whereas all we know for certain is that they disappeared from the Tower at some point during the

second half of 1483. Also the programme did not explore the implications of the various

‘pretenders’ who surfaced during the reign of Henry VII. The fact that the most prominent of

these, Perkin Warbeck, was accepted by many as Richard Duke of York does at least suggest that

there was at the time uncertainty about the fate of the two princes.

The debate over the illegitimacy of Edward IV and the implications that this has both for

Richard’s motives and his claim to the throne is one to which the Society will contribute. The

debate is in its early stages, but is an interesting new angle on the House of York and the behav-

iour of its members during the late fifteenth century. The programme concentrated on Edward’s

supposed illegitimacy and rather side-stepped Richard’s stated rationale for assuming the throne:

the pre-contract with Lady Eleanor Talbot (Lady Butler) and the consequent illegitimacy of Ed-

ward’s children by Elizabeth Woodville. The involvement of John Stillington, Bishop of Bath

and Wells, both in 1478 at the time of Clarence’s trial for treason and with the pre-contract reve-

lation in 1483, was also not mentioned.

The Society does however recognise that the circumstances in which Richard became king

and the fate of the Princes in the Tower and their possible illegitimacy remain areas of controver-

sy.

The quest to establish the current Yorkist ‘heir’ through the line of Margaret Pole was a thor-

ough and entertaining exercise. However, no account was taken of the attainder of her father,

George, Duke of Clarence, which rendered his heirs ineligible for the throne. Additionally the

fact that Henry Tudor’s claim was also based on the right of conquest (as was the claim of the

illegitimate William the Conqueror) was not addressed. Australian members who may not yet

have seen the programme will be interested to note that the traced ‘heir’ is Michael Hastings,

12th Earl of Loudoun, who has lived in New South Wales since the early 1960s.

The Society congratulates the programme makers for their handling of a complicated subject

and making it accessible to a wider audience. We look forward to building on the positive pub-

licity generated by the programmes.

Facts and Fiction

4

Society News and Notices

The Norwich Richard III Society Award

The idea came to me while idly thinking how good it would be to get an award for writing the

best history essay. So the Norwich Richard III Society Award was born but not as I originally

thought for schools but at university level. I hope this will go some way to keeping the Society

better known to young people.

I went to the University of East Anglia here in Norwich and spoke with the history depart-

ment. The idea was received very favourably, all the tutors feeling that winning such an award

would look very good on a c.v. The remit for the prize was quite wide – i.e. anything relevant or

within the fifteenth century, the winner to be chosen by the tutors. The sum of £30 was agreed:

not a fortune but enough to have some fun with.

In April 2003 Professor Carole Rawcliffe contacted me with the winner, a dissertation on the

Woodvilles which she had awarded a first. On a hot July day I went with the Norfolk Branch

Vice Chairman Stephen Bailey and the branch photographer Margaret Dixon to present the first

award to Andrew Kettle. After we had made contact the award was duly presented with An-

drew’s parents watching.

I hope Andrew’s work can be published in the Bulletin at some stage, and we wish him best

wishes for the future and hope his Ricardian interests continue.

This is the second connection with the university – the first being help for an MA, ably pro-

vided by Geoffrey Wheeler. So news of the Society is spreading. As one tutor said to me ‘It’s

hard to be involved in the medieval period and not run across the Society’.

The award will be an annual event, so hopefully the new intake of students is hard at work!

Annmarie Hayek

Completion of the Wills Indexing Project

The project was launched in the Bulletin in 1994 and as a reminder its aim was to produce an

index to testators of English medieval and early Tudor wills, either made or proved between 1399

and 1540, that have been published in serial publications, books and other printed matter between

1717 and 2000. The index will be an invaluable tool for genealogists and historians who will be

able to access readily such wills which otherwise are only available in archives and record offices

across England.

The notice immediately attracted volunteers and as the project gained momentum more mem-

bers joined. Some of the palaeographers working on the Logge Register took time out to do some

of the indexing. Eventually the team was expanded by another seven members who undertook

the computerisation of the index.

Hundreds of sources were identified, some jam-packed with wills, others containing just one.

The entries could be the complete wills or substantial or brief abstracts. The earliest work that

provided abstracts from wills was published in 1717 and it was decided that the project would

close with sources published in 2000.

The index, with an introduction and full details of the sources, will also include a list of the

Logge register testators who would have formed part of the index had the Society’s other major

project been published by 2000. Technology has advanced and become more widely available

since the project began and so the publication will initially be on CD-Rom while consideration is

being given to a hard-copy format. The index will be advertised in the Bulletin as soon as it is

available.

5

I would now like to recognise the contributions made by the volunteers. The first group has

indexed over 1500 entries each:

Margaret Lewis • Wendy Moorhen • Robert Musgrove • Barbara Plumridge

Sheila Pollock • Marion Treagus • Jane Trump

A significant contribution, in other words hundreds of entries, was made by the following:

John Ashdown Hill • Daphne Booth • Philomena Connolly

Clea Cook • Bill Featherstone • Anne Greatorex • John Hill

Philomena Jones • Marilyn Kilroy • Anabel Morris • Mary O’Regan

Karen Spencer • Lesley Wynne-Davies

The following indexed only a small number of entries but from rather elusive sources that

were difficult to locate:

Carol Evans • Vivian Fleet • Peter Hammond

Lynda Pidgeon • Brian Waters

The computerisation of the index was completed by:

Alison Andre • Brian Bannister • Pam Benstead • Francis Irwin

Marilyn Kilroy • Hazel Pierce • Jane Trump

In order to ensure consistency across the index a process was put in place and the whole index

checked by:

Pam Benstead • Marilyn Kilroy

Apart from individual correspondence, communication was maintained through the Wills

Project Newsletter, distributed to the volunteers of both the indexing and Logge transcription

project, and I would like to thank my co-editors Peter Hammond and John Saunders as well as all

those who contributed to the newsletter. I would also like to thank Peter and Carolyn Hammond

for their support and encouragement throughout the project and Lesley Wynne-Davies for her

help with the introduction.

Sadly three of the indexers are no longer with us: Philomena Connolly, Philomena Jones and

Marion Treagus. The index will be dedicated to their memory.

Finally I would like to highlight the contributions of four individuals, and in doing so I hope

nobody else on the project will be offended because everybody’s efforts are appreciated so much.

Sheila Pollock indexed over 6,000 entries and was the last indexer working on the project. Brian

Bannister and Francis Irwin were also working with me right to the end typing Sheila’s prolific

output. Pam Benstead’s work on the checking project was prodigious. Over the past ten years, I

have made many new friends on this project. I have had the pleasure of meeting many of the vol-

unteers at Society events and enjoyed my correspondence with all of them. Oh, and the final

count of entries – 28,349 (unless I stumble across another source before the CDs are made.)

On behalf of the Chairman and Executive Committee a big thank you to all participants of the

Wills Indexing Project.

6

The ‘Logge’ Wills Project

Readers will see above the triumphant report of the ending of the Society’s wills indexing project

and the plans for its publication. Work on the other Society wills project, the complete transcrip-

tion, translation and publication of the National Archives probate will register Logge, covering

the years 1478-1486, is still progressing. We are also noting that the Logge register contains the

wills of many people well known to Ricardians, e.g. Ralph Shaa, Doctor of Divinity, William,

Lord Hastings and Thomas Betson, merchant of the Staple of Calais, known for his admonition

in the Stonor letters to his betrothed to eat her meat so that she would grow up big and strong.

Transcription and (where necessary) translation, was completed some time ago by a team of

hard-working members of the Society. All wills were checked during the transcription period but

following this the more time-consuming but essential checking of the Latin and harmonisation of

the whole work began. We have a file of the complete transcript and now Lesley Wynne-Davies

and Moira Habberjam are carrying out the time-consuming work of going through the Latin

wills. Lesley reads through the Latin of a will to check that all is correct in grammar, translation

and consistency. Everything has to be made consistent with decisions made after lengthy discus-

sions, for example the word ‘relicta’ has been translated as ‘relict’, rather than as ‘widow’ and

the very common word ‘item’ as ‘also’. When a Latin will breaks into English, to show that this

happened, the phrases are left in medieval English rather than ‘translated’ into modern English.

These and similar decisions were made as a result of much hard bargaining since all involved

have strong views about these matters! Following this work by Lesley she passes corrected

sheets to Moira who checks what has been done, marks any further queries and sends them back

to Lesley who makes the final changes to the computer file. Lesley estimates that by the time

this Bulletin is published she will have completed this work on 225 out of the 383 wills in the

register The individual indexes compiled by transcribers are being put together into three com-

puter files by myself.

As well as the correction/harmonisation work Lesley is also compiling information from oth-

er sources about the Logge testators for use in brief foot notes and the Introduction. She is using

all available sources, original sources such as the Calendars of Fine, Patent, and Close Rolls, City

of London records (since many of the testators are London merchants), past issues of The Ricard-

ian and so on. In the course of this work many interesting facts have come to light, e.g. that two

of our testators, Thomas Breten, Alderman of London, and Thomas Ostrich, haberdasher of Lon-

don, were two of the eleven commoners chosen to attend Richard’s coronation, and the Howard

Household Books show that Robert Clerke of Nayland, Suffolk, served in the household of the

Duke of Norfolk for more than twenty years.

We are aiming to finish all of this work by the end of 2004 and to publish the complete text in

2005. We shall keep members informed of our progress in future Bulletins with notes on and

excerpts from some wills of interest, to whet your appetites for the eventual volume.

Peter Hammond

At last – something to spend your money on

It has been quite a long time since we produced a sales catalogue, and apologies for this hiatus.

The cause partly relates to the aftermath of the Great Sale, partly to efforts to negotiate further

reductions in stock by sales outside the Society, and finally to the need to make some policy deci-

sions. In the past prices have included postage and packing, and whilst this makes for a simple

and convenient system it has also meant that some of the heavier items were being sold at a loss.

So the decision has been taken that all books will be priced at a figure exclusive of postage and

7

packing in future. Items such as postcards, and badges are not as weight-sensitive in terms of

price so the figure in the sales catalogue does include postage and packing.

So welcome to the new sales catalogue, and may I emphasise that it is the definitive guide to

our sales items – please ignore old lists, advertisements in past issues of the Bulletin and The

Ricardian (including the Festschrift), even the back of this edition of the Bulletin.

Hopefully there is a pent-up buying spree that will be released by the catalogue but we have a

few more bargain items to tempt you: look out for details of these in this Bulletin.

Bill Featherstone

Society Visits

Having been active in the field of society visits for a number of years, I have recently taken over

the co-ordination of visits from Lesley Wynne-Davies, who wishes to devote her time more ex-

clusively to research. This seems an appropriate moment at which to review the position of socie-

ty visits. I should like to begin, however, by paying tribute to Lesley for all the hard work she has

done as Visits Co-ordinator during the past eight years.

The society’s policy in respect of visits has been in the nature of an organic growth rather

than something planned. What has emerged is a situation in which the Visits Committee current-

ly organises two or three day trips and one weekend visit in this country every year, together with

a roughly week-long ‘continental trip’. These visits have medieval historical (but not necessarily

specifically Ricardian) themes. A few, though by no means all, have been based around new re-

search. In addition the Visits Committee has a co-ordinating role in respect of the three annual

society events (the Requiem Mass in March, the Bosworth Commemoration in August and the

Fotheringhay Carol Service) as well as in relation to specific one-off commemorations such as

the recent Waltham Abbey plaque unveiling. Traditionally most visits have been coach trips, and

most visits have started from London.

It used to be the case that visits were quickly fully booked, and even had waiting lists. This no

longer seems to happen in the case of coach trips, which is something of a problem when it come

to costing trips and deciding whether (and when) to confirm the booking of the coach. This year,

for the first time, the ‘continental trip’ (planned for Ireland) has been abandoned because insuffi-

cient bookings were received. On the other hand ‘own transport’ based visits, such as to the Soci-

ety of Antiquaries and British Library, or the ‘London Walks’, have proved so popular that they

have been repeated to accommodate the number of members wishing to come. In the light of

these experiences the Visits Committee is reviewing the visits policy, and we need your help and

your input.

At the last AGM a visits questionnaire was circulated. From the replies received, we note that

the respondents thought our visits were well-planned and well-organised, but that short trips (day

trips) seem to be preferred over longer visits. Unfortunately (in one way) almost all those who

filled in the questionnaire were fairly regular participants in society visits and events. We should

very much like to hear also from members who do not currently take part in society visits. Could

you let us know why this is, and whether there is anything we could do which would help you,

sometimes, at least, to join us on a trip? Please contact me, anonymously, if you wish, with any

views you may have on our visits policy.

Meanwhile we have already begun to try a new experiment: linking up with a planned group

or branch visit for a day trip which will not be London-based, and which may not involve coach

hire. This experiment is at a very early stage, but the response in the case of the Colchester visit

in January (which was oversubscribed and will have to be repeated) seems to indicate that this

approach may be viable.

We are now wondering what other changes should be made. Should we, for example, give up

the long ‘Continental Visit’ (at least as an annual event) and have fewer coach trips and more

8

‘own transport’ based visits? Is it preferable for visits not to start from London? Do you have any

views on these matters, on the cost or our visits, on whether they are sufficiently ‘Ricardian’, or

on where we should be planning to go in the future? Any feedback will be most gratefully re-

ceived, and will be seriously considered by the Visits Committee.

John Ashdown-Hill

New Draft Constitution

There is a centrefold section in this issue of the Bulletin devoted to the new draft of the Society’s

Constitution. A motion for its adoption as the Constitution of the Society will be put to the AGM

later in the year.

New Members

Ms H Alton, London SW17 Mr J H Aronberg, Leeds Miss M Baker, Bury St Edmunds

Mrs H Baker, Long Preston Ms K Billingham, N’hampton Mrs R Bolongaro, Grantham

Mr A Braddon, Lancaster Miss I Brett, Herne Bay Miss P Coleman, Corby

Mrs J M Cranston, Congleton Mrs M Dann, Royston Mr I Darby, London EC1

Mrs M Davies, Wallasey Mr H Davis, Barnsley Mrs C Feast, Broxbourne

Mr S Field, Clifton Mrs D Grainger, Worthing Mr R PG Green, Rushden

Mr D Greenfield, Stockport Ms H S Griffin, London E10 Mr & Mrs H&A Harris, Belford

Mr D Harrison, Skipton Mrs A Harwood, Penrith Mrs A Hogg, Liverpool

Miss A M Hollings, Keighley Mrs A Jackson, Burgess Hill Mr A Jamieson, Yeovil

Mr W Johnson, Leamington Spa Ms C Kendall, Cambridge Mrs J Laybourn, So’ton

Mr & Mrs G Leaney, Portslade Mrs R Lindall, London N14 Mr, Mrs & Ms Lloyd, Harrow

Ms A MacMillan, Stowmarket Mrs PJ Phillips, Llanfairfechan Miss C Proudley, Reading

Mr & Mrs C Pyne, Towcester Mr G Rinu, Epping Mrs P E Savage, Corby

Mrs J Shanks, Lincoln Mrs D Taylor, Chalfont St P. Mrs A L Twigg, Sheffield

Miss T Upex, Bourne Mr M Watling, Peterborough Miss L Whittaker, London W14

UK 1 Oct 2003—31 Dec 2003

Overseas 1 Oct 2003—31 Dec 2003

Mrs C Brady, Australia Mr D Hewett, Malaysia Mr A Johnson, Pohang

Mr R H Smiley, Alaska Dr J Styntjes, Netherlands

US Branch 1 Sep—30 Nov 2003

Caroline & Brendon Reay Bicks Richard Bosworth Carol Chesney

Jean Dominico Lee A Forlenza Herlaine Gann

Beth Greenfeld Cynthia Hoffman Bradley C Howard

Sarah K Hunt Bryn Kildow Karen King

Carol Lehr Charles C Miller Ruth Roberts

Elizabeth J Roush Linda S Smith Steven D Smith

Sean F Strahon Tao Strong-Stein Karen Joy Toney

Judith Van Derveer Brad Verity Cara L Warren

Gordon White Lori Wornom

9

From Geoffrey Wheeler and

Marilyn Garabet: Daily Mail, 18 October, 2003:

‘The origins of Humpty [Dumpty] are impos-

sible to verify. One theory is that the rhyme

refers to Richard III, who named his horse

Wall. During the Battle of Bosworth Field in

1485, the King was sitting on the horse direct-

ing his armies when he was surrounded by

enemy troops and butchered.’

From Geoffrey Wheeler and

Margaret Jones Radio Times:

The spate of recent TV costume dramas

prompted articles and comments in the letters

pages: following the screening of Ray Win-

stone’s ‘Cockney’ ‘Henry VIII’, one writer

suggested a follow-up ‘ ... maybe ‘Richard

III’ renamed ‘Dicky the Bird’ and starring

Barbara Windsor, wearing a mask on the back

of her head and playing Shakespeare’s hunch-

back king. Some may argue that Dicky was a

man, but I think that Babs will add a touch of

gritty realism missing in the Olivier version,

which is, after all, fifty years old. I can pic-

ture it now; Babs larfing with Clarence and

havin’ ‘im drowned in a barrel of brown

ale’ (1-7 November, 2003).

Then the BBC’s ‘Charles II’ prompted

Rupert Smith to write: ‘Historians are an ar-

gumentative lot, unable to agree about any-

thing beyond irrefutable facts. Dramatists,

meanwhile, will always bend the truth to fit

the plot. This means that historical drama is

one of the biggest cans of worms on the shelf

– and anyone who thinks otherwise need only

reach for a copy of “Richard III”.’ And in an

accompanying column headed ‘Truth Mat-

ters’ Michael Wood concluded his views on

historical accuracy: ‘But does it matter?

Shakespeare after all, wasn’t true to the facts

of the Wars of the Roses: his Richard III is a

cartoon villain more in tune with the Sopra-

nos than the Plantagenets. But no one com-

plained then: just like us, they loved a good

villain. History, then as now, could be pure

entertainment.’ (15-21 November, 2003).

From Marilyn Garabet: The Sunday Telegraph, 2 November, 2003:

Review of Who murdered Chaucer ? A medi-

eval mystery by Terry Jones et al, review by

Jonathan Bate, Professor of Literature at the

University of Warwick: ‘Richard II (like

Richard III) is one of those medieval kings

who has suffered from the negative spin of

the Tudor chroniclers’.

The Times ‘Books Review’ 1 November,

2003:

Who murdered Chaucer?, Terry Jones, re-

viewed by Peter Ackroyd: ‘Terry Jones and

his associates have been able effectively to

challenge the received wisdom of generations

of historians, who simply copied the testa-

ments of the old chronicles to the effect that

Richard II was an unpopular and unjust king.

As is the case with his name-sake Richard III,

the judgements of malign contemporaries and

partisan apologists have been allowed to pass

as “true” by historians who had little or no

interest in investigating the facts of the peri-

od’

From the Editor: The Sunday Telegraph, 7 December, 2003:

‘Mandrake’ by Tim Walker: ‘Queen Noe-

lene? ‘... In a programme called The Real

Monarch to be broadcast in January, Tony

Robinson reheats the old story that Edward

IV was illegitimate. “If true, that means that

all the subsequent kings and queens, from

Henry VII to Elizabeth II, shouldn’t have in-

herited the crown” a spokesman for the televi-

sion station claims. ... The programme takes

the story a step further by naming the coun-

try’s “rightful” sovereign as the Earl of

Loudoun, ... descendant of Edward IV’s

brother, George, Duke of Clarence. ...

Charles Kidd, co-editor of Debrett’s Peerage

has been roped in .. to give some credibility to

Media Retrospective

10

the claim, but he himself doubts that it is true.

“They believe that an English bowman crept

into the bedroom of Cicely Neville, the wife

of Richard, Duke of York, but I can’t see it”

he says. “She was known as Proud Cis, after

all”.’

The Sunday Telegraph, 7 December, 2003: ‘In sickness and in health’ Dr James Le Fanu:

‘… the use of the word “trouble” by William

Colyngbourne at his execution in 1484 for

high treason against Richard III must, ob-

serves David Atkins from West Sussex, “rank

as the greatest understatement of all time.

First he was hanged, then cut down ... He

lived until the executioners ripped his bowels

out of his body and cast them onto the fire,

insomuch that at that instant he said Oh Lord

Jesus, yet more trouble and so died”.’

The Editor comments that it is satisfactory to

see the unfortunate but guilty Colyngbourne’s

treason properly attributed as such, and not

just as writing a rhyme.

From Patsy Conway: From the British Museum’s ‘Buried Treasure’

exhibition: the Chiddingly boar displayed

with a portrait of Richard III. The infor-

mation panel began: ‘Richard III, Shake-

speare’s “Crookback” king, is commonly per-

ceived as one of the greatest villains in British

history ...’. Or as the website had it: ‘... a

piece of history from the time of one of Eng-

land’s most infamous Kings, Richard III. To-

day most people think Richard was a bad

king, a murderer with a crooked back –

Shakespeare’s play portrays him in this man-

ner. Others think he’s had a rather bad press’.

Editor: This was protested and James Robin-

son, Curator of Medieval Collections Depart-

ment of Prehistory and Europe, The British

Museum, replied: Thank you for your mes-

sage expressing your disappointment about

the way in which Richard III is represented in

our temporary exhibition ‘Buried Treasure:

Finding our Past’. I take full responsibility

for the text which attempted, very clumsily, to

imply that the 'crookback' villain was merely

an invention exploited dramatically by Shake-

speare. We lacked sufficient space to develop

the story sensibly. The dilemma was to con-

jure up a popular image of Richard III which

did not require too much text. It is quite clear

to me that I failed that challenge. I regret very

much the phrasing of the text which does not

manage to separate fact from fiction and I

will investigate the possibility of correcting

the error for the subsequent venues of the ex-

hibition (Cardiff, Manchester, Norwich and

Newcastle).

From Jan Ogilvy, Canada: I am sending on the New York Times cross-

word puzzle which appeared in our local

newspaper The Yukon News on 28 November,

2003. One of the clues was ‘Fittin’ nickname

for Richard III ?’ The answer was ‘The lyin

king’. Hardly appropriate, but I thought it

might make an interesting small item in the

Media Retrospective feature of the Bulletin.

From Dr Audrey Gellatly: I thought you might be interested in this quo-

tation from the letter page of the Richmond

and Twickenham Times. It was in a comment

on how shabbily monarchs had treated their

wives: ‘Richard III may have poisoned his

wife, it was never proved but I wouldn’t put it

past him”. The author obviously had Tudor

sympathies!

From Maureen Nunn: ‘Message from David Suchet’ ‘Playing Wol-

sey was so interesting. ... I love researching

for the various characters I play, and although

I knew a little about the Cardinal a whole

world of knowledge opened up to me, not on-

ly about “himself”, but also about that partic-

ular time in our nation’s history. Rather like

Richard III’s reputation which is nearly al-

ways influenced by Shakespeare ... ’.

From John Ashdown-Hill: I recently discovered Heather Hacking’s His-

torical Cats (Great Cats who have shaped

History), (Hodder & Stoughton, October,

2003, ISBN 0340862211) which I was de-

lighted to see includes a sympathetic account

11

of the reign of Richard the Furred. Ms Hack-

ing notes that ‘it was put around for centuries

that he had murdered the young Pilchards in

the Tower, however this now seems unlikely

… nor was Richard a deformed hunchback –

he just wasn’t very good at putting on his

tights’. Richard is in exalted company. Other

feline monarchs featured in the book include

European celebrities such as Bluey the Four-

teenth!

Editor: not to mention ‘Henry Chewed-

Ear’ [say it !]

From Geoffrey Wheeler: The ubiquitous Tony Robinson contributed

the foreword to Bloody Britain (AA Publica-

tions, 2002), where the Central England sec-

tion was written and researched by Ria Wil-

liams. Through a simple mis-reading and

omission of one word (‘the’) from her

sources, she concluded her account of Bloody

Bosworth Field (pp.120-121) with the re-

markable statement: ‘Richard’s body was put

on display for two days in Newark before be-

ing buried’!

BBC History Magazine continued to maintain

a high number of fifteenth-century related ar-

ticles amongst its output, ahead of rival publi-

cations. May last year saw a useful eight

page summary on ‘The Wars of the Roses’ in

their ‘Essential History’ series, by Alastair

Burn. The issue for December 2003 included

Michael Hicks’s article ‘Sins of the fathers’

on Edward V as a ‘victim of circumstances’

based on his latest biography of the king,

whilst in January 2004, Barry Coward

(Professor of History, Birkbeck College, Lon-

don) examined the perennial appeal of the

conspiracy theory throughout history in ‘Why

the plot thickens’, with some classics of the

genre, Rudolf Hess, the 1960s assassination

of the Kennedys, Malcolm X, Martin Luther

King, and more recently the death of Diana,

Princess of Wales (which still reverberates).

Heading the list, however, was Richard III

and ‘The Princes in the Tower’, without

doubt a prime target, long overdue for consid-

eration in this context. Four decades ago A L

Rowse believed the campaign to rehabilitate

the king’s reputation ‘second only to the Ba-

conian heresy’ (as he called the Shakespeare

authorship question, which also, regrettably,

seems to attract many Society members).

Surely the most extreme example proving this

point published to date centred on the Holbein

Thomas More family group painting and its

hidden messages. This issue also saw Fergus

Collins on ‘England’s Greatest Warrior

Kings?’ which numbered Edward IV amongst

them. The current (March 2004) issue fea-

tures an article by Joanna Laynesmith on

Anne Neville – England’s Lost Queen, mark-

ing the anniversary of her death.

Classified Advertisement

ROSANDA BOOKS

Specialists in out-of-print Ricardian fact and fiction. If you would like to receive our cata-

logue please write to: 11, Whiteoaks Road, Oadby, Leicester LE2 5YL or email: dbald-

win@themutual.net

12

News and Reviews

This section of the Bulletin covers news and reviews of non - society but Ricardian-related events

The Berkeley Castle Muniments: Summary of a talk given by David Smith

FSA to the Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, November 2003

The archive contains some 20,000 documents, the earliest dating back to 1153, and Mr. Smith

chose just five to discuss that evening including Select Book 33 which is of interest to us. The

book was a hitherto unrecognised royal household book for the year 1474/5 mistakenly cata-

logued in the Berkeley muniments as ‘Old daily accounts, temp Henry VIII’. The book compris-

es three sections. The first contains daily accounts of expenses of feeding and providing for Ed-

ward IV’s court and household for the six months from Saturday 1 October 1474 to Wednesday

22 March 1475. There is a similar journal in the Public Record Office (E101/412/5) written by

the same clerk, which ends on the day before the Berkeley volume starts. The next section deals

with costs by department of the household: pantry, buttery, wardrobe, kitchen, poultry, scullery,

saucery, hall and stable. The third section lists daily wages paid to the 355 men employed on the

Household payroll, starting with the highest paid – Robert Wynkefield, Controller of the House-

hold, and John Elrington, newly promoted to be Treasurer of the Household – and ending with

people paid 4d a day.

This gives an enormous amount of information about how the court actually worked, as dis-

tinct from how it was supposed to work. Just before this volume was written the king became

concerned about excessive costs and in 1471-2 drew up orders to reduce expense and curb waste

and embezzlement, as well as commissioning the ‘Black Book’, a textbook on the management

of the household. In reality, the king continued to mount lavish displays of his power and magnif-

icence – for example, the lavishness of royal banquets can be judged from the accounts of the

poultry department, which supplied for the king’s table not just chickens but also plovers, herons,

cranes, woodcock, peacocks and pheasants.

Mr Smith closed with the remark that the Berkeley account book, a major find in the Berkeley

muniments discovered only last year [2002], has the potential to throw interesting light on the

domestic workings of the royal household at that period.

During the ensuing discussion a question was asked about access arrangements to the Berke-

ley material and David Smith responded that there was a project, in conjunction with the Histori-

cal Manuscripts Commission (HMC), to microfilm the archive and this could be accessed at the

Gloucester Record Office. Anyone who wanted to see the original documents could do so if they

had a reason.

This exciting find is likely to become the focus for students with an interest in medieval royal

households and in due course will be transcribed and fully analysed.

Peter Hammond and Wendy Moorhen

Medieval Seals On-Line

This is a joint project between the National Archives (Public Record Office), British Library, Na-

tional Archives of Scotland, National Library of Wales and the University of Durham to make

available 20,000 medieval seals on the web. The many thousands of wax seals attached to docu-

ments in the Middle Ages are not widely accessible. Yet they are not only important for research-

ing the lives of those who used them; they also provide a fascinating and revealing conspectus of

13

medieval Britain: images of kings and bishops, castles and ab-

beys, towns and craftsmen, and a host of other images, reli-

gious, comic, amorous or moral. The organisers are looking

for support to make the project a reality and simply would like

to know the level of interest. They are not asking for money

or any other commitment but they need to demonstrate that

this is a viable project in order to secure Heritage Lottery

funding.

Further details are available on the Society’s website

(www.richardiii.net). If you do not have access to the internet

but you would like to know more and register your interest

please write to me (contact details on front inside cover of the

Bulletin) sending an s.a.e.

Wendy Moorhen

Gothic: Art for England 1400-1547, at the V&A; and Illuminating the Re-

naissance: The Triumph of Flemish Manuscript Painting in Europe, at the

Royal Academy

Two exhibitions with a lot of similarities – three rooms apiece, the extended late medieval peri-

od, comprehensive catalogues ... however also differences: the latter was more narrowly fo-

cused, perhaps less ambitious, but more enjoyable.

‘Gothic’ has generally had an unfavourable press and it is easy to see why: the arbitrary divi-

sion into categories: ‘royalty’, ‘war and chivalry’, ‘patrons’, etc. must have seemed like a logical

idea, but failed to illuminate the exhibits, and the awkward division of the exhibition space into

three separated rooms made it difficult to compare items of like period and type. On a more

practical note, when visiting exhibitions, I like to pay a repeat visit to items of particular interest

(in this case, for instance, items with a particular connection with Richard) and the layout made

this difficult.

Extending ‘Gothic’ well into the Tudor period did not really work. It applies most in archi-

tecture, where the continuity in sacred and secular architecture is perfectly viable – there is a con-

tinuum from Eton College and King’s College chapel, through St George’s, Windsor, to the Hen-

ry VII chapel, and from the great halls of Eltham Palace and Crosby Hall to Hampton Court.

But, unfortunately, architecture was least illustrated of all the decorative arts in the exhibition,

being confined to some detached portions of buildings, large out-of-focus photographs, and a

small slide show of buildings, towards the end of the exhibition. [It had a better showing in the

accompanying television programme.] In other decorative arts, too often one’s reaction was ‘too

late’, when confronted with Tudor caps and rounded toes .

The way the items were displayed left a good deal to be desired – rows of flat fronted show

cases with captions at navel level, and the low levels of lighting necessary to conserve the exhib-

its, made reading captions difficult, and the crowded nature of the exhibition meant that the op-

portunity to move freely in front of a show case, to compare items, was lost. It was nice to see

Margaret of York’s coronet in the round (it was nice to see Margaret of York’s coronet ... having

pursued it to Aachen, in 2002, only to find it had escaped us to reside temporarily at the Tower),

but it would have been nice to see both sides of the Middleham Jewel, as is the case in its perma-

nent home in the Yorkshire Museum. At the V&A the lighting was so poor that although one

could stand in front of the showcase and by judicious positioning ‘wear’ the Middleham Jewel as

a ferronière, one could not see its reverse. Insensitive display lost much of the point of other

The Seal of Richard III

14

exhibits – Richard Beauchamp and his ‘hearse’ plonked down on a plinth in the V&A and look-

ing up with praying hands to – the ceiling of the V&A, lost all the context of his tomb in St

Mary’s Warwick, with hands raised in prayer to the Virgin in the ceiling above him.

Many of the objects were wonderful in themselves – what child would not learn its cross-row

presented with a porringer such as the Studley cup, and it was of course pleasing to see so many

items with Ricardian connections – the Middleham Jewel, his Book of Hours, the Rous Roll, the

Chester sword, etc., but many did not earn their display space: why for example display a man

and horse armour of Henry VIII, when a properly Gothic man and horse armour could be seen

just down the road at the Wallace Collection?

It was also unfortunate that some of the text was traditional: ‘Edward V was killed in the

Tower ...’ – I was kept busy assuring members of the London & Home Counties Branch party,

with whom I visited the exhibition, that I was protesting against these comments.

So – wonderful objects, but not a coherent exhibition as a whole. My favourite object

(naturally excluding the Ricardian items) was the enameled brooch in the shape of a flower, with

a tourmaline centre, which looked as fresh and modern as if had been left behind by the previous

– Art Deco – exhibition.

I had suggested that the Branch visit might take in the Royal Academy exhibition in the after-

noon, but no one wanted to do this – very wisely as it turned out, as it would surely have led to

visual indigestion, and even visiting the RA exhibition alone almost did so. Its better layout,

however, in three interlinked rooms, did give the opportunity to revisit favourites – except that

any and all of the manuscripts could have been so designated.

The manuscripts ranged in size from no bigger than the thumb to Eton choirbook size, and

almost all were absolute stunners, particularly when one realised that each MS had many illumi-

nations, of which only one page was being displayed, albeit perhaps the plum. Some of the illus-

trations were familiar and it was lovely to see them in the flesh so to speak, so much more three-

dimensional than reproductions, with gorgeous, glittering gold leaf, and softer, burnished gold.

Some were revelations - including some Spanish family trees that in fact belong to the British

Library. While the shields had not been completed, giving an unfinished look, the figures and

faces clearly had been completed, and although probably not intended as portraits were neverthe-

less sharply individual.

There were of course Ricardian connections – Margaret of York and Mary of Burgundy, and

Lord Hastings. Lord Hasting’s ‘London’ Hours, familiar to Ricardians, and Lord Hasting’s other

‘Hours’.

It really brought it home to you, how much this was ‘conspicuous consumption’, immensely

expensive to commission and acquire, at the time, and truly staggering, if you fell to computing

the current value of what was assembled there!

Once again it is possible, at least to the slightly jaundiced, Ricardian eye, to detect a falling

off in quality towards the end of the period covered, before illumination ceases and printing takes

over.

Elizabeth Nokes

Medieval Lives on BBC2

By the time this Bulletin reaches UK readers we will be well into Terry Jones’s new series on life

in the Middle Ages (BBC 2 Monday evenings). The series covers eight aspects of medieval life

with the aim of portraying ‘a vibrant society teeming with individuality, intrigue and innova-

tion’. Early indications are that his treatment of Richard III will be favourable so look out for the

episode devoted to ‘Kings’ that will be transmitted on 29 March. It's a series not to miss. There

will be a full review in the summer issue of The Bulletin.

15

Richard III, a new play by Bobby Fishkin

performed at the UCL Theatre, Blooms-

bury, London, 12 – 14 February 2004

At the time of writing, and at our deadline for going

to press for the Bulletin, I have just watched the final

dress rehearsal of this play. It would be inappropriate

to provide a full review at this stage but perhaps en-

tirely appropriate to share briefly the experience with

you.

Bobby Fishkin’s Richard III is the antithesis of the

Shakespearean character although the plays have sim-

ilarities. The telescoping of events, is if anything,

greater than the Bard’s version. This is very much a

21st century production with more technology than

you can shake a stick at. There are giant screens ei-

ther side of the stage to ensure that the less well in-

formed members of the audience are kept up to speed

about events in the life and times of Richard III.

The play begins with an overture, described as a

movement piece, which is intended to show the dis-

junctions in the succession to the crowns of England and France and to set the scene for the

events leading to Richard’s coronation. Act one begins with the news of Edward IV’s death and

Richard ‘having no time to grieve’ quickly re-assesses his position as Protector once Edward V is

crowned and realises that ‘as she (Elizabeth Woodville) ascends ... we descend’. Richard’s im-

mediate concern is for his family ‘I have a son …. Will he have time to grow into a man?’ and

his soliloquy closes with his fears for the future in a Woodville dominated world. Buckingham

confirms his fears but Stillington’s revelation about Edward’s pre-contract allows Richard to take

the initiative and he becomes king. In Act II Buckingham is seduced by Morton’s words. The

prelate works on the duke’s vanity ‘You are a kingmaker …. he was a chunk of clay’ and Buck-

ingham is entranced by a vision of his future glory. The ensuing rebellion is encapsulated in one

dramatic scene that includes the brief appearance –and disappearance of Henry Tudor – his time

is not yet come. Meanwhile Richard has the opportunity to rule and the achievements of his par-

liament are proudly proclaimed but his personal losses bring the king to despair, compounded by

the threat of invasion ‘I have no say in my own destiny.’ Richard’s Bosworth peroration is long

but the climax echoes Shakespeare’s Henry V:

Some time from now, men may say of us who fought this field today …

But tell them friends, that you were here and you cared not what was to come …

We will fight this day, this field, on our terms’

Richard’s death is both poignant and stylised. Surrounded by soldiers with spears, his body is

arched in its death agony and the scene, silhouetted in red, is a vast tableau against the back wall

of the stage. But this is not the end of the play! We have just witnessed history, but now we are

going to witness what passes for history. A large portrait of a handsome young man is brought

on stage, but when it is reversed, a travesty of the picture is displayed as Morton and Shake-

speare’s Richard present their version of events.

This play is an ambitious production and tomorrow night the audience and critics will decide

its merits. My applause, however, goes to a twenty-two year-old Texan who has spent three

years writing a play about a king that Ricardians will recognise, and to a young student-actor

called Zoltan, who brings that king to life.

Wendy Moorhen

Publicity poster for the play

16

B arley Hall is a reconstructed medieval town house in York, well known to many members.

It has been restored to how it looked in the late fifteenth century and is one place where an-

yone can be sure of finding that Richard III is regarded as an undoubtedly Good Thing. The So-

ciety has generously supported the Hall since it became an independent Trust, and three of the

Trustees are members of the Society. The Hall is making steady progress towards completing

furnishing all rooms as they would have been in Richard’s time. Three, including the great hall,

have been done so far. Such events as the recent St Nicholas Fair when a total of nearly 2500

people visited the Hall in the four days that the Fair lasted (there were sometimes queues in the

courtyard waiting to get in) and the fact that in the four months from August to December last

year visitor figures were up by over 13% show that good progress is being made. However Bar-

ley Hall does still need help and this is the point of the picture here.

The picture is a preliminary sketch for a possible painting by Graham Turner, well known for

his excellent paintings of medieval scenes. What is depicted here is a scene in Barley Hall in the

year 1468. William Snawsell has recently been elected Lord Mayor of the city of York and in the

great hall at Barley Hall, his fine house in Stonegate, he holds a sumptuous banquet in honour of

some very important guests. They would certainly be impressed as a magnificent peacock - the

highlight of the meal - is paraded to the top table, accompanied by a musician.

Barley Hall

17

When Graham first visited Barley Hall he was amazed at how this jewel of a building had

been so successfully resurrected. Just sitting quietly in the great hall it is easy to conjure up imag-

es of this historic building’s medieval past, and Graham was immediately inspired to paint some-

thing to bring Barley Hall’s heyday back to life. This preliminary sketch gives some idea of the

composition he has arrived at for a painting full of evocative atmosphere yet providing scope for

plenty of interesting details. It is proposed that the finished painting could then be reproduced in

an edition of prints to help raise much-needed funds for the continued preservation of Barley

Hall.

However, before he devotes the considerable amount of time (and money) this project will

require, Graham would like to have some indication of the amount of potential interest there is

for this exciting project. If you think you might possibly be interested in a print of this subject,

please send a letter or e-mail to help us persuade him that this will, indeed, be a worthwhile un-

dertaking. You will be under no obligation at all and we will publish further information in the

Bulletin when it is available. We will hope that we can unveil Graham’s painting at Barley Hall

in the not too distant future because a print would make a lovely souvenir for members who have

been to any event at Barley Hall, particularly one of the Society banquets.

Graham’s address is Studio 88 Ltd., PO Box 568, Aylesbury, Bucks HP17 8ZX or e-mail him

at info@studio88.co.uk

Peter Hammond

YOUR SOCIETY NEEDS YOU

Opportunities for members

Skills to offer? Time to spare? Do you want to contribute something to the work of the So-

ciety? Then we want to hear from you. The Society is run primarily by voluntary officers,

with outsourcing to third parties kept to a minimum to keep costs down. However with the

many new initiatives taking place workloads are increasing so we are calling for more vol-

unteers to help us with our work.

What are we after? At this stage we do not want to be too prescriptive: just let us know

what you have to offer and we can match to the tasks which need to be done. Some of these

will require no more than a little time whilst others may require access to a computer and

the internet.

If you think you have something to offer then please contact the Chairman Phil Stone

(his details are on the inside of the front cover). Phil is getting married on the 20 March, so

please be patient if he does not respond immediately during the first couple of weeks after

the wedding.

18

‘Such was his renown in warfare’

I n January 1483 the Rolls of Parliament

recorded that the King, Lords and Com-

mons ‘understand and consider that the Duke

[of Gloucester], being Warden of the West

Marches, by his diligent labours … has sub-

dued a great part of the west borders of Scot-

land, adjoining England, by the space of thirty

miles and more … and has [secured] divers

parts thereof to be under the obedience of [the

King] to the great surety and ease of the north

parts of England’. This statement demon-

strates the regard in which Richard was held

at the close of the reign of his brother King

Edward IV. Nevertheless, Richard’s military

reputation, despite contemporary enthusiasm,

has been challenged by historians beginning

with the Crowland Chronicler and in recent

years by Desmond Seward who pointed out

the obvious – that Richard only commanded

an army at one pitched battle – and Michael

Hicks who wrote that his ‘military reputation

was unearned’ and ‘inflated’. The reality was

very different. Warfare has many facets, of

which, it could be argued, the pinnacle is to

lead an army into full battle. Before reaching

such heights, however, much has to be

achieved in practical terms – diplomacy ex-

plored, castles and towns fortified, musters

raised, artillery sourced, victuals provided,

intelligence organised as well as participation

in smaller scale events such as raids and skir-

mishes. Throughout his adult life Richard

was involved in such matters, hardly surpris-

ing in view of the internecine strife that

blighted England in the second half of the fif-

teenth century coupled with the invasions of

England’s old enemies, France and Scotland.

First Steps

Much has been written about the main cam-

paigns that Richard was involved in, the bat-

tles of Barnet and Tewkesbury, the invasion

of Scotland and of course, Bosworth and I do

not propose to cover these in any detail as

members will probably be familiar with these

landmark events. What I am going to do is to

describe briefly Richard’s wide experience in

warfare outside these major campaigns.

Richard’s training in the art of warfare be-

gan at an early age under the tutelage of the

earl of Warwick and would have been the

same as that experienced by all young noble-

men. He would have read the conventional

texts about warfare and in due course he pos-

sessed a copy of the hands-on military text-

book – Vegetius’ De re militari. Richard’s

first experience of campaigning was during

the period when the relationship between

King Edward and Warwick began to founder

and the latter tempted Clarence, the king’s

middle brother, to join his cause. In 1469,

there was a series of disturbances in the north

led by the ‘Robins of Redesdale and Holder-

ness’ and the uprising in Lancashire was suf-

ficiently serious to bring the king north to

deal with it. Edward took his youngest broth-

er along and the royal party made a leisurely

progress via East Anglia. A letter written by

John Paston recounts how the duke of

Gloucester recruited four men to take arms

under his banner. When the royal party

reached Newark, the situation became quite

ugly, as ‘Robin of Redesdale’ with a force

The Man Himself

This article continues our series focusing on Richard III as both duke and king and is a brief ex-

amination of his military career and reputation in the light of twentieth-century criticism. It is by

no means exhaustive and is based on the work of a number of historians including Paul Murray

Kendall, Peter Hammond, Norman Macdougall, Charles Ross, Cora Scofield, Anne Sutton and

Livia Visser-Fuchs and as such the article is an example of what can be achieved by the perusal

of readily available printed sources, both primary and secondary.

19

larger than that of the king, was moving rap-

idly south. The king and Richard fled to the

safety of Nottingham Castle. ‘Redesdale’

continued his march and defeated the loyalist

Welsh forces, under the command of the earl

of Pembroke, near Banbury, leaving the way

clear for Warwick to move against King Ed-

ward who by 2 August was his captive in

Coventry. Warwick’s success was short-lived

and by October Edward was in London ac-

companied by Richard. Kendall conjectured

that it was due to Richard’s active support

during the previous few weeks and his en-

deavours in raising loyal troops that Edward

now rewarded and promoted his brother who

had just turned seventeen. Richard received

grants for estates and lands, he was appointed

Constable of England, received commissions

to array men in Shropshire, Gloucestershire

and Worcestershire and was appointed Chief

Justice of North Wales. There was trouble

stirring in Wales and King Edward decided

that Richard was the person to sort it out. A

grant dated 16 December gave Richard his

‘first independent military com-

mand’ (Kendall, p. 79) when he was given

full power and authority to ‘reduce and sub-

due’ the castles of Carmarthen and Cardigan

in south Wales and to deal with the local re-

bels. After a brief return to England, he was

again sent to Wales leading a commission of

oyer and terminer [a commission to hold and

pass judgment in specified cases] and the fol-

lowing month was appointed Chief Justice

and Chamberlain of South Wales, making

him the ‘virtual Viceroy of the principali-

ty’ (Kendall, p.79).

Meanwhile King Edward faced new diffi-

culties with a rising in Lincolnshire led by Sir

Robert Welles, who was the agent of War-

wick and Clarence. The king successfully

defeated the rebels at Empingham in the ac-

tion known as the battle of ‘Lose-coat’ Field

and a few days later Warwick and Clarence

were proclaimed traitors. Edward pursued the

rebels but had to give up the chase due to the

lack of provisions for his soldiers. Warwick

and Clarence fled to Chesterfield and intend-

ed to move westwards to join Warwick’s

brother-in-law, Lord Stanley, in Manchester.

Richard does not appear to be with the king

during this period and it can be supposed he

was still on active service in Wales. The only

clue to Richard’s activities during March is in

a proclamation made in York by Edward.

Reference was made to a ‘matter of variance’

between Richard and Lord Stanley. Kendall

has suggested that Richard decided to leave

Wales to assist Edward but had a run-in with

some supporters of Stanley and warned the

king of Stanley’s disloyalty. Stanley, the con-

summate trimmer, assessed the situation and

abandoned Warwick. The day after the York

proclamation, 26 March, Richard was com-

missioned to array the men of Gloucester and

Hereford and, on 17 April, the men of Devon

and Cornwall. The last appointment was per-

haps too late as the same month Warwick and

Clarence escaped to France from the west

country.

King Edward was aware that the return of

Warwick was imminent and the summer was

spent in preparing for an invasion. In June

Richard headed commissions of array for

Gloucester, Somerset and Hereford, he was

sent to Lincoln in July on a commission of

oyer and terminer and the following month

joined Edward on a march to Yorkshire to as-

sist the earl of Northumberland to put down a

rebellion. Warwick landed in England in Sep-

tember. Edward and Richard marched south

but when they reached Doncaster the hitherto

loyal brother of Warwick, John, Marquess of

Montagu, threw in his hand with the traitors.

The king, his brother and followers were

forced to flee and on 2 October set sail for

Burgundy. Their exile lasted for a little under

six months and the royal brothers returned to

England in March 1471. Details of Richard’s

involvement in King Edward’s campaign to

regain his throne are found in Peter Ham-

mond’s authoritative The Battles of Barnet

and Tewkesbury but may be briefly summa-

rised by describing how on 14 April, Easter

Sunday, Richard was entrusted with right

wing of the royal host at the Battle of Barnet,

where he was slightly wounded, and within

three weeks he again led the vanguard at the

Battle of Tewkesbury. In both engagements,

Richard acquitted himself well. King Edward

re-established his authority although there

was still some scattered unrest, Warwick,

20

Montagu and Edward of Wales were dead and

for the next twelve years, there was a respite

from the civil conflict.

Warden of the West Marches

King Edward now began his ‘second reign’.

The events of the past two years had seen

losses within the mighty baronial families and

some ‘territorial re-ordering’ was required

(Ross, p. 334). One such territory was the

north of England where Warwick had been

pre-eminent and where Richard was now es-

tablished by the king. He had been created

Warden of the West Marches towards Scot-

land in August 1470 and he now relinquished

his great office as Chief Justice and Chamber-

lain of South Wales to concentrate on his new

role in the north that included the policing of

the borders and the care and repair of fortifi-

cations. Kendall writes that Richard immedi-

ately ‘set forth on a campaign against the

Scots’ (p. 107) but does not cite any evidence

for this and it is unlikely that England would

take an aggressive role at this stage following

the recent upheavals in England. In all likeli-

hood just the opposite was the case as on 7

August a warrant was issued for the safe con-

duct of Scottish ambassadors to ‘treat with the

English’ and authority was granted to the

English commissioners on the 26th ‘to redress

March offences’. Despite meetings between

England and Scotland (September 1471 in

Alnwick, May 1472 in Newcastle and a

schedule for ‘March meetings by the Wardens

to redress complaints’) there were frequent

raids by both sides on land and at sea as the

existing truce crumbled. In April 1474, a

Scottish proclamation was made summoning

the lieges to muster at Lauder under the duke

of Albany to resist a raid to be led by Richard

who also harried the Scots at sea and his ship

the Mayflower captured James III’s Yellow

Carvel. King Edward had to make reparation

to the Scots in February 1475 for this incident

following a truce negotiated late in 1474. Life

on the marches, therefore, appeared to be

lively with forays and skirmishes and with the

Wardens being generally in a state of high

alert.

Involvement in a more substantial military

campaign brought Richard south in 1475

when he joined his brother and almost the en-

tire nobility of England for King Edward’s

‘Great Expedition’ – the invasion of France.

Richard’s contribution of men was the great-

est from any peer. He was indented to pro-

vide 120 men at arms and 1,000 archers but in

the event brought an additional 300 men,

much to his brother’s delight. Richard no

doubt regarded the war as justifiable and only

reluctantly accepted the negotiated settlement

made by his brother with Louis XI.

Richard returned to his northern domain

where the breaches of the truce with Scotland

were becoming more frequent. By 1479 the

region was in crisis, and war became inevita-

ble. Border raids by the Scots began on a

large scale in the spring of 1480 and on 12

May King Edward responded by appointing

Richard Lieutenant-General of the North,

charged to lead an army against the Scots. He

led commissions of array for the three York-

shire ridings, Cumberland, Westmorland and

Northumberland. The Scots made a pre-

emptive strike in the summer led by the earl

of Angus who penetrated into England as far

as Bamborough which he fired. Richard, sup-

ported by a contingent of men from York,

swiftly retaliated and it appears he was suc-

cessful enough to keep the Scots on their side

of the border for the time being. The duke

then visited Sheriff Hutton and proceeded to

make repairs to the defences of the major for-

tress on the western march - Carlisle.

Scottish Campaigns

In 1481 there was an escalation in prepara-

tions for an invasion to be led by the king in

the summer and to prepare the way. John,

Lord Howard, sailed into the Firth of Forth in

late spring destroying and capturing Scottish

ships and burning Blackness. Richard had in

the meantime recruited men to the border gar-

risons and worked closely with the earl of

Northumberland to establish how many men

could be called upon for the invasion. Rich-

ard, along with the Scottish renegade earl of

Douglas, was also given the task of suborning

key Scottish lords to weaken King James’s

support but this covert activity met with little

success. In March Richard had visited Lon-

don to discuss the invasion plans but was no

21

doubt dismayed later in the year to learn that

the king had decided not to undertake the

campaign himself because of ‘adverse tur-

moil’ and left Richard and Northumberland

‘to wage a vigorous war against the

Scots’ (Scofield II, p. 321). King Edward did

travel as far as Nottingham where he arrived

on 1 October and stayed until the 20th. Rich-

ard met with the king where it was no doubt

agreed that it was too late in the season for

the full invasion to

take place that

year. In Richard’s

absence from the

immediate vicinity

of the war North-

umberland may

have appealed to

the citizens of

York for men in a

letter dated 13 Oc-

tober when he re-

ported the Scots

were already in his

eponymous coun-

ty. The year of the

letter is uncertain

(Kendall attributed

it to 1480) but the

incident may well

be the one record-

ed by the Scottish

historian John

Lesley (p. 45) that

the ‘borderers in-

vaded the marches

of England and

took away many

preys of goods and

destroyed many

towns and led

many persons in

Scotland’. Following the fresh news of Scot-

tish incursions into England Richard returned

to the front, laid siege to the town and citadel

of Berwick, which he failed to take, and was

no doubt involved in the ‘intermittent warfare

[that] continued all along the border during

the winter’ (Ross, p. 282).

The new year brought a new campaign-

ing season and on 21 February Richard re-

ceived a commission to obtain the necessary

victuals for his army and with leave to find

them anywhere in England, Wales and Ire-

land. The harvest had been poor, hence the

permission to find grain and crops wherever

they were available. On 22 May Richard led

an attack into southwest Scotland and reached

Dumfries which he burned amongst other

towns. Events now took an unexpected turn

when the brother of King James III, the duke

of Albany, arrived

in England from

France where he

had been living

since fleeing Scot-

land in 1479. King

Edward welcomed

the Scottish traitor

and during a stay

at Fotheringhay,

where they were

joined by Richard,

a treaty was

agreed on 11 June

when the English

king recognized

Albany’s claim to

the throne of Scot-

land. The follow-

ing day Richard

was confirmed as

Lieutenant-

General of the

North and with

Albany set out on

the invasion of

Scotland. He had

authority to raise

an army of around

20,000 men and

sufficient funds to

pay them for four

weeks. The muster was complete by mid-

July and the army crossed the border. The

English host was large enough to terrify Ber-

wick and the town fell to Richard without fur-

ther delay, although the citadel held out.

Lord Stanley was left to continue the siege

whilst Richard moved north, devastating Rox-

burghshire and Berwickshire, all the while

expecting to meet the Scottish army. He was

Model of Richard III by Peter Dale

at the Bosworth Battlefield Centre.

Photograph courtesy of Geoffrey Wheeler.

22

to be disappointed. On 22 July King James’s

dissatisfied subjects had taken their king pris-

oner at Lauder, executed his favourites and

returned with their royal prisoner to Edin-

burgh. As Richard moved towards the capital

the rebels moved to Haddington, situated fif-

teen miles to the east, and awaited develop-

ments. Richard found himself entering an un-

defended Scottish capital. He controlled his

army and the city was not molested. The

king’s captors were prepared to negotiate

with Richard. Albany immediately aban-

doned his hope of becoming king and settled

for the restoration of his lands and position.

The Scots asked for a peace treaty and that

the proposed marriage between the Scottish

heir and princess Cecily take place. Richard

demanded the return of Berwick Castle and

the dowry paid for the princess. The settle-

ment was that the marriage would go ahead if

it were Edward’s wish, otherwise the dowry

would be repaid. Richard left Edinburgh, dis-

banded most of his army at Berwick on 11

August, and continued with the siege. The

castle fell on 24 August. The Crowland

Chronicler was dismissive of the campaign –

that it cost too much for too little gain and

that King Edward was grieved at the

‘frivolous expenditure’. It is, however, diffi-

cult to see what other outcome there could

have been. Richard, on the ground, would

have appreciated the mood of the Scots and

that it would not be possible to establish Al-

bany on the throne, although the situation

might have been different if the Scottish army

had been vanquished. In any event, this was

not one of the original aims of the war. Rich-

ard himself was also keenly aware of the cost

of the army and that he could not afford to

prolong the negotiations or his stay in Scot-

land. In modern parlance, he had achieved

his objective and completed the project on

schedule and within budget.

Richard’s penultimate military campaign

was the preparation to meet the threat of the

Buckingham rebellion in the autumn of 1483.

He was ably supported by Norfolk, who was

close to one of the front lines, and the entire

incident clearly demonstrated Richard’s mili-

tary acumen as he swiftly and easily sup-

pressed the disparate uprisings without per-

sonally becoming involved in even a skir-

mish.

Bosworth

Finally, we come to Bosworth, where at last

Richard commanded his own army and a bat-

tle was joined but with disastrous results for

king. Battles are always uncertain events and

the outcome can never be foretold with any

certainty. This was the battle, however, that

should have been won by the king but the vi-

cissitudes of men’s loyalties snatched victory

from a man who throughout his short life was

intimate with all things martial. Was there to

be another king of England who was so hands

-on? Certainly no Tudor. Possibly a Stuart or

two? Richard as duke and king never shirked

his duty to pursue war, be it in preparation or

actuality, skirmish or battle. He may have

had little interest in the courtly posturing of

the joust, so beloved of his brother Edward

and his great nephew, Henry VIII, but Rich-

ard embraced the art of warfare as a true chiv-

alric prince who, if he had successfully sur-

vived Bosworth, might have gone on to fight

a holy war against the Turks. Those who

challenge his prowess and generalship need

perhaps to look more deeply into his military

career, and though the sources are scant, the

effort is worthwhile. Richard, Duke of

Gloucester was highly rated by his contempo-

raries and it is difficult to see how this reputa-

tion, in hindsight, can be easily dismissed

even allowing for some degree of propaganda

by the Yorkist government about his exploits

in Scotland.

What was written five hundred years ago

cannot be unwritten and I will close with a

few of those observations. The first of these

is a political song written to commemorate

the Battle of Tewkesbury:

The duke of Glocetter, that nobill

prynce,

Yonge of age and victorius in batayle,

To the honoure of Ectour [Hector of Troy]

that he myghte comens,

Grace hym folowith, fortune, and good

spede

(re-printed in both Richard III: The Road to

Bosworth and Richard III’s Books. The edi-

tors of the latter commented that ‘Although

23

the likening to Hector was standard panegyr-

ic, it was no mean compliment and Richard is

the only character compared to a named he-

ro.’)

Next we have a letter of June 1482 ap-

pointing Richard as Commander of the army

against the Scots: ‘King Edward to all to

whom these matters appertain. We therefore

meaning to oppose his [James III’s] malice

and such great injury, trusting with full pow-

ers our illustrious brother, Richard Duke of

Gloucester, in whom not only for his nearness

and fidelity of relationship, but for his proved

skill in military matters and his other vir-

tues ...’ followed by a letter from Edward to

Pope Sixtus, dated 25 August 1482. ‘Thank

God, the giver of all good gifts, for the sup-

port received from our most loving brother,

whose success is so proven that he alone

would suffice to chastise the whole kingdom

of Scotland.’ (Both quotations are from Rich-

ard III: The Road to Bosworth Field pp. 83

and 86.)

From Dominic Mancini (not known as an

admirer of Richard) in his Usurpation of

Richard III ‘Such was his renown in warfare

that, whenever a difficult and dangerous poli-

cy had to be undertaken, it would be entrusted

to his discretion and his generalship’ (p. 65).

And finally, perhaps the most surprising

of all, in letters written in 1513 and 1522, by

Lord Dacre, Warden of the Western Marches.

The letters, referred to in Paul Murray Ken-

dall’s endnotes, were summarised in the Let-

ters and Papers of Henry VIII. Dacre seemed

to feel intimidated by the reputations of Rich-

ard and Northumberland resulting from a raid

they had made into Tevydale and which he

was expected to repeat. Nine years later, he is

still concerned at their exploits in a letter to

Wolsey who responds ‘as they took effectual

measures to punish and repress offenders,

hopes Dacre will obey his wholesome and

friendly admonition and acquire, as good a

character as they did’.

Wendy Moorhen

Printed primary sources:

Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland 1357-1509, ed. J. Bain, London 1888

Calendar of Patent Rolls: Edward IV 1468-76, London 1899

Calendar of Patent Rolls: Edward IV, Edward V, Richard III (1476-85), London 1901

Hall’s Chronicle, reprinted London 1809

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII, eds. J.S. Brewer, James

Gairdner and R.H. Brodie, 21 vols, London 1862-1932. Vol. 1 Part 2 and Vol. 4 Part 1.

The Crowland Chronicle Continuations 1459-1486 edited by Nicholas Pronay and John Cox,

London 1986

The Usurpation of Richard III by Dominic Mancini, Gloucester 1984

York House Books 1461-1490 edited by Lorraine Attreed, 2 vols, Stroud 1991

Further reading: Edward IV: by Charles Ross, London 1974

James III: A Political Study by Norman Macdougall, Edinburgh 1982

Richard the Third: by Paul Murray Kendall, London 1955

Richard III: by Charles Ross, London 1981

Richard III: England’s Black Legend by Desmond Seward, London 1983

Richard III: The Road to Bosworth Field by P W Hammond and Anne F Sutton, London 1985

Richard III: The Man behind the Myth by Michael Hicks, London 1991 and republished as

Richard III, Stroud 2000

Richard III: A Source Book by Keith Dockray, Gloucester 1997

Richard III’s Books by Anne F Sutton and Livia Visser-Fuchs, Stroud 1997

Scotland: The Later Middle Ages by Ranald Nicholson, Edinburgh 1974

The Battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury by P W Hammond, Gloucester 1990

The Life and Reign of Edward the Fourth by Cora L Schofield, 2 vols, London 1924, reprinted

1967

24

M r Gordon Smith comments generally

but is chiefly critical of Anon. He also

points out that Anon did not address the point

that the bones were not found where More

said they were finally buried, a point taken up

by Professor Hanham, our second contributor.

Anon is to be congratulated in the debate

with Bill White over the Westminster Abbey

skeletons (Bulletin, Winter 2003, pp. 19-24)

for making the best of a doubtful case. Theya

Molleson's researches may be more recent

than those of Peter Hammond and Bill White,

but it is a pity that the objections raised by the

latter, e.g. on Wormian bones, should be left

unanswered. Anon uses Molleson to support

the conclusion of the investigation in 1933 by

Tanner and Wright that the skeletons were

those of Edward V and his younger brother

Richard, Duke of York. Anon claims that

Molleson shows both skeletons were male,

but White says that the older one is more like-

ly to have been female. The admitted fact

that the 1933 examination did not consider

the sex of the bones is astonishing.

Anon further claims that the two skeletons

were closely related because of congenitally

missing teeth, found also in the princes’ rela-

tive Anne Mowbray and in Mary of Burgun-

dy. Molleson shows that the occurrence of

this anomaly is high in close relatives, and all

four are descended from Edward III. Presum-

ably this king or some of his descendants who

were ascendants of the four would have this

anomaly, but the only reported evidence ap-

pears to be negative. Anne Mowbray’s

grandfather John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury,

had missing teeth, but he was not a descend-

ant of Edward III (John Ashdown-Hill, ‘The

Missing Molars: a Genealogical Conundrum’,

The Ricardian 11 (1997-99), pp. 340-44, who

says, however, that we do not know whether

Talbot’s teeth were missing congenitally or

lost).

Anon cites Molleson’s improved figures

for the age of the skeletons (older 12.7 – 14.5,

younger 11.5 – 12.5 years), and notes that

these are the ‘right ages to support Wright’s

conclusion that these were Edward V and

Richard Duke of York. The observation that

the average difference in their ages is 2.7

years is particularly convincing, given that

Edward was two years and eight months older

than Richard ... Edward was 12.5 years old

and Richard nearly ten years old in 1483!’

But these last figures are below Molleson’s.

Perhaps this is why Anon asks, ‘Does all this

help us to arrive at a date for the death of the

Princes?’ As I see it, the date should lie be-

tween Molleson’s lowest figure for the

younger (11.5) and the highest figure of the

older (14.5). Assuming that the skeletons are

those of the princes, I calculate that Richard,

Duke of York, who was born in August 1473,

should have died in or after February 1485.

Edward V was born in November 1470, and

so should have died in or before May 1485.

The date of death February - May 1485 is

a few months before Richard III’s death in

August 1485, and therefore hardly ‘still com-

fortably within the reign of Richard III’.

Anon admits that Molleson suggested that the

princes died during 1484, and that Wright

suggested August 1483. But August 1483

agrees with Sir Thomas More, and if the date

of death is about 18 months out, one cannot

confidently assert, as Anon does, that More’s

traditional story is correct in its main outlines.

As a parting shot Anon resurrects the old

The Debate: WHOSE BONES?

The response to the debate on the bones of the Princes in the December Bulletin was rather low

key, perhaps because members agreed with one or the other of our debaters and did not wish to

comment. Nevertheless there were three excellent responses, all of them taking issue with

Anon to a greater or less extent. Further letters on this topic would of course be welcome.

25

canard that the skeletons were found exactly

where More said they were buried. If this

were so, it is difficult to understand why they

were not found there by Henry VII, who

could thus have destroyed rumours that the

princes had survived. In view of the contra-

dictory accounts of the discovery of the bones

in 1674 and of the strange objects originally

with the skeletons in the funerary urn in

Westminster Abbey, I can imagine the re-

mains were found on a spoil-heap. Once it

was realised that the bones were roughly the

age of the princes in 1483, the excavators re-

membered that in More the princes were bur-

ied at the foot of a staircase, and decided that

the skeletons must have come from a staircase

which had been removed. Alas, the canard is

wrong. What the discoverers, A.L. Rowse,

and Anon apparently failed to do was to

check More, who says that the bodies of the

princes were later exhumed and re-interred in

an unknown place. Also it strikes me that

Molleson's evidence for the male sex of the

bones is disputed, for consanguinity it still

has to be proved, and for

the age and date of death

it is against the findings

of 1933. There is no con-

vincing evidence for the

traditional story.

If you believe that the

bones are those of the

princes, there is an alter-

native story. If months

can be taken off

Molleson’s figures for the

age of the skeletons so

that the princes died

‘comfortably within the

reign of Richard III’, why

cannot a few months be

added so that the boys

were conveniently exter-

minated by Henry VII

after Bosworth?

Anon ends by saying

that the 1933 examination

concluded that the traditional story was main-

ly correct, and that this conclusion needed no

revision. But revision is precisely what Bill

White, Theya Molleson and others are en-

gaged in. And I suspect it is needed because

the investigators of 1933, like the workmen of

1674, wanted to believe that the traditional

story was true and, perhaps unconsciously,

fitted the facts to the story.

I am not questioning the integrity of the

investigators. In another popular examination

from not many years earlier, highly respected

scientists wanted to believe that Dawn Man

lived in England because of remains found in

the ancient gravels at Piltdown in Sussex. In

view of the Piltdown hoax, we should dis-

pense as far as we can with romantic baggage,

and judge the facts negatively until we have

good reason to do otherwise. I see no reason

for believing that the Westminster Abbey

bones are those of the princes.

P rofessor Alison Hanham concentrates on

the strange omission by Anon of the fact

that More actually said that the bones of the

Princes were moved from under the stairs

where he said they were first buried

The anonymous contribution to the debate

on ‘the bones’ (Winter

2003, pp. 21-24) was most

interesting scientifically,

but the author was unwise

to conclude it by quoting

A. L. Rowse’s statement

that ‘the two skeletons

were found exactly where

Thomas More said they

were buried’ and by en-

dorsing the belief of Tan-

ner and Wright that ‘the

traditional story, told by

Thomas More, was correct

in its main outlines’.

I note than Anon’s reading

list did not include R. S.

Sylvester, ed., The Com-

plete Works of Sir Thomas

More, vol. 2, New Haven

and London 1963. Which

part of More's story was

meant? Presumably that

after smothering the princes the murderers

buried the bodies ‘at the stayre foote, metely

depe in the grounde under a great heape of

stones’. Curiously, that echoes part of quite a

The urn containing the bones.

Photograph courtesy of Geoffrey Wheeler.

26

different story in John Rastell’s Pastyme of

People (1529). That one had the princes per-

suaded to hide in a chest, which the murderers

then locked and buried in a previously-

prepared ‘great pytte under a steyre’ ... ‘and

anone caste erthe thereon, and so buryed them

quycke [i.e. alive]’ before chest and contents

were removed and thrown into the sea some-

where between England and Flanders

(Sylvester, ed. op. cit., pp. 265-6). In Ras-

tell’s alternative story one of the boys was

smothered and the other stabbed in the throat

with a dagger before, again, the bodies were

disposed of at sea. Rastell explained that

‘Dyvers men conjectured [this story about the

method of disposal] to be trewe, because that

the bones of the sayd chylderne coude never

be found buryed, nother in the Towre nor in

no nother place’. More, on the other hand,

claimed to have heard (but much more proba-

bly invented himself) a tale that in the inter-

ests of family honour Richard had ordered his

nephews’ remains to be taken up from their

original hiding-place and secretly re-interred

in a never-revealed location.

It seems in fact that in the early sixteenth

century nobody knew for sure how the princ-

es were supposed to have died, or what had

happened to their remains – ‘cast God wote

where’, said More. On one thing, however,

they were agreed: the princes’ bodies had not

been left buried within the confines of the

Tower.

L esley Wynne-Davies makes the follow-

ing pertinent comments on coming to

conclusions before we have any real evi-

dence. I cannot see that the evidence we have

is good enough yet to permit any real conclu-

sions to be drawn on the identity of the bones,

and would make two points.

First, no techniques exist or (as far as I

know) are being worked on for pinpointing

the calendar date of death with any real de-

gree of accuracy. Carbon 14 dating is not

nearly accurate enough, and, in any case, the

samples are surely now very contaminated.

Yet until it can be shown that the two children

in question died at one and the same time no

estimate of their relative ages at death, even

estimates produced by very advanced scien-

tific techniques, can give us anything more

than food for speculation.

Secondly, given the fact that they were not

discovered in a controlled and proper-

ly-recorded excavation, we are really totally

dependent on what evidence the bones them-

selves can provide. Three things would al-

ready be possible, if ever an investigation

were to be permitted.

Carbon 14 analysis might establish the

calendar age of death as occurring in an earli-

er - or later - century, if the problem of con-

tamination could be sorted out.

An analysis of the mitochondrial DNA

present would establish whether the children

were siblings, even if no comparative material

from other hypothetically related skeletons

were available.

An oxygen-isotope analysis of the teeth

would show where the children had been

brought up. This technique was used to show

that the ‘Amesbury Archer’, a recent-

ly-discovered skeleton dating from about

2400-2200 calibrated B.C. from Wiltshire,

was brought up in Central Europe. Water

contains different proportions of the three iso-

topes of oxygen according to such factors as

distance from the coast, altitude, temperature,

etc., and these leave their individual traces in

our teeth as they develop in childhood. The

map of the oxygen-isotope values for Europe

shows three different zones in southern Eng-

land. (See Current Archaeology, no. 184, of

February 2003.) The values for the Ludlow

area, where Edward V was brought up, would

be different from London values, where the

younger Richard was brought up.

If only these two tests could be carried out

their combined results would provide a prima

facie case either for or against the proposition

that these are the bones of the princes. How-

ever, as we all know only too well, at present

the establishment of scientific facts must wait

on official sentiment. Bones are not now sen-

tient beings, though once they were, and The

Powers That Be are still blocking scientific

investigation. Unfortunately, infuriatingly,

there is nothing that we can do about this. It

is not for want of trying.

27

O f all the alleged crimes of Richard,

Duke of Gloucester, later Richard III,

only one has attracted little or no de-

fence - the apparently judicial murder of An-

thony Woodville, Earl Rivers, Lord Richard

Grey and Sir Thomas Vaughan at Fothering-

hay Castle on 25 June 1483, the day before

Gloucester assumed the throne. Gloucester

accused them of trying to assassinate him on

30 April, but this seems contradicted by his

successful capture then of the three with Ed-

ward V at Stony Stratford. The capture rather

than any assassination attempt is attested by

extant sources – Mancini, the Crowland

Chronicle, Rous, the London chronicles, Ver-

gil, More – followed by the revisionist Paul

Murray Kendall.

No records of a trial have survived, and

some sources say the three suffered death,

without being heard, under Sir Richard

Ratcliff, Gloucester's follower. Rous lets slip,

however, that their chief judge was Henry

Percy, Earl of Northumberland. Rivers had

been brought from Sheriff Hutton and Grey

from Middleham to join Vaughan at Ponte-

fract. If there was no trial at Pontefract, Riv-

ers and Grey could have been executed where

they were held.

It looks as though the three were accorded

some form of hearing. Rous says that Rivers,

Grey and Vaughan ‘were condemned to death

as though they had in fact plotted the death of

Richard, duke of Gloucester, ... a thing they

had never contemplated’, though some

sources (Crowland, Rous, More) claim that

the accused were not allowed a chance to de-

clare their innocence.

The charge, then, looks like conspiracy to

murder and perhaps attempted murder.

Gloucester could claim he had witnesses,

arms, and the accused had been caught in the

act. With such evidence against them, one

might ask if the failure of the three to declare

their innocence was that they were plainly

guilty.

Although Gloucester had laid his accusa-

tions before the royal council after his arrival

in London on 4 May, he presumably did not

prosecute while he tried to negotiate with the

queen Elizabeth Woodville, who had fled into

sanctuary. It was only after her conspiracy

against him with her opponent, William, Lord

Hastings, was uncovered on 13 June that

Gloucester ordered the trial of Rivers, Grey

and Vaughan.

Mancini says that Gloucester failed to se-

cure the condemnation of the three by the

royal council because there was neither trea-

son nor evidence. The councillors took the

view that, although he had been appointed

Protector by Edward IV’s will, Gloucester

had not been formally proclaimed in that of-

fice by them before he arrived in London. As

the alleged offences were committed before

then, the Statute of Treason failed on a techni-

cality. Nevertheless, the council, while not

allowing the treason charge, probably thought

that there was at least a case to answer on a

capital charge, and agreed to the detention of

the accused.

Mancini’s statement that there was ‘no

certain case’ is not supported by what had al-

ready happened when Edward V, Gloucester

and Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham,

entered London on 4 May. At the head of the

procession trundled four wagons loaded with

barrels of harness including Woodville ar-

mour, which criers proclaimed had been for

use against Gloucester. Mancini’s assertion

that the arms were stored around London for

use against the Scots suggests that the Italian

thought the capital was much closer to the

Stony Stratford: The Case for the Prosecution

GORDON SMITH

28

border. More maintains the armour had to be

packed at Ludlow or thrown away – which

seems untrue – and that wise men thought

that, to kill Gloucester, it should be on peo-

ple’s backs. Mancini said, however, that the

armour bore ‘the devices of the queen’s

brothers and sons’, which could mean not all

of it came from Ludlow, but was acquired en

route. Perhaps it was acquired as a result of

an attempted ambush.

Mancini also notes that Gloucester’s entry

into London was accompanied by no more

than five hundred soldiers drawn partly from

his own and partly from the duke of Bucking-

ham’s estates. If half of the Protector's men

took Rivers, Grey and Vaughan into captivity

in the north, this figure of 500 is close to

More’s figures of 600 for Gloucester and 300

horse for Buckingham. The dukes were pit-

ted against a royal escort of 2,000 men and,

despite being told of the size of the escort by

Hastings (Crowland), they had failed to in-

crease their forces to match it. This suggests

Gloucester and Buckingham were not plan-

ning to seize the young king and his compan-

ions.

Others beside the three accused were ar-

rested – for example, Sir Richard Haute, who

some sources insist was also executed at

Fotheringhay – but soon released (Great

Chronicle, More, London chronicles). The

briefer early narratives of Rous, the London

chronicles (who all confuse Rivers with Dor-

set) and Vergil assume the arrests occurred at

Stony Stratford. The longer ones except

Mancini (Crowland and More) agree on the

capture of Sir Thomas Vaughan, coming from

Ludlow, in Stony Stratford itself. Rivers was

originally at Ludlow and arrived at North-

ampton, and then was either arrested there

(Mancini, More) or near Stony Stratford

(Crowland). Grey had come either from Lud-

low (More) or, more likely, from London

(Mancini), and then either reached Northamp-

ton and was arrested near Stony Stratford

(Crowland only) or was captured in the latter

(Mancini, More).

All the longer sources have Rivers greet-

ing Gloucester and Buckingham at Northamp-

ton. The town was on Gloucester’s route

south from Yorkshire to London, and could

be a meeting point with Rivers and the king

who journeyed east from Ludlow. There can

be little doubt that Gloucester enquired about

joining the royal cavalcade on its way to Lon-

don, and that Rivers suggested a rendezvous

at Northampton (Mancini). Yet all sources

agree that. while Richard duly arrived at

Northampton, Edward V reached Stony Strat-

ford.

It was therefore important that Rivers

should be seen to be keeping the rendezvous.

In More, he arrived at Northampton and

stayed there, while Edward V continued on to

Stony Stratford. In Mancini and Crowland,

Rivers and the king arrived at Stony Stratford,

and then Rivers turned north to greet the

dukes. (P.M. Kendall conflated both stories,

having Edward V and Rivers passing through

Northampton, and then Rivers turning back.)

There was no reason why Edward V

(More) or both he and Rivers should push on

from Northampton instead of keeping the ren-

dezvous with Gloucester. The problem of in-

sufficient accommodation suggested by Ken-

dall could easily have been foreseen earlier,

and in any case the royal cavalcade could

have divided, with Rivers and the king stay-

ing behind. If it had been decided already to

aim for Stony Stratford, the route through

Northampton is an unnecessary detour.

In the second story, Mancini and Crow-

land imply that Rivers went to consult

Gloucester, but this is an inadequate motive

and inconsistent with events in London,

where the royal council under the Woodville's

had circumvented Gloucester’s protectorship.

Some inkling of these events, and the fact that

Edward V was not at the promised rendez-

vous, would give Gloucester good reason for

seizing Rivers - which Rivers could have eas-

ily anticipated.

The notion that Rivers went to consult the

dukes therefore looks unlikely. The North-

ampton stories seem invented to conceal his

deception in not meeting Gloucester and

Buckingham as promised. Mancini mentions

that Lord Richard Grey ‘had come from Lon-

don to the king’. Before he left the capital,

Grey knew that the Woodville meeting-point

was Stony Stratford, not Northampton, which

implies the deception was planned.

29

Rivers had already acquired a patent from

Edward IV allowing him to raise troops in the

Welsh marches, and on 8 March 1483, shortly

before the king’s death, he asked his lawyer

Andrew Dymmock to send him a copy of it.

In Ludlow on 14 April he received news from

his sister, Elizabeth Woodville, of the king’s

death. On 16 April his nephew, the new king

Edward V, wrote from Ludlow to the burgh-

ers of [King’s] Lynn that he was coming to

London to be crowned. Rivers had a manor

close to Lynn, and might well have supplied a

messenger to deliver Edward’s letter, and also

to carry his own verbal call to arms to his

men there. Perhaps other Woodville strong-

holds were contacted likewise.

Gloucester’s enquiry to Rivers about the

rendezvous had inadvertently allowed the lat-

ter to predict his movements, a prerequisite

for ambush. Rivers’ choice of Northampton

was on Gloucester's route south, but over six-

ty miles from London. Its central position

made it a good mustering point. To make the

rendezvous, Gloucester slowed his march

30

south. The royal cavalcade did not leave

Ludlow until 24 April (Rous). Both these de-

lays would give the Woodville forces time to

gather near Northampton and Stony Stratford.

The royal cavalcade moved towards the

rendezvous, with Buckingham from Brecon

behind it to the west, and Gloucester in front

from the north. With ambush in mind, Rivers

could then have slipped from between the two

dukes by not turning off for Northampton, but

continuing south down Watling Street to

Stony Stratford. There perhaps he was joined

by Grey and the other Woodville forces.

So Rivers had opened up between himself

and the dukes the distance between North-

ampton and Stony Stratford. He left Edward

V at Stony Stratford, then took the road north

towards Northampton to ambush the dukes

(hence the journey given by Mancini and

Crowland). Some way along this road was

Elizabeth Woodville’s manor of Grafton

Regis. The Woodvilles were landowners in

Northamptonshire and their soldiers were on

friendly territory. The county was far more

FOILING THE AMBUSH

31

heavily wooded in the past. (On both sides of

the road, names of farms and places still con-

tain ‘tree’, ‘wood’, and kinds of trees.)

Mancini and More maintain that Rivers was

arrested at Northampton, and the dukes’

troops on the road prevented the news reach-

ing Edward V; the different scenario in Crow-

land does not need this. But in fact the troops

on the road could have been those of the

Woodvilles, and they had cover for an am-

bush.

When Gloucester reached Northampton

on 29 April, he waited in vain for Edward V.

The arrival instead of Buckingham, who had

been following the royal escort, showed the

dukes that Rivers had given them the slip, and

was now further south towards London. In

pursuit next morning on the road south to

Stony Stratford, they should have been am-

bushed by Woodville forces.

Gloucester and Buckingham were ex-

pected to ride into the ambush and be killed

quickly. Rivers could then rejoin the king at

Stony Stratford. But somehow the dukes

managed to avoid any ambushes. Perhaps

they received advance warning or suspected a

trap.

If they were prepared for ambushes, they

could have ridden through them. The Wood-

ville troops would then be out of position and

unable to defend Edward V. With Rivers to

the north, there had been no need for

look-outs around Stony Stratford, and without

them the royal entourage may have been una-

ware of the dukes’ approach. The approach

could have been rapid, but More says that Ed-

ward V was ready to leave, which could sug-

gest that he had waited some time already.

Perhaps, to avoid ambush, Gloucester and

Buckingham had devised a more devious ma-

noeuvre on foot.

There would also have been a delay if the

dukes rode round the ambushes. Did they

simply by-pass Grafton Regis by taking the

road from Northampton to Towcester, and

thence to Stony Stratford? Perhaps they even

rode through Towcester down to Bucking-

ham, where the Buckinghams had a manor,

and then turned to approach Stony Stratford

from the southwest, while those waiting in the

latter town were expecting moves from the

north.

In any event, when Rivers failed to arrive,

the royal entourage (as in More) prepared to

depart. During these preparations, the intend-

ed victims suddenly appeared (compare

Crowland). In the ensuing altercation

Gloucester told Edward V, according to

Mancini, that the men who had brought about

his father Edward IV’s death, as companions

and servants of his vices, were planning to do

the same thing to his son, and therefore had

prepared ambushes to kill Gloucester himself,

as protector; the ambushes ‘had been revealed

to him by accomplices’. Edward V had been

clearly left in the dark, and the dukes treated

him with deference.

Sir Thomas Vaughan and others were ar-

rested, and the royal escort was dismissed.

Rivers and the ambushing forces would have

been mopped up in a move back to North-

ampton. From there, Rivers, Grey and

Vaughan were sent north in captivity and, on

3 May, Edward V, Richard and Buckingham

reached St Albans, and London the day after.

Thus Gloucester's capture of the king and the

three could have happened because a Wood-

ville ambush failed, a possibility mention by

Hammond and Sutton in The Road to Bos-

worth Field. Early sources were misled ulti-

mately by those involved in the failure, who

needed to explain it away by trying to fit their

inventions about the capture into circumstanc-

es surrounding the ambush without revealing

the ambush. Interestingly enough, besides

being the scene of the capture of Edward V,

according to Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase

and Fable Stony Stratford lays claim to being

Reading List

Dominic Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard III, 2nd ed. by C.A.J. Armstrong, Gloucester 1989,

especially pp. 74 - 9, 82 - 5, 92 - 3.

Nicholas Pronay and John Cox, eds., The Crowland Chronicle Continuations: 1459 - 1486, Lon-

don 1986, especially pp. 154 - 7, 160 - 1.

32

Alison Hanham, Richard III and his Early Historians 1483 - 1525, Oxford 1975, especially pp.

118 - 24 (including Excursus: John Rous’s Account of the Reign of Richard III).

Robert Fabyan, The New Chronicles of England and France, ed. by Henry Ellis, London 1811,

especially p. 668.

A.H. Thomas and I.D. Thornley, eds., The Great Chronicle of London, London 1938, especially

pp. 230 - 2.

C.L. Kingsford, ed., Chronicles of London, Oxford 1905, especially p. 190.

Polydore Vergil, Three Books of Polydore Vergil's English History, ed. by Sir Henry Ellis

(Camden Soc. pub. 29), London, 1844, especially pp. 174 - 6, 182.

Sir Thomas More, The History of King Richard III, ed. by Richard S. Sylvester (Yale edition of

the works of Sir Thomas More, vol. 2), New Haven 1963, especially pp. 17 - 20, 24 - 5, 57 - 8,

88 - 9.

P.M. Kendall, Richard the Third, London 1955, especially pp. 173 - 8, 182, 211 - 3, 463 - 4.

Anne F. Sutton and P.W. Hammond, eds., The Coronation of Richard III: the Extant Documents,

Gloucester 1983, especially pp. 23, 283.

E.W. Ives, ‘Andrew Dymmock and the Papers of Anthony, Earl Rivers, 1482 - 3’, Bulletin of the

Institute of Historical Research, vol. 41 (1968), especially pp. 226 - 29.

Historical Manuscripts Commission 11th Report (1887) App. III, the Manuscripts of the Corpo-

rations of Southampton and King's Lynn, p. 170.

Michael Bennett, The Battle of Bosworth, Gloucester 1985, especially pp. 38 - 9, 181.

Louise Gill, Richard III and the Buckingham Rebellion, Stroud 1999, especially pp. 52 - 5.

P.W. Hammond and Anne F. Sutton, Richard III: the Road to Bosworth Field, London 1985.

War Horses at Bosworth

LYNDA M. TELFORD

F urther to the debate regarding the correct

site of the Battle of Bosworth, I would

like to put forward a point which, after thirty

years’ experience with horses, leads me to

believe that, whether Dadlington or Ather-

stone is the site, it cannot have been at Ambi-

on Hill. This is due to the cramped area

thought to be the battlefield, which is quite

unsuitable for large numbers of horses. As is

well known several types of horses were in

use at the time. Apart from sumpter horses, a

knight would use two kinds in this situation.

The light, swift riding horse, occasionally

with a valuable strain of Arabian blood for

improved looks and speed, would be kept in

the rearward lines and used as the medieval

‘getaway car’. Then there was the warhorse.

These are often confused with the present

day Shires (as mentioned in the article quoted

by S. Derry in a book review in The Ricardi-

an, no. 136, 1997). However, the warhorse,

though certainly able to carry considerable

weight, was also required to be capable of

bursts of speed. Not, of course, as fast as the

riding horses; indeed, it was sometimes said

that they only had two speeds – amble or full

gallop. Contemporary drawings of such hors-

es show a far lighter horse than the Shire,

with much less feathering, which is a distinct

disadvantage in muddy or snowy conditions.

The selective breeding then carried out (of

which there is a great deal of evidence here in

the Yorkshire Dales, with a proliferation of

medieval horse-stud sites) produced a more

refined weight carrier. It is quite likely that

the present day Cleveland Bay (the old York-

shire Carriage Horse) is a descendant of the

warhorse type. They are extremely strong,

intelligent and teachable, with a good temper-

ament and clean legs. The police often use

33

After Bosworth: A Fork in the Road

P. A. HANCOCK

this type, or its crosses, for similar reasons in

their crowd control work. However, the great

heights presently reached by today’s Cleve-

lands, or indeed Shires, would not be known,

or necessary, in medieval times.

We are told that Richard was an excellent

commander and that the concentrated cavalry

attack he used was an accepted tactic, not an

act of desperation on his part. No sensible

commander would waste his knights’ lives

unnecessarily, so he must have believed that

his charge of several hundred knights was

likely to be successful, as it very nearly was.

Therefore, he would have deployed his caval-

ry where they could be used to full advantage.

An eyewitness account refers to an entire

division being used for that charge (cited by

Alfred Spont in 1897 and referred to by Mi-

chael Jones in ‘Bosworth 1485’, taken from a

letter by a French mercenary on the Tudor

side, dated 23 August 1485). No commander

of Richard’s calibre would expect many hun-

dreds of mounted knights to work in so con-

fined an area as Ambion Hill, where, by the

time the riders in the van reached their objec-

tive, the ones at the rear would have barely

set off and would be quite unable to be used

effectively. Either of the other suggested

sites would allow far more room for manoeu-

vre, though Atherstone seems more likely as

it is quite close to a marshy area at Fenny

Drayton which would have proved a serious

obstacle to weight-carrying horses trying to

move at speed. We understand this indeed

caused a problem. I hope these points are of

interest and would welcome comments.

T he ex-baseball player Yogi Berra is

reputed to have once announced that: ‘if

you come to a fork in the road – take it.’ My

concern here is somewhat in the same vein.

Michael Jones’s provocative re-appraisal of

the site of conflict between Richard III and

Henry Tudor on the morning of 22 August

1485 leaves any number of questionable con-

cerns but here, for the present, I wish to for-

ward only one. Jones, in his text, asks us to

consider the psychological motivations of the

combatants, using primarily the tenets of log-

ic and their individual preferred self-interest.

Given these imperatives, his account of the

action of Henry Tudor following the battle is

less than convincing as even a brief perusal

of the topographical context shows. Interest-

ed readers may wish to consult a map of this

local area to have at their side, which will

help elucidate these geographical objections

more clearly. Jones locates the cessation of

hostilities around the Fenny Drayton area

(see Jones, 2002). This being so, why does

Henry Tudor now make for Leicester and not

for London? London is surely the prize and

as the seat of power must be claimed at the

earliest opportunity, especially given Tudor’s

highly doubtful claim to the throne and his

still tenuous position in what for him must

have been a strange land. Even if the battle

finished around Jones’s ‘burial mound’ on

the branching Roman Road of ‘Fenn

Lanes’ (and this is giving him the best of his

interpretation), Watling Street, one of the

major Roman thoroughfares in the whole

country still beckons to the south

(Codrington, 1903). Indeed, according to

Jones, Henry Tudor had, prior to the battle,

marched some miles south along Watling

Street already that day. Jones would have us

believe that Henry Tudor progressed sixteen

miles in a north-east direction, away from his

line of march upon the capital – why? If he

needed respite after the battle, there is Hinck-

ley, four miles away from the Atherstone site.

If he needed a place for the burial of the hon-

34

ored dead, Nuneaton is less than four miles

away and closer to Jones’s purported battle

site than Dadlington where we know some of

the combatants were interred (see Jones,

2002). If Tudor needed a city for the night,

Coventry is ten miles directly south and no

great diversion from his road of progress to-

ward the capital.

The fact is, Michael Jones must have

Henry Tudor walk away from his best inter-

est precisely because of what little infor-

mation we do have of the aftermath of the

battle. For Jones’s reinterpretation to work,

Tudor has to march along the Fenn Lane,

burying the dead at Dadlington, passing Wil-

liam, Lord Hastings’ sombrely incomplete

Castle of Kirby Muxloe and on into Leicester

to accord with the historical record. However,

Jones’s whole thesis is based upon a reap-

praisal of probable response and in the ab-

sence of more persuasive evidence, this ac-

tion seems very much counter to Tudor’s best

interest at that moment in time. If we accept

Foss’s currently most persuasive interpreta-

tion (see Foss, 1998), or even the more tradi-

tional location, then the burial at Dadlington

and the progress to Leicester (now the closest

city) makes greater sense, although Tudor’s

imperative to claim the capital must still be

considered and important motivation. In

short, unless Jones can find more persuasive

evidence for Henry Tudor’s known actions

after the conflict, the more traditional version

of events and indeed the more traditional

location of the battle must, on this ground,

continue to be preferred until further signifi-

cant evidence is found from which we can

again re-appraise this most frustrating of his-

torical conflicts.

The Middleham Window

JOHN SAUNDERS

I n the Bulletin Autumn 2003 we were re-

minded by Bill White of the events of

1933 involving those bones in Westminster

Abbey. It was not a good year for Ricardians,

who in those days called themselves ‘The

Fellowship of the White Boar’. The Fellow-

ship had been founded in 1924 by the Liver-

pool surgeon Saxon Barton and early mem-

bers included the writers Philip Lindsay and

Marjorie Bowen, the historians Philip Nelson

and Aylmer Vallance, and the actor Tom Hes-

lewood.

One of the aims of the Fellowship was to

sponsor a memorial to Richard III, the only

English monarch without an extant tomb, a

sad state of affairs which a modern memorial

would help put right. By the early 1930s seri-

ous thought was being given to its form and

location. The setbacks of 1933 did not deter

the Fellowship and by the following year a

memorial was in place. In the seventieth an-

niversary year of this memorial’s dedication it

is appropriate that we should recall again the

events and personalities that gave us what we

know today as the Middleham Window. In

1475 Middleham’s church of St Mary and St

Alkelda had been elevated to the status of a

College by Richard, Duke of Gloucester. The

church’s close associations with Richard and

its proximity to his favourite residence make

Reading List 1. Jones, M.K. (2002). Bosworth 1485: Psychology of a Battle.(pages 198, 154) Stroud.

2. Codrington, T. (1903). Roman roads in Britain, London.

3. Foss, P. (1998). The Field of Redemore: The Battle of Bosworth, 1485. Newton Linford.

4. Hancock, P.A. (2002). Solem a tergo reliquit: The troublesome Battle of Bosworth.

Ricardian Register, volume 27, part 2.

35

it an inevitable focal point for Ricardians. To

the Fellowship it was the obvious place for a

memorial. After much discussion and debate

a stained glass window was agreed to be the

most appropriate form it should take. Bar-

ton was the driving force behind the idea – as

he reflected in later life ‘I can honestly say

that but for my efforts there

would have been no window at

Middleham. I was called crazy

when I first proposed it.’

Negotiations were carried

out with the Vicar of Middle-

ham, the Rev. Mr. Thomas

Young, who became both an

enthusiastic supporter of the

project and a member of the

Fellowship. His help was to

be crucial in clearing all the

ecclesiastical hurdles and se-

curing the necessary faculty,

which were by no means easy

tasks. Once the faculty had

been obtained the first deci-

sion to be made was where to

place the window. The Rev.

Mr. Young arranged for a lo-

cal photographer, Charles Illife from nearby

Leyburn, to take photographs of two potential

locations and send the negatives to Barton.

This he did and in an accompanying letter

provided the following information: ‘For the

plain window, i.e. the one near the church’s

main door, 19 and 19 ½ inches for left and

right lights respectively. And for the second,

which has some bits of design and is, I believe

called “The St Alkelda Window”, 20 ¾ inches

for both lights.’ After some deliberations the

plain window was chosen.

Philip Nelson, an expert on medieval

stained glass, was given the task of designing

a window appropriate to a fifteenth-century

monarch. He took up the challenge with rel-

ish. His final design has St Richard of Chich-

ester, with his emblem of an ox, in the left

hand upper light and in the right hand appears

St Anne teaching the Virgin to read. Beneath,

in small panels of blue, are figures of King

Richard kneeling at a prie-dieu with his son

Edward behind him. Facing them is Queen

Anne Neville. The legend below reads Ad Dei

gloriam et in piam memoriam Ricardi tercii

Regis Anglie qui hanc Collegiam fieri fecit

Anno domini MCCCLXXVIII. All the repre-

sentations in the window are faithful to fif-

teenth-century glass designs of the School of

York.

The execution of the window was carried

out by a firm based in Liver-

pool at a cost of £400, then a

considerable amount of mon-

ey. The bulk of the funds

were to be raised through

public subscription and by the

time of the window’s dedica-

tion nearly £375 had been

collected. The date for this

was set for the 20 April 1934,

close to the 450th anniversary

of the death of Edward of

Middleham. Barton dealt with

the invitations, despatched

with an explanatory leaflet

and photograph of the win-

dow. The leaflet noted that

‘by means of a plate at the

door an opportunity will be

afforded for contributions to

the cost of the window for which £25 is still

required.’ The plate delivered the balance.

Barton had also been active on the public-

ity front. The Archbishop of Liverpool was

asked to arrange a commemorative service for

Edward of Middleham in Liverpool Cathedral

on the day of the dedication. His secretary

replied ‘He [the Archbishop] is very interest-

ed to hear what the Fellowship of the White

Boar is doing to perpetuate the memory of

King Richard III and to see the photograph of

the beautiful Middleham Window … he re-

grets very much that it is now not possible to

organise any commemoration of his memory

on Friday.’ Anthony Wagner, Portcullis Pur-

suivant and later Garter King of Arms, wrote

to Barton on receipt of his invitation ‘May I,

as a member of the College which King Rich-

ard III founded four hundred and fifty years

ago, express to you my deep interest in the

erection of a window in Middleham Church to

his memory.’ In response Barton wrote ‘we

would solicit your help to abolish the office of

Rouge Dragon of the Welsh usurper and re-

Marjorie Bowen — 1930s publicity

photograph

36

store to the college the Great Founder’s own

pursuivant Blanc Sanglier.’ A request the

College was of course unable to comply with,

but it was worth a try.

A few days before the dedication the Rev.

Mr Young sent a telegram to George V. It

read ‘On the occasion of the dedication of the

memorial window to Richard III in Middle-

ham Church, the Rec-

tor, Churchwardens

and membership of the

Fellowship of the

White Boar beg to

convey the expression

of their unswerving

loyalty to Your Majes-

ty.’ King George may

well have expressed

some surprise to learn

of his royal ancestor’s

posthumous following.

The day itself saw a

large congregation fill

the church, including

many members of the

Fellowship. Barton,

together with his wife

Dorothy and Philip

Nelson were dressed in

academic gowns com-

plete with mortar-

boards. The photo-

graph of the Fellow-

ship outside the church

captures the atmosphere of what must have

been a memorable day for them.

The Rev. Mr. Young conducted the ser-

vice which began with a processional hymn,

followed by a reading from 1 Kings Chapter 8

verses 22 - 31. A further hymn was sung and

then the window was unveiled by Marjorie

Bowen. She praised its beauty, emphasised

the good character of King Richard and his

family and how history had dealt so unfairly

with them. The window was then blessed by

the Rev. Canon Sullivan of Richmond, who in

his address spoke of the ‘thankfulness felt by

the life-boatman following some heroic res-

cue attempt which had been a success. Simi-

lar gratification and thankfulness should be

felt at this service following the successful

rescue of a name from the dark waters into

which, through misinterpretations, it had

been flung.’ The final hymn, ‘Now thank we

all our God’ was followed by the prayer of St

Francis of Chichester. The Rev. Mr. Young

then read out a telegram from Buckingham

Palace ‘Please convey to the Churchwardens

and members of the Fellowship of the White

Boar the King’s sincere

thanks for the loyal

assurances contained

in your message on the

occasion of the dedica-

tion of the memorial to

King Richard III in

Middleham Church.’

The service concluded

with the Blessing and

the National Anthem.

The surpliced clergy,

choir, members of the

Fellowship and the rest

of the congregation

then moved in proces-

sion from the church to

Middleham Castle. At

the Drum Tower, where

Edward of Middleham

may have died, the bu-

glers of the East York-

shire Regiment sound-

ed Reveille and the Last

Post and the Fellow-

ship laid wreaths in

memory of the prince. The ceremony closed

with the singing of one verse from the hymn

‘O God our help in ages past’.

The day ended with afternoon tea organ-

ised by the Rev. Mr. Young for members of

the Fellowship and their guests. It was doubt-

less a happy occasion and is the first recorded

example of Ricardians enjoying a good tea

after an event or visit, a tradition now enthusi-

astically maintained by members throughout

the world.

There was some press coverage. The

Times noted the date of the dedication but did

not provide a report. The Yorkshire Post gave

more prominence and included a full report

on 21 April. The Daily Mail noted that ‘men

and women who after five centuries still tena-

The Middleham Window.

Photograph courtesy of Geoffrey Wheeler.

37

ciously believe in the innocence of Richard III

have come forward with private subscriptions

… in paying this tribute the supporters of the

belief that Richard III was a much-maligned

monarch show that they are not shaken by the

revelations last year [about] the bones of the

two princes…’. Indeed they were not.

Barton commented at the time of the dedi-

cation ‘…it is such a window as might have

been erected to this great monarch at the time

of his death.’ The Middleham Window was

the first memorial to King Richard that sought

to perpetuate his memory for positive reasons,

rather than to preserve it for negative ones.

The dedication day was a high point for the

Fellowship and one of the rare occasions we

can glimpse its public face.

Correspondence

Dear Editor,

Going ‘Undercover’

I thought my fellow Ricardians might be in-

terested in a little playful ‘subterfuge’ I am

undertaking at my local Adult Education Cen-

tre. Having completed and enjoyed many

creative writing courses over the past few

years, I decided to branch out and do a little

history course. When I saw advertised

‘Yorkists and Tudors, History for Pleasure’ I

could not resist. While there was no pretence

of high academic value to this, I was most

intrigued as to how the tutor ‘would play it’

when it came inevitably to Richard III and of

course Edward IV’s sons (I refuse to call

them ‘the princes in the tower’ as this sug-

gests they spent their entire life locked in

there).

Having started at the beginning of the

Wars of the Roses, things were now getting

more interesting as we learnt about Edward

IV’s reign in detail. Having been unusually

non-vocal I had not declared for the Yorkists

and was quietly pleased to hear of Richard’s

unwavering loyalty to Edward and his prow-

ess on the battlefield. In particular our tutor

made much of Richard the youngest brother

commanding his own flank of troops at both

From a copy of the Yorkshire Herald's original report of the unveiling, hence the uneven quality

38

Barnet and Tewkesbury whilst the older Clar-

ence had to stay, on both occasions, with Ed-

ward, due to the fact that the king could not

trust his brother not to change sides (again).

So far, so good ... There have even been a

couple of references to Shakespeare’s charac-

ter of Richard: To quote my teacher

‘Shakespeare wrote a load of nonsense about

hunchbacks and so on’. Now we are really

getting somewhere, or so I thought.

Alas, it was of course, all too good to be

true (and that is what we desire from history,

is it not?) Dealing with Edward’s second

accession to the throne, the class was in-

formed that Henry VI was then murdered in

the Tower by Richard duke of Gloucester.

Sigh! We were then given a basic family tree

from Edward III to Henry VIII to show the

lines of succession. As is the case with such

documents, dates of birth, marriage and death

were shown, and also the cause of death. I

could point out many inaccuracies but the one

that struck me most was that George duke of

Clarence was said to be murdered in 1478.

That he died cannot be denied. Surely a man

who fights openly against the king has com-

mitted treason – for which the penalty is

death. When that man is the king’s brother,

who has already been pardoned more than

once, execution is entirely normal within the

‘fifteenth-century rules’. Now, who do you

think carried out this dreadful deed? Right

first time, it was, we are told, Richard, Duke

of Gloucester. By this time I am having great

trouble keeping my mouth closed and have

emitted so many little squeaks that the lady

next to me appears concerned. Without real-

ising the effect she then, having perused the

family tree, says ‘well, the Lancastrians had a

much better claim to the throne didn’t they?’

That was enough for me: I confessed: fifteen

years a member of the Richard III Society.

Her face was a picture: I made her promise

not to tell. The tutor is still unaware of my

allegiance. He is however, becoming suspi-

cious. Talking briefly about the content of

our next lecture, he paused when trying to

recall the name of the lady that ‘Richard al-

leged’ was pre-contracted to marry Edward. I

heard a voice say ‘Eleanor Butler’ and then

realised it was mine. The rest of the class

looked baffled and looked at me. ‘I have read

a lot of books’, I said weakly. So I await next

week’s lesson with anticipation of one who is

surely going to be found out. Yes, we are on

to that old serial killer himself, my dear Rich-

ard. Next someone will be telling me he poi-

soned his wife because he wanted to marry

his niece.

I would be most interested to hear of any-

one else who has taken a history course in

recent years that deal with the later Plantage-

nets, and how it was taught. Revisionist or

Traditionalist? Unfortunately too many histo-

ry teachers read Shakespeare.

Sarah Aylward PS I will provide an update post-Richard if

anyone is interested and if I haven’t been

thrown off the course for unruly behaviour.

Dear Editor,

I was glad to see, in the Winter Bulletin, that

useful material from past Ricardians is being

recycled in the Bulletin, where it may reach a

new audience. I do, however, feel that since

such previously published material is poten-

tially somewhat out of date, it might be advis-

able to add notes updating it where appropri-

ate.

Carolyn Hammond’s article published on

pp. 17 and 18 of the Winter Bulletin under the

title of ‘The Man Himself’ is still excellent,

but it predates a recent revision of tree-ring

dating calibration, from which it now seems

that the Society of Antiquaries portrait of

Richard III is very nearly contemporary, and

it might have been useful to add a note to this

effect. The Clare Priory poem on the house of

York, which has been taken to imply that

Richard might have been a sickly child, has

been frequently mentioned in talks to Ricardi-

an Groups and Branches, and to outside audi-

ences, both by myself and by other speakers

including Anne Sutton, and I think it ought to

be clear by now that no imputation of sickli-

ness was intended. The fact that Richard was

alive at the time of writing was simply being

contrasted with the fact that his two immedi-

ate siblings were dead.

As for Catherine Fitzgerald, Countess of

Desmond and her reported comments on

39

Richard’s appearance, I deal with these more

fully in a forthcoming Ricardian article

(planned for 2005), but since I have already

talked to some Society Groups on this sub-

ject, it might be worth repeating now what I

have already said in those talks: all the evi-

dence suggests that while the countess herself

is unlikely ever to have set eyes on Richard,

her very much older husband certainly could

have met him. Thus, while the countess’s

report is unlikely to be first hand, it could

very well be second hand, received by her

from her husband the 11th earl of Desmond,

who was born in 1454.

If I may also comment briefly on ‘Whose

Bones’ (pp. 19-24) I think it is a great pity

that Theya Molleson or some other competent

expert has not attempted a comparative dental

study between the skull of Lady Anne Mow-

bray and the possible skull of her aunt, Lady

Eleanor Talbot (Lady Butler). I would wel-

come such a study, which I lack the expertise

to undertake myself but the potential im-

portance of which I attempted to outline in

‘The Missing Molars: A Genealogical Conun-

drum’ (Ricardian no. 142 [1999], pp. 340-

344). In my view it is at least as likely that the

Norwich Castle Museum remains are those of

Lady Eleanor as that the Westminster Abbey

urn remains are those of the ‘Princes’, and if

it could be shown that Anne Mowbray’s hy-

podontia may have been inherited via her

mother from the Talbot family, its relevance

in attempting to identify the Westminster Ab-

bey bones would become very questionable.

John Ashdown-Hill

Dear Editor,

The Bosworth Cross

May I reply briefly to the letter from John

Ashdown-Hill concerning the so-called Bos-

worth cross? (Ricardian Bulletin Winter,

2003, pp. 33-34). There he refers to the prov-

enance of this processional cross described in

Nichols’s Leicestershire Volume IV, Part II

(1811) as being ‘dug up at the Bosworth bat-

tlefield site’. There is only one Nichols so I

think we are reading the same text, but what

Nichols actually reports is a hearsay account

of one of his antiquary correspondents in

Coventry, assuming that the cross was dug up

in what he assumed to be the area of the bat-

tlefield as it was understood in the late eight-

eenth century ‘but in what particular part of

the Field cannot now be properly ascer-

tained’. Nichols was so doubtful about this

information (unusually for Nichols who tend-

ed to put in everything without comment)

that he provided a note to the effect that since

the cross came into the Fortescue family

‘immediately upon its discovery in 1778, he

was of the opinion that it was found at their

home of Husbands Bosworth, twenty or so

miles away in a different division of the

county.

If you have lived in Leicestershire as long

as I have you are well aware of the confu-

sions still existing between the two villages.

They were both of similar size, each has a

‘Bosworth Hall’, and each has a canal pass-

ing to the west of it (indeed at times it is hard

to convince canal travellers that they are not

cruising through Market Bosworth on their

way north along the Grand Union!) There is

no doubt in my mind that this cross has noth-

ing to do with Market Bosworth or the battle.

The Fortescues were a recusant family who

would have held on to Catholic liturgical

items through the Reformation and beyond;

one simply cannot see how such a thing

would have been just ‘lost’ at a battle. As

with so many issues involving Bosworth, it

would be wonderful to think this was so, but

the facts say otherwise.

Peter Foss

Dear Editor,

Much as I like and respect the Editor, may I

please point out that Aquitaine did not contain

a ‘c’ (as distinct from acquisition, which it

was) and that anyone spelling Bonnie Prince

Charlie’s name with a ‘y’ would be ostracised

north of the Border?

That apart, with regard to the footnote to

my last article: I bought Dr Wroe’s book on

Perkin at once, because I liked her earlier one

on Pilate. However both are wordy and

though it does no harm in the first instance,

when imagination can to a certain extent be

allowed free play, it obscures evidence in the

second. Page 265, which I am recommended

to study, speaks of mother-love without prov-

ing that this existed. I used to know the Ac-

counts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland

40

Vol. 1 off by heart when preparing my own

first book in the mid 1950s, and although the

hospitable James IV paid for a spousing-

gown for ‘Perkin’ there are no subsequent

payments for a christening or a wet nurse.

Certainly this is negative evidence, but so are

the quoted comments of the Venetians to

Maximilian – the second of them has im-

proved matters to include more than one

child. Page 511 is a mere reference to the

above letter to Maximilian and proves noth-

ing further.

It is feasible that Maximilian, who had

met the true or false Richard at his own fa-

ther’s funeral, would want to be informed

even indirectly of any such birth, as his broth-

er the Archduke Sigismund was married to

one of James I of Scotland’s barren daugh-

ters. Charles VII of France had given up

hope of the rest of them. Lady Katherine

herself had no children by any of her subse-

quent marriages although the second and third

were contracted within her childbearing peri-

od in a time when, as the late Earl of Onslow

has remarked, women seemed to bear chil-

dren to a later age than now. Certainly Sir

Matthew Cradock would have wanted an heir.

One of the few mistakes made by the late

Diana Kleyn in her crystal-clear, unpreten-

tious and thoroughly researched Richard of

England was the statement that Lady Kathe-

rine was the ancestress of the latter-day Pem-

brokes. It is unlikely that she was the ances-

tress of anybody. Had there been such a

child, Henry VII would have shown it no

more mercy than was shown to the last Pole

grandchild, who simply disappeared in the

Tower in the next reign.

Pamela Hill

Dear Editor,

The three articles on the latest RSC ‘Richard

III’ in the Winter issue (pp. 14-15, 34-35),

with their conflicting accounts of Henry

Goodman’s appearance in the title role, only

served to underline the unreliability of such

‘eye-witness’ accounts (which can also be

applied to medieval chronicles of battles,

etc.), as well as the fallibility of human

memory. Although given that theatrical pro-

ductions are constantly evolving and doubt-

less no two persons’ perceptions of different

performances are likely to agree in detail, at

least, in this case, we have photographic evi-

dence, as The Independent newspaper ran a

series in their ‘Photographic Gallery’ on

‘Rehearsing Richard’, so it is possible to see

what hats, crowns and costumes were tried

out before the opening night. Then the critics

were in general agreement that it was

‘Edwardian’ in style, with an innovative mu-

sic-hall staging of the opening soliloquy, de-

livered by Richard in cream silk top hat and

tail suit, prompting one observer to dub it

‘Crookback – the Musical’! Unfortunately

the rest of the production failed to live up to

this promising start. Goodman had already

outlined some of the background research in

studying for the role (see Autumn Bulletin,

pp. 12-13) but one daring innovation, seem-

ingly showing his sympathy for the historical

Richard, was apparently dropped soon after

the première, when a number of reviewers

recorded him descending into the audience

and seizing a programme, which he tore to

pieces with a derisive sneer of ‘Huh, Shake-

speare!’

A further interesting departure from the

text was perhaps only appreciated by those in

the audience with a keen ear (something lost

in modern theatregoers often concentrating on

the visual aspects of the play, but of para-

mount importance to the Elizabethans, as,

after all, Hamlet declares ‘We’ll hear a

play’). Before Bosworth Richard issued the

command to ‘Saddle White Syrie’ (Act 5,

Scene 3) instead of ‘Surrey’, thereby reveal-

ing that the actor had studied the New Oxford

edition of the text (ed. John Jowett, Oxford

University Press, 2000), with its footnote (p.

336) supplying this alternative reading, as

Syria was apparently famous for its breeding

stock, and also citing as evidence Richard’s

‘Household Register’ (BL.Harleian MSS 433)

where the name is said to be given in a list of

Richard’s horses. However, numerous re-

searchers over the years have failed to locate

this reference, though interestingly Ken

Wright in his recent ‘Field of Bosworth’, il-

lustrates the folio in an appendix and makes

an attempt to decipher the entry.

Geoff Wheeler

41

New Fiction Librarian - Anne Painter

I am delighted to have taken over the running of the Barton Fiction Library from Anne Smith.

Over the next twelve months I hope to hold a book auction.

I have been interested in Richard III for most of my life. On a visit to Bosworth Field in 1978

I made a note of the Society’s address from the plaque on the gate at Dickon’s Well and I conse-

quently joined the Society later that year. In 1980 I joined the newly formed Devon and Corn-

wall Branch (then the South West Group) and became a member of the Branch Committee in

1990. In 1993 I took over as Branch Secretary.

I moved to Cornwall from Nottinghamshire in 1972 to marry my husband David and joined

him at Corisande Manor Hotel Newquay. In 1986 I became a committee member of the Devon

& Cornwall Branch of the Hotel, Catering & International Management Association and was

elected as Branch Secretary in 1990, a post I held until 1995.

We sold the Hotel and took early retirement in 1996. Since that time I have been able to take

a more active part in the Society.

Notice of temporary closure of the Fiction Library

The Fiction Library will be closed between Saturday 13 March and Saturday 22 May, inclusive.

No books will be issued or may be returned between these dates. Please contact Anne direct for

advice about book loans and returns around this period. Apologies to members for this unavoid-

able inconvenience.

Latest additions to the non-fiction books and newly catalogued articles in

the papers library

Listed below are a selection of books and articles that have been added to the Non-fiction Books

and Non-fiction Papers Libraries. All the books are hardback unless otherwise described.

Books COSS Peter & KEEN Maurice (editors) Heraldry, Pageantry and Social Display in Medieval

England (Boydell Press 2002, paperback) A collection of essays on social and cultural display in

England in the Middle Ages, incorporating family lineage, social distinction and aspiration, cere-

mony and social bonding and the expression of power and authority. Objects considered include

are monumental effigies, brasses, stained glass, rolls of arms, manuscripts, jewels, plate, seals

and coins.

EVANS Michael The Death of Kings: Royal Deaths in Medieval England (Hambledon Lon-

don 2003) In this book Michael Evans gives an account of what is known about the deaths of all

medieval English kings – natural, violent or accidental. He describes how contemporaries and

later writers drew morals from such deaths and about the characters of individual kings, giving

their deaths an imagery and symbolism lasting until the present day. Much fascinating detail is

included plus personal information about the characters and attitudes of English kings and

queens, giving an insight into the core of medieval society.

HIETT Constance, HOSINGTON Brenda & BUTLER Sharon Pleyn Delit: Medieval Cook-

ery for Modern Cooks (University of Toronto Press, 1996 Second Edition, paperback) A fun

book translating medieval recipes into modern terminology for the twenty-first century cook to

The Barton Library

42

follow.

PIDGEON Lynda Antony Wydevile, Lord Scales and Earl Rivers: Family, Friends and Affini-

ty (BA Thesis for the University of Reading, March 2003) An exploration of Antony Wydeville

as man and lord. How did Antony relate to the others of his family? Was he a ‘Good Lord’?

Was he the ‘… kind, serious and just man…’ that Mancini believed him to be or was there a cer-

tain coldness to his character? A detailed piece of research, including genealogical tables, and

information on Anthony Wydeville's estates and offices.

SINCLAIR Alexandra (ed) The Beauchamp Pageant (Paul Watkins for the Richard III &

Yorkist History Trust - large book) The Beauchamp Pageant is a late fifteenth century illustrated

life of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick (1382 - 1439), probably commissioned by Anne

Beauchamp, Countess of Warwick. Dr Sinclair provides an introduction, describing the origins,

purpose and history of the manuscript, as well as a detailed biography of Richard Beauchamp,

along with an interesting description to accompany each of the illustrations. See Peter Ham-

mond’s advertorial on page 47.

Papers Robert Hardy on Longbows by Robert Hardy (from Living History, Issue No. 5, August 2003)

The longbow is the archetypal medieval English weapon. It enabled a succession of monarchs

from Edward I to Henry V to record notable victories over French and Scottish forces. So, what

was it about the great war-bow that made it such a mighty force for England, and such a scourge

for England’s enemies?

Northern Fortress by James Marchington (from Heritage, No. 109, February/March 2003) A

beautifully illustrated article on Raby Castle.

Sources of Contention: The Search for Originality – The Wars of the Roses by Roni Wil-

kinson (from Battlefields Review, Issue No. 24, 2003) An article about the location of the Battle

of Wakefield.

In Defence of the King by David Allsop (from Heritage Today, September 2002) As Duke

of Gloucester, ruling from his estate at Middleham castle, Richard brought peace and good gov-

ernment to the north of England.

The Search for John Tresilian: Master Smith to Edward IV by Jane Geddes (from History To-

day, Vol. 52, (4), April 2002) John Tresilian was one of the greatest smiths, whose work sur-

vives from the Middle Ages, revealing a complex cultural background, and highly evolved tech-

nical skills.

Marrying for Love: The Experience of Edward IV and Henry VIII by Eric Ives (from History

Today, Vol. 50, (12), December 2000) This articles looks at the cases of two monarchs who

broke with convention by marrying for love.

Richard III: Days of Blood and Roses by Peter Crookston; Illustrations by Janet Wooley

(from Heritage Today, Issue No. 39, September 1997) Just what makes Richard fascinating: a

short article.

Crafts, Guilds and the Negotiation of Work in the Medieval Town by Gervase Rosser (from

Past & Present, No. 154, February 1997) An article which focuses on medieval society.

How Urban was Medieval England? By Christopher Dyer (from History Today, Vol. 47, (1),

January 1997) Christopher Dyer argues for an upgrading of the town’s importance in the Middle

Ages.

Girls growing up in Later Medieval England by Jeremy Goldberg (from History Today, Vol.

4, No. 45 (6), June 1995) An article about teenage pregnancy and street gossip but also lessons

in housekeeping and good husbandry.

The Lovelace Dispute: Concepts of Property and Inheritance in Fifteenth-Century Kent by P

W Fleming (from Southern History, 12, 1990) This article relates to disputes which were com-

mon in the later half of the fifteenth century.

43

My Uncle by Edward The Lord Bastard by Jan Dines. A short story of ‘an interview given by

Edward, son of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville, in safe seclusion in Burgundy, 1487’.

The Charity of Thomas Barton: Blue Plaque Walk of Historical Stoke Golding An A5 booklet

about Stoke Golding, where Henry VII was crowned after the Battle of Bosworth.

Thomas Rotherham – Archbishop of York and Chancellor of England by Canon Gerald Hol-

lis, M.A. A short biography of Thomas Rotherham.

The Wallace Collection: A Guide to the Armouries A well illustrated booklet.

Richard III and Historical Tradition by A R Myers. This article investigates the attitudes of

historians to the traditions which grew up about Richard III.

The Making of the Age of Chivalry by Jonathan Alexander. An article which outlines the con-

text and objectives of an exhibition devoted to English Gothic Art.

Audio Visual Library Report

The undoubted highlight of recent video acquisitions, through the generosity of Linda Miller

(USA), is the first significant Shakespeare film production in the States: ‘The Life and Death of

King Richard III’ (1912), long thought to be lost and only known through written accounts and

stills, but the only surviving copy was discovered by a collector in 1996 and after restoration by

the American Film Institute is now available to a wider audience. Starring the tragedian Freder-

ick Warde (1851-1935) who appeared in Irving’s company before leaving for the USA, where he

acted with Edwin Booth (two other notable stage Richards), short extracts were screened in the

NFT special programme on Richard in film and TV with Sir Ian McKellen narrating (1997), and

‘The Missing Princes of England’ History Channel TV programme (1999).

A contemporary advertisement details the film in typical current hyperbole: ‘A Genuine

Novelty and Triumphant Success. Five Reels – 5000 feet. A Feature Costing $30,000 to produce,

1,500 People, 200 Horses, 5 Distinct Battle Scenes, a Three-Masted Warship Crowded with Sol-

diers on Real Water, Architecture, Costumes, Armor, all Historically Correct in Every Detail’.

Unlike the shorter British version filmed by Sir Frank Benson in 1911 (see Bulletin, September,

1999) the introductory episode of Tewkesbury sees the first of numerous exterior locations, fol-

lowed by the death of Henry VI in the Tower. After the wooing of Lady Anne, scenes proceed

with great pace, through the arrest and murder of Clarence to the arrival of the Princes (sic) on

horseback in London, where the understated score by Ennio Morricone provides a memorable

accompaniment which reaches its crescendo with Richard’s acceptance of the crown. Here per-

haps Warde is at his best, in suggesting Richard’s hypocrisy, and the acting compares favourably

with more recent interpretations. Amongst the many scenes that depart from the Shakespeare

text the princes are violently removed from their mother and their subsequent death and burial

illustrated. Queen Elizabeth summons Richmond from France to protect her daughter from Rich-

ard’s advances (as with Benson, Elizabeth of York is introduced into the narrative), and Richard

urges Lady Anne to commit suicide (!) but she is later poisoned on his instructions. Richmond

(played by the director, James Keane, no doubt eager to build up his part) visits his betrothed

Elizabeth and is twice ambushed before Bosworth, where in an incredible variation a wounded

Richard appears and collapses before being led off for the climactic duel with Richmond! Some

striking lapses in continuity are evident, as when Richard’s costume changes after visiting Clar-

ence in the Tower and more noticeably, following the dream sequence, in his tent before Bos-

worth, but in all the film offers a rare glimpse of a legendary pre-war Shakespearean actor and

‘reminds us ultimately that the traditions of our theatrical past are very much alive in the dra-

matic endeavour of the present’.

Despite being promoted as a ‘new series’, Channel 4’s ‘Fact or Fiction’ has had a troubled

start, with odd programmes being transmitted at random. After ‘Robin Hood’ last year, ‘Richard

III’ finally reached our screens on January 3, and although published some months ago, the ac-

44

companying book In Search of British Heroes, trailed at the conclusion, does not include him.

Rather more publicity was, in any case, generated by the follow-up programme ‘Britain’s Real

Monarch’, both of which are reviewed and discussed elsewhere in this issue. Visually ‘Richard

III’ included more than its share of the usual tired cinematic clichés, so practically every refer-

ence to ‘the princes’ was accompanied by the over-familiar Millais painting, often lit by a gutter-

ing candle, ravens hovered in the Tower shots, and even that most persistent metaphor for the

‘Wars of the Roses’, the chess set, put in an appearance! At least costumed extras were kept to a

minimum and the battlefield re-enactments were suitably ‘out of focus’. Author Michael Jones’s

theories on Edward IV’s illegitimacy were presented at the conclusion and followed up in depth

in the second programme, the results of which inevitably came as something of an anti-climax,

having been prominently featured in the tabloid press the previous week. Unfortunately, too, the

main objective of his book, the alternative location for Bosworth, was ignored and Tony Robin-

son had been filmed gesticulating with his usual enthusiasm on Ambion Hill and the ‘traditional’

battle site. Indeed, for all the money spent on location filming in Australia, a rather more inter-

esting programme might have been made on the Bosworth controversy.

Channel 4’s earlier historical venture came when a small selection of documents to be auc-

tioned at Christies in December 2002 was previewed on the day-time TV show ‘Richard & Judy’.

Examples signed by Richard I, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I and Henry VII were displayed, the latter

dating from 1498, giving instructions for the decoration of his bedchamber at the new Palace of

Richmond. Whilst pointing out that he is usually seen as a somewhat ‘ascetic’ character, histori-

an Andrew Roberts commented that ‘this was almost a “camp” letter, that he writes’! Despite

being singled out in the sale catalogue (courtesy Denise Price) that ‘documents signed by Richard

III are of the greatest rarity’, his contribution was noticeably absent from the programme and

newspaper reports of the sale, which concentrated on those of the Tudors and Lord Nelson’s love

letters. However, the document should be familiar to longstanding members, as it had previously

featured in the Bulletin for June 1981, when originally offered for sale, along with a transcription

by Anne Sutton, and later was extensively studied by Lorraine Attreed, who published her re-

search as ‘An Indenture between Richard, Duke of Gloucester and Scrope family of Masham and

Upsall’ in Speculum 58.4 (1983). Concluding her introduction to the catalogue of her late hus-

band’s collection, Brigitte Spiro, the vendor, expressed her feelings with these prescient com-

ments: ‘Technological advances of the last quarter century have changed the romanticism of his-

tory. Society today suffers from information overload. Most libraries today no longer save

newspapers and magazines, these are now copied on microfiche, tapes, discs and even digitally.

The original is then discarded. Furthermore communication is by email and telephone. The art of

letter writing is disappearing. Letter writing has even acquired the derogatory term of “snail

mail”. For generations to come, in particular personal letters of future historical figures will be

virtually non existent. Thus the price of technology has been the steady elimination of handwrit-

ten material. Our tactile link to history is being lost’.

Geoffrey Wheeler

The Life and Reign of Edward IV by Cora Scofield

For a few years my husband has been looking for a copy of this two-volume set. I would be

glad to hear from anyone who might have a copy available.

Carolyn Naylor, 18 Hague Avenue, Rawmarsh, Rotherham, South Yorkshire S62 7PJ

45

Letter from America

T he American Branch will hold its fourth

triennial conference on the fifteenth

century from 2 to 5 May 2004 on the campus

of the University of Illinois at Urbana-

Champaign (UIUC). The first conference

was held at UIUC in 1995 and the proceed-

ings were subsequently published by Sutton

Publishing under the title Estrangement, En-

terprise and Education in Fifteenth Century

England. The papers from the third confer-

ence, Reputation and Representation in the

Fifteenth Century, should be published by

Brill Academic Publishers this spring. The

papers cover a number of political, military,

social, architectural, and literary aspects of

fifteenth-century England. For further details

of the book visit the pub-

lisher's web site

www.brill.nl

Founded in 1867 UI-

UC is a large Midwestern

research university of

around 36,000 students

located in Champaign-

Urbana twin cities which

are home to approx

120,000 residents. The

University Library houses

the largest public univer-

sity collection in the

world, with 22 million items in the main li-

brary and in the more than forty departmental

libraries and units. Champaign-Urbana is

located in Central Illinois, a large farming

area approximately 2½ - 3 hours south of

Chicago, Illinois and the same distance north

of Saint Louis, Missouri.

While the conference is an academic one,

members of the Society are encouraged to

attend. The atmosphere is very congenial and

the participants in the past have enjoyed the

camaraderie that a small conference can of-

fer. The keynote speaker is Jean-Philippe

Genet of the University of Paris and there will

be plenary addresses by DeLloyd Guth of the

University of Manitoba, Ralph Griffiths of the

University of Wales at Swansea, and Michael

Bennett of the University of Tasmania at Ho-

bart. The conference will have a number of

themed sessions around which lectures and

discussions will be based. The themes will

include: Literature and Politics, Political Fig-

ures and their Impacts, Lay Women and Spir-

ituality, Burgundy and the Hundred Year

War, and Art and Spirituality. Amongst the

wide range of lectures to be delivered will

be: Richard, Duke of York, and how the

Scots saw him in the 1450s; Processing Pow-

er: Public Spectacle, Politics and Topography

in Fifteenth-Century Bristol; Margery Kempe

and Sacred Space: the Community in Her

Soul; ‘Two Shires Against All England: Re-

gional Honor and the Deposition of Richard

III in the Stanley Family

Romances’; ‘The Many

Lives of the Wars of the

Roses: Ricardian to Vic-

torian Historiography’,

or, ‘How the Rat, the Cat

and the Hog Have Fared

over the Centuries!’

Two of the ses-

sions at the conference

will be in memory of

William and Maryloo

Schallek, who have made

possible scholarships for

North American doctoral scholars to help

them with research and travel expenses in-

volved with completion of their disserta-

tions. The papers in these sessions will be

given by former Schallek Scholarship recipi-

ents Daniel Thierry, Helen Maurer, Robert

Barrett, and Sharon Michalove. We expect

about fifty people to attend including the

speakers. If anyone is planning a trip to the

US and would be interested in attending the

conference, please contact me at

mlove@uiuc.edu.

Sharon D. Michalove

Sharon D. Michalove is a past Chair of the

American Branch and is currently their Con-

ference Coordinator and Research Officer

The University Library, University of Illinois

at Urbana-Champaign.

46

Book Review

This is another new section of the Bulletin to provide reviews of new novels about Richard or

which are set in the more general medieval period. This will complement the non-fiction book

review part of the Ricardian. We intend to appoint a fiction reviews editor for these book re-

views and will make a further announcement in the June issue of the Bulletin - watch this space.

The Clerkenwell Tales by Peter Ackroyd,

London 2003. Hardback £15.99. Paperback

£6.99 (April 2004).

T his innovative novel is set in 1399 dur-

ing the last months of the reign of Rich-

ard II. The action is centred in Clerkenwell

but also takes the reader into the City of Lon-

don and surrounding neighbourhoods such as

Smithfield, Bermondsey, St Pancras and

Kentish Town. Ackroyd

recreates the memorable

cast of Chaucer’s pilgrims,

that band of immortal char-

acters that have charmed

readers through the ages

and driven school children

to distraction trying to un-

derstand the archaic lan-

guage. The familiar sum-

moner, pardoner and wife

of Bath are all there but

thrown together with new

personalities, including

Clarice, the mad nun, and

Miles Vavasour, the sinister

sergeant-at-law. Each of

the first 22 chapters in-

volves a ‘tale’, which like

Chaucer’s original tales is a

complete story in itself, but in Ackroyd’s ver-

sion they also form a complete narrative. The

first tale is that of the Prioress, Dame Alice

Mordaunt, who is at her wit’s end as the

eighteen-year-old Clarice disrupts St Mary’s

Convent with her visions. As Clarice’s fame

spreads across London, a conspiracy, led by

the clandestine movement called Dominus,

unfolds as they manipulate a disparate group

of heretics, known as the ‘predestined men’,

to commit a series of crimes aimed at creating

suspicion and fear amongst the populace. Five

acts are to take place, which represent the five

wounds of Christ. First an oratory is de-

stroyed by Greek fire and then a murder is

committed in St Paul’s. Slowly the tension

mounts in the city. Fascinating though the

story is, the strength of the book is the recrea-

tion of medieval life and folk. This is a warts

and all view of the period. Particularly memo-

rable is the Cook’s Tale and Roger de Ware’s

‘coquina’ in Nuncheon

Street for those who

‘lunched’. Here the young

cook is chided as he fails

to create successfully a

dish of chopped pig’s liver,

milk, hard-boiled eggs and

ginger. Ackroyd vividly

brings to life each charac-

ter and the reader’s sympa-

thy goes out to the lonely

and doomed illuminator

Hamo Fulberd and then

applauds the courage of the

physician, Thomas Gunter,

who stumbles across the

conspiracy and confronts

one of the perpetrators

with dire consequences.

The superstition of the

people is convincingly portrayed, such as the

importance of astrology and the use of herbs

and animal waste to cure their ills. Perhaps

most disturbing is the abject loneliness of

those stricken with poverty.

The final chapter, the Author’s Tale, pro-

vides a final twist to the story that will appeal

to historians. The Clerkenwell Tales may well

become a classic and for those of you who

wish to spend a few hours in late medieval

London this book is well recommended.

Wendy Moorhen

47

The Beauchamp Pageant

Plate 38. Rouen. The town was besieged by

Earl Richard in 1418

T he Beauchamp Pageant is a unique

depiction of the events in the life of

the fifteenth-century nobleman Richard

Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, grandfather

of Anne Neville. The Pageant consists of

55 line drawings accompanied by a few

lines of text depicting royal occasions,

battle scenes and tournaments as well as

more ordinary scenes. Amongst the fa-

mous events illustrated is the marriage of

King Henry V with Katherine de Valois.

All of the scenes contain wonderfully

detailed drawings of such things as cloth-

ing, shoes, armour and weapons and some

have been used many times in historical

works as illustrations because of their

accuracy. Although Richard Beauchamp

died in 1439 the drawings were made

about 1485 and depict life as it was at that

time, bringing to life the late fifteenth

century, the life led by the nobles of the

Yorkist court. As part of the work there

are two genealogical depictions of Rich-

ard Beauchamp and his immediate family,

which include one of only two representa-

tions of Anne Neville and Edward of

Middleham (not illustrated). The Beau-

champ Pageant is available from the Soci-

ety’s Sales Office, price £43 plus £7.50

postage and packing.

Peter Hammond

Plate 55. Anne Neville flanked by her husbands,

Edward, Prince of Wales , and King Richard III

Plate 43. The marriage of Henry V and Katherine de Valois

Plate 30. Earl Richard at the Joust

48

W e had a slightly earlier start from Lon-

don this year because the visit includ-

ed an unveiling of a special plaque in the vil-

lage. On arrival we met up with other Ricard-

ians and Phil

Stone

thanked every-

body for at-

tending, add-

ing that in the

year of the

quincen-

tenary of her

death, we are

honouring

Margaret of York with a plaque to commemo-

rate the possibility that she was born in Foth-

eringhay, together with several of her sib-

lings. Phil also

thanked Si-

mon and Lady

Victoria

Leatham for

allowing the

Richard III

Society to

place the

plaque at the

end of their

house. He

then called

upon Juliet

Wilson, the

Society’s rep-

resentative in

the village, to

unveil the

plaque. Fol-

lowing the unveiling, Juliet thanked the Soci-

ety and said that she was pleased to see, at

last, some recognition in the village of Rich-

ard III’s presence.

Phil responded by thanking Juliet, and al-

so again thanked Simon and Lady Victoria

Leatham, Michael Wilson who put up the

plaque, Geoffrey Wheeler for its design and

John Ashdown-Hill who organised the event.

After the

unveiling we

had our tradi-

tional Christ-

mas lunch at

the Village

Hall, which was

excellent as

usual, and then

we made our

way to the

church for the Christmas Carol Service. On

entering the church I noticed the winter sun

shining through the windows making it look

very warm and

welcoming.

The service

followed the

traditional con-

tent, except for

the carol

‘While shep-

herds watched

their flocks by

night’ which

was sung to the

tune of ‘Ilkley

Moor baht’at’,

which was dif-

ferent but still

enjoyable.

Personally eve-

ry year I look

forward to vis-

iting Fotheringhay, to meet up with old

friends and make new ones and this year was

no exception and I would like to thank Phil

Stone for organising it.

Elaine Robinson

Report on Society Event

As recorded in the 15th Century Annals, attributed to

William Worcester.

KING RICHARD III b.1452 and his brothers and sisters

WILLIAM of YORK, b.1447

ANNE DUCHESS of EXETER, b.1439 and

MARGARET DUCHESS of BURGUNDY 1446-1503

Unveiling of the Fotheringhay Plaque, Christmas Lunch and Carol Service,

Sunday 14 December 2003

From left to right: Dr Phil Stone, Juliet Wilson and John Ashdown-Hill

49

Future Society Events

New Announcements and Forthcoming Events Celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Norfolk Branch

This year is the Silver Jubilee of the Norfolk Branch. As part of the celebrations, Saturday 31

July 2004 will be a very special day in Norwich. There will be a service at Norwich Cathedral to

mark the Silver Jubilee. Also a plaque will be unveiled at the Blackfriars in Norwich to com-

memorate the Royal visits of the house of York to the city in the summer of 1469. In June 1469

Edward IV was in Norwich, together with his brother, the duke of Gloucester (Richard III), and

they were followed in July by Queen Elizabeth Woodville, who was entertained with pageants at

the Blackfriars.

The Norfolk Branch invites all members of the Society to come to Norwich for this special

day of celebration on 31 July. It is hoped to run a coach to Norwich for those who would like

transport from London. There will be free time to look around Norwich and have lunch, followed

by the Cathedral service, the plaque unveiling and tea. Please come if you can, either in the coach

or using your own transport.

Full details, together with a booking form, will be in the Summer Bulletin, but in the mean-

while, please make a note of the date in your diary.

John Ashdown-Hill

Death of Kings

The Norfolk Branch will hold its annual study day on 13 November 2004 at the Elizabeth Fry

Building, University of East Anglia, Norwich. The day begins at 9.30 a.m. with coffee, and the

programme includes talks by Professor Carol Rawcliffe The Deathbed of Medieval Kings, Alison

Weir Edward II, Dr Michel K Jones Death of Richard Duke of York, Dr Ann Wroe Perkin War-

beck and Dr Phil Stone First Catch your Asp. Full timings and booking form in the Summer

Bulletin.

Norfolk Branch

Bookable Events

Society visit to Westminster Abbey Museum and guided tour of Lambeth

Palace on Thursday 22 April 2004

A visit to Westminster Abbey Museum and a guided tour of Lambeth Palace have been arranged

on Thursday 22 April 2004, limited to 25 participants.

Westminster Abbey Museum housed in the vaulted undercroft beneath the former monks’ dor-

mitory is one of the oldest areas of the Abbey, dating back to the foundation of the Norman

Church by King Edward the Confessor in 1065. The centrepiece of the exhibition is the Abbey’s

collection of royal and other funeral effigies including effigies of Edward III, Henry VII, Eliza-

beth I and Charles. During recent conservation of Elizabeth I’s effigy a unique corset dating

from 1603 was found on the figure and is now displayed separately. Other items on display in-

clude the funeral saddle, helm and shield of Henry V, panels of medieval glass, twelfth century

50

sculpture fragments, Mary II’s coronation chair and replicas of the Coronation regalia.

Lambeth Palace Guided Tour. The London home of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the oldest

surviving part of the Place is the chapel, whose construction was almost certainly commissioned

by Stephen Langton. Little is known about life in Lambeth during the Middle Ages, partly be-

cause Archbishop Kilwardby took almost all the old records with him when he went to be a Car-

dinal in Rome in 1278. The first great hall (now vanished) was built before 1234, when its roof

was repaired. The building of the guard room was probably a response to the Peasants’ Revolt in

1381. One tower was built by Henry Morton, who was Archbishop to Henry VII (1486-51), and

a small room in it was used as a prison. The Library, which became permanent in 1610, was Eng-

land’s first public library and remains freely open for research, serving today as the principal

library for the history of the Church of England. It contains over 4,000 manuscripts of which

more than 600 are medieval, some 200,000 printed books, including a Gutenberg Bible printed in

1455 and about 30,000 other works dating from the invention of printing to 1700. The archives

of the archbishops range from the long series of registers dating from 1279 to modern corre-

spondence. The Gardens. In the Middle Ages the nineteen acres of grounds had been used mainly

for growing food, breeding rabbits, etc. When a mill grinding flour was no longer needed to sup-

ply the bakery, streams and a large pond remained, and there was also a ‘pleasure garden’ where

Thomas Cranmer built a summerhouse. Much of this area was landscaped in the 1780s. Programme:

10.15 Meet outside Westminster Abbey Bookshop

10.30 Visit to Westminster Abbey Museum. If time after, or at end of day, visit the

Jewel Tower. It is a fourteenth-century tower built to house the treasure of Edward III

12.00 Lunch – own arrangements

13.00 sharp regroup outside Westminster Abbey Book Shop and then walk as a group

to Lambeth Palace

13.30 Visit to Lambeth Palace: Gardens, weather permitting, then video and guided tour of

Lambeth Palace, which we hope will include Richard’s Book of Hours.

16.30 End of visit Travel: For Westminster Abbey to St James’s Park or Westminster underground on the District

and Circle Lines. Buses travel from Victoria Street, near Victoria Station, to Parliament Square. Costs: For Lambeth Palace tour, Westminster Abbey Museum and admin. - £8.50.

The Jewel Tower is English Heritage: members - free, entry £2.00, concessions £1.50. (Open

10.00 –16.00 in April): please pay your own entrance fees on the day. Please send a cheque payable to the Richard III Society for £8.50 to Rosemary Waxman, 37

Chewton Road Walthamstow, E17 7DW, marked on the back ‘Lambeth Palace’. Tel 0208 521

4261. Please enclose an SAE with your booking form. You will be sent a confirmatory letter

with information about the availability of the Library visit, notes for visitors to Lambeth Palace, a

map and details of places to eat in the area. Please note that it is unlikely that this visit will be

repeated as it has taken over four months to book the guided tour of Lambeth Palace! If you

need to cancel, please let me know as soon as possible. A list of reserves will be kept and you

may be notified at very short notice, if a vacancy occurs. Closing Date 31 March 2004.

If you wish to join in this visit, please complete the booking form in the centre pages.

Rosemary Waxman (Visit Organiser)

Visit to Ely

On Saturday 19 June 2004 the Mid Anglia Group is visiting the unique and beautiful Ely Cathe-

dral, and fellow Ricardians (of other groups or of none) are cordially invited to join us on that

occasion. Ely, with its unique octagonal lantern tower, built by Alan of Walsingham in the four-

51

teenth century, is one of England’s finest cathedrals. The cathedral houses a special museum ded-

icated to the rescue and display of stained glass. It is also a building with clear Ricardian associa-

tions. The future Cardinal Bourchier, cousin of the Yorkist kings (and who, as archbishop of

Canterbury, crowned both Edward IV and Richard III) was, earlier in his career, bishop of Ely.

So was Richard III’s great enemy, the future Cardinal Morton! The London palace of these prel-

ates was in Ely Place, Holborn, and St. Etheldreda’s church, where the annual Society Requiem

Mass is normally celebrated, was once their private chapel.

Ely cathedral also houses the splendid tomb of John Tiptoft, 1st Earl of Worcester, a loyal

supporter of Edward IV, and known as his ‘Butcher of England’. It was Tiptoft who, at the insti-

gation, it is said, of Elizabeth Woodville, put to death the earl of Desmond in 1468.

Ely is accessible by train from London, Cambridge and Peterborough, so Ricardians from

many areas might like to join in this visit. Entry to the cathedral normally costs £4.40, inclusive

of guided tour, but there are group and other concessions which will apply if enough members

wish to come. If you wish to join in this visit, please complete the booking form in the centre

pages.

John Ashdown-Hill

Reminder and Late Bookings

Study Weekend, Friday 16 – 18 April 2004

There are still a few places available for the study weekend and for the Saturday night banquet at

Barley Hall. Please see page 16 for a representation of the great hall. Full details and booking

form were in the Winter 2003 Bulletin.

Jacqui Emerson, Research Events Administrator

Reproduced from The Yorkshire Jester by kind permission of the Yorkshire Branch

52

Devon and Cornwall Branch Branch Meetings :

Saturday 13 March Perkin Warbeck, a talk by Dr Ann Wroe, with reference to his land-

ing and activities in Devon & Cornwall

Saturday 8 May Social Meeting

Saturday 12 June View the Barton Fiction Library at the Branch Secretary’s home (all

members welcome)

Saturday 3 July Branch 25th Anniversary Celebration Dinner at the Plymouth Moat

Hotel. We will be joined by Society members who are staying in

Plymouth for the Society’s Annual Summer Visit

Saturday 10 July The Military Prowess of Richard III, a talk by Michael K. Jones

Saturday 3 - Tuesday Branch Weekend trip to York

6 September

Saturday 11 September The Third Robert Hamblin Memorial Lecture, this year given by

Mary O’Regan on ‘Richard III and York’

Saturday 13 November Branch Annual General Meeting

Saturday 11 December Christmas – the venue to be chosen at a later date

All meetings, apart from the June meeting, are held in the fifteenth-century Prysten House, Royal

Parade, Plymouth. Meetings commence at noon. Tea, coffee and biscuits are provided. All

members are welcome to come along to a meeting and see one of the oldest surviving buildings

in Plymouth.

Anne E Painter, Branch Secretary

Edinburgh and Lothian Group - Report for 2002-2003 Our group in Scotland prior to 2002 became a little moribund after the resignation of our hard-

working founder and secretary Philippa Stirling-Langley. We are still in a somewhat ‘post-

Philippa’ situation, all ‘mucking in’: we have only produced one journal (2001), edited by Dave

Fiddimore, but our present secretary is working on the next edition for 2003/2004, which will in-

clude report of a September visit to Dean Castle in Ayrshire.

We finally achieved our visit to Lennoxlove (post foot-and-mouth plus a couple of mishap-

penings). For a guided tour, the original is a great ‘L’ plan tower of the early fifteenth century

with Maitland/Mary Queen of Scots connections. What particularly took our interest was the

portrait of ‘Henry VII’ which looked for all the world like a copy of Henry VI. Correspondence

on the issue was followed up with the director of the estate, but the outcome was, predictably,

that we agreed to differ. That day had started with a guided tour of the town and reconstructed

church of Haddington, believed to be on the line of march of Richard’s 1482 invasion army.

In the summer of 2002 we met up at Middleham Castle for an annual extravaganza called

‘The Court of Richard III’ which takes place within the castle walls. We made contact with soci-

ety member Johanna from the Netherlands, and Alison Weir the historical author. Alison came

partly to attempt to put the case against King Richard, but the re-enactors of ‘The Court’ gave as

good as they got: we were not needed.

Pre Christmas 2002 the group combined with our guest Dr Michael K Jones for a tour of Dal-

housie Castle (not claimed to be involved in the ’82 invasion) followed by being ‘piped’ in to

dinner there. Dr Jones, on the following day, spoke to us on the 1482 invasion of Scotland, skil-

fully weaving this in with the main themes of his book Bosworth 1485: the psychology of a bat-

tle. The venue for his inspiring and lucid talk was James Thin, Scotland’s best known bookshop.

Branches and Groups

53

We were a small but enthusiastic audience with members of the local Historical Association pre-

sent, and society member Johanna again came all the way from the Netherlands to attend.

In 2003 we again ‘kicked off’ with our AGM, then combined this with lunch and an afternoon

chat with author Alison Weir. This proved to be a really enjoyable meeting which demonstrated

clearly that we can agree to differ in the nicest possible way.

In August 2003 we combined again with Ricardians from the north of England at ‘The Court

of Richard III’ at Middleham. It was enjoyable to say the least: a great feeling of ‘togetherness’.

Stuart and Johanna even put together their own scenario, presenting a dish of strawberries to

Richard and Anne.

When the Scottish branch of the Battlefields Trust is permanently established, we hope to co-

operate with them in finding out more about the battle of Lochmaben, when the duke of Albany

with an English army was defeated in 1484, plus the battle on the river Sark in 1448.

We have scheduled for 2004 a meeting to research with maps the route of Duke Richard’s

1482 invasion of Scotland. At the moment we are on the trail of an unpublished thesis, plus the

author (courtesy of Rollo Crookshank), and have also made contact with a North-East historian

who plans to include the subject in his next book.

Douglas Weeks

Gloucestershire Branch During the first quarter of the year we have staged two lectures: Mickie O’Neill presented ‘Auld

Enemie, Auld Alleyance’ a history of the reigns of James I to James IV of Scotland and their im-

pact on Scottish and English history, and, in March, Keith Stenner spoke about the Battle of Bos-

worth, the main protagonists and how their motives may have impacted on the outcome of the

conflict.

The Bristol Group has held two events. An evening of ‘short papers’ focused on ‘Favourite

Medieval Locations’. Attendees were able to outline their best-loved sites and explain why the

locations were so important to them. The now annual quiz evening was also the usual success

since, once again, we were able to laugh at our collective ignorance.

The spring and summer programme should prove quite busy and some events are outlined be-

low. Please keep in touch at Branch and Group level for possible additions to the schedule, ven-

ues and detailed visit schedules.

Saturday 3 April To be announced (Branch )

Saturday 1 May Perkin Warbeck : Talk by Ann Wroe (Branch )

Saturday 29 May Field Visit : Corfe Castle and local churches (Bristol Group )

Saturday 5 June Field Visit : Partishow Church, Tretower Court and Llanthony Abbey

(Branch)

Saturday 19 June Field Visit : The Churches of North Herefordshire (Bristol Group )

Keith Stenner

Greater Manchester Branch Study Day at Norton Priory: ‘Heraldry, Hau-

berks and Henins – colour, campaign and clothing in Medieval England’ Saturday 18 October 2003 was a glorious day, blue skies, sunshine, very warm, and I set off for

the very first Greater Manchester Study Day at Norton Priory with a mixture of excitement, trepi-

dation and hope that everything would go well. I need not have worried. Thirty-eight Society

members and friends met up in the Study Room at Norton Priory, our speakers were all there

with lots of things for us to touch and try on, Bob Dobson had brought his excellent selection of

secondhand books carefully reflecting our tastes, and after a welcome cup of coffee we were off.

54

First on was Mark Olly, a great favourite at branch meetings. He has a fund of knowledge

about the history and archaeology of the Warrington area, was involved with the original excava-

tions at Norton Priory and is the author of several books about the area. His talk was about the

Knights Templar, exploring the religious and pagan aspects of the group, their history and the

geographical spread of the Knights. He even managed to connect them to Norton by way of

Templar Crosses. As with all Mark’s talks we just wanted him to continue, but we had another

gem waiting, in the beautifully-clad Sarah Thursfield. Sarah designs and makes medieval

clothes, for re-enactors or just people who are interested. She was wearing one of her own dress-

es, and had brought with her a selection of clothes such as might have been worn by your typical

fourteenth and fifteenth-century person, rich and poor. We tried them on, buckling under the

weight of some of the velvet dresses and cloaks, and Philip our chairman was close to abscond-

ing with the beautiful tabard embroidered with the coats of arms of John de la Pole that she had

on display. It was gorgeous, as was the matching battle pennant she had made. Mark Olly

looked particularly medieval with his long hair and beard, wearing a magnificent velvet robe. It

was noticeable that no-one modelled the hose or the undergarments Sarah brought with her.

This brought us to lunch, a sumptuous buffet served in the coffee bar, after which we were

free to explore Norton Priory. As a venue for a medieval study day it is second to none, having

the remains of the twelfth-century priory, an excellent museum and shop, a world famous giant-

sized statue of St. Christopher, wonderful woodland walks and a walled garden. To walk off

lunch, and as the weather was so warm and sunny, some of us took the opportunity to walk to the

walled garden to have a look at the roses Philip our chairman had planted in remembrance of

Richard III and Francis Lovell. Admittedly they looked a bit stick-like, but it was October.

Hopefully by summer they will be lovely.

Then back to the speakers, starting with our chairman, Philip Jackson, talking about Richard

and the College of Heralds, illustrated with slides explaining the basics of heraldry, showing lots

of examples of the arms of local families and ending up with Richard’s connection with the Col-

lege and more modern examples of coats of arms including the Society’s own.

Our final speaker was Michael Jones, who did not discuss the Battle of Bosworth except

briefly in passing, but concentrated on the conduct of battle, and how behaviour in battle was a

very ritualistic business with very specific ways to behave. He related these rituals, from the way

you prepared for battle by making a will and saying masses, to donning your armour and there-

fore not turning back, to Richard and battles in general, including Bosworth. His talk neatly

drew together many of the threads from our previous speakers’ talks, and all done without benefit

of notes.

So we need not have worried about our first study day: it was great. Our speakers enjoyed it

as much as the listeners did, and they all want to come back again next year. In fact they have

already started planning next year’s talks. We will do it again: we can guarantee the quality of

the speakers and the lunch, but I am not so sure about the weather. It would be nice to see more

local members there, as it was a truly splendid day. So we tender many thanks to Philip who

came up with the original idea, to Helen our secretary who organised it all so competently, to

everyone from the Branch who helped to make it so successful, to our four excellent speakers, to

the people who attended and to Norton Priory for their facilities and wonderful setting.

Personally I can’t wait for next October and the next Greater Manchester Study Day. Come

and join us. You will enjoy it.

Carol Carr

Lincolnshire Branch - Medieval Banquet

55

Saturday, 3 April, in the great hall of the Bishops’ Palace at Southwell Minster. Time: 19.30 for

20.00. Cost: £23.00 – includes four-course meal, music and entertainment. Bed and breakfast

available in the area. Contact: Jean Townsend – Tel 01636-626374.

Yorkshire Branch

Most of the guests at our medieval banquet last October will have noticed Mr Don Flear taking

formal (or not so formal) photographs of the occasion. The Branch is pleased to announce that

copies of a CD-Rom of his pictures are now available from our Treasurer, Mrs C Symonds, 2

Whitaker Avenue, Bradford BD3 2HL, at a bargain £2.00 each. As a colourful souvenir of a

great evening, or simply a collection of costume designs for all sorts and conditions of citizens,

this is unmissable Order your copy now!

On 30 December the Branch commemorated the Battle of Wakefield by laying a wreath at the

monument, which features a small statue of Richard, Duke of York, in Manygates, Sandal, just

down the hill from the castle. One of the very first activities of the group of Ricardians who later

formed the Yorkshire Branch was a meeting here back in December 1960, at the time of the quin-

centenary of the battle, and following a suggestion from Wakefield member Barabara Sykes it

was decided to revive the custom after many years’ abeyance. More than twenty members and

friends were present, and a wreath of white roses and lilies made up by Sheffield member Pauline

Pogmore was placed at the foot of the monument after a few words by our Chairman John Auds-

ley. Afterwards the party enjoyed some time at the castle on a fine, crisp afternoon, and Branch

members provided refreshments in the new visitor centre. This was a successful event which the

Branch has every hope of making a regular date in our calendar.

We can confirm that Dr Michael Jones will be the speaker at our Spring Lecture on Saturday

3 April 2004. The venue, as usual, is the lecture theatre at Leeds City Art Gallery, and the lec-

ture begins at 2.00 p.m., although the hall is open from 1.00 p.m. for socialising. Admission is

free. Dr Jones will speak on Richard of Gloucester as a military commander, especially in the

North of England. Those of you who have heard this speaker before will surely look forward to

hearing him again, and if you have never heard him you have missed a great experience, so come

along this time!

The lecture always takes place at ‘Towton Weekend’ and on Sunday 4 April there will be the

customary commemoration of the battle at the Dacre Cross by the battlefield near Saxton, Tad-

caster. This event is organised by the Towton Battlefield Society, and further details may be ob-

tained from John Audsley on 0113-294-2656.

Angela Moreton

Worcestershire Branch

We have had a number of successful meetings. The Christmas lunch was up to its usual high

standards and in a new venue after we were let down by our usual hall. The new place turned out

to be as large and comfortable as the Oaks.

In November Kevin Down spoke to us about Richard III and his churchmen, which was an

interesting discussion followed by a lively question and answer session.

In January we held our first ever library open day, where the librarian bought all the books,

magazines, and periodicals that are in our library and displayed them for us to browse. Along-

side this we showed the displays we created for our stalls at the re-enactments of the battle of

Tewkesbury and at Leominster for the Battle of Mortimer’s Cross. Also shown was Geoffrey

Wheeler’s display about Richard III.

Our future programme:

Saturday 13 March In a change to the programme it will now be an illustrated talk ‘The

Castles of Herefordshire’ by David Whitehead at Lyttleton Rooms,

Malvern

Saturday 17 April AGM and visit to Caldwell Tower, Kidderminster

56

Nancy Baldwin The Gloucestershire Branch is very sad to record the death of Nancy, who died

suddenly in December 2003. She will be remembered for her long membership of the Branch,

constant attendance and lively contributions at meetings. Her staunch allegiance to Richard and

his reputation was legendary – any visiting speaker careless enough to cast some ill considered

slight on Richard, would receive an immediate, mid-sentence, riposte from Nancy!

A thanksgiving service for her life was held at Christchurch, Abbeydale, Gloucester on Friday

19 December. The church was packed with Nancy’s friends from the many groups and societies

she frequented – these included her interests in classical music, art, reading, local history and, of

course, the Richard III Society.

Our sincere condolences go to Chris, Nancy’s husband, and her sons, Alex and Francis. Nan-

cy will be much missed at Branch meetings.

Gloucestershire Branch

Dr Philomena Connolly I never met Phil Connolly but I corresponded with her between 1994

and 1998 on the Society’s wills indexing project. She introduced herself as an archivist working

in the National Archives and a part-time teacher in the Medieval History Department in Trinity

College, Dublin. I later learned she was a graduate of Trinity College, and she originally regis-

tered for an M.Litt studying Lionel of Clarence and Ireland, 1361-66, but extended her research

in order to submit it for a Ph.D. which was conferred in 1978. During her career Phil was given

day-to-day charge of the State Paper Office in Dublin Castle and later was based in the Public

Record Office of the Four Courts where she had responsibility for medieval records. Amongst

her major publications were the Statute Rolls of the Irish Parliament, Richard III - Henry VII.

For the wills project Phil indexed several volumes found in the library of Trinity College and as

with many other indexers she couldn’t resist including snippets from the wills in her letters. Her

last letter to me mentioned the death of her namesake on the project, Philomena Jones, at an ear-

ly age. Sadly Phil herself was only in her mid-fifties when she passed away in June last year. A

true daughter of the 60s, she appreciated the music of Bob Dylan. I always loved her description

of working on the project – ‘I’m enjoying this’.

Wendy Moorhen

With regret we announce the loss of our former member Sylvia Streich, one of our four Hanove-

rian members. With only around fifty years of age a serious disease let her leave too early. She

was one of the founding members of the Continentals when they started in 1986. We well re-

member her important support as a staunch Ricardian. She wrote very interesting articles for our

little magazine and helped to organise our meetings. She will be sadly missed.

Rita Diefenhardt-Schmitt, Continental Group

Obituaries

57

Calendar

We run a calendar of all forthcoming events: if you are aware of any events of Ricardian inter-

est, whether organised by the Society - Committee, Visits Team, Branches/Groups, or by others,

please let the Editor have full details, in sufficient time for entry. The calendar will also be run

on the website, and, with full details, for members, on the intranet.

Date(s) Events Originator

13 Mar Requiem Mass and rose planting at Clare Priory Visits Committee

3 Apr Lincolnshire Branch Medieval Banquet, Southwell Lincolnshire Branch,

page 54

3 Apr Yorkshire Branch Spring Lecture: Michael K Jones

‘Richard III as a military commander’ Yorkshire Branch,

page 55

16-18 Apr Study Weekend in York on Medieval Women Research Officer, page

51

22 Apr Weekday day visit to Lambeth Palace and Westminster Visits Committee,

page 49

19-25 May Visit to Ireland – Dublin, and Cork - CANCELLED Visits Committee

5 Jun Branches, Groups and Committee Representatives

Meeting Secretary

19 Jun Visit to Ely Mid Anglia Group,

page 50

2-5 Jul Visit to Devon and Cornwall – Plymouth, St Michael’s

Mount, Tiverton, Exeter, etc. Visits Committee

31 Jul Norfolk Branch Blackfriars Plaque Unveiling Norfolk Branch, page 49

22 Aug Bosworth Secretary

11 Sep Day visit to Surrey – Society Library, Farnham Castle,

Guildford Castle Visits Committee

2 Oct AGM Secretary

13 Nov Norfolk Branch Study Day ‘Death of Kings’ Norfolk Branch

12 Dec Fotheringhay Service of Nine Lessons and Carols and

Lunch Fotheringhay

Co-Ordinator

Subscription Rates Full member £15; Family membership (all living at same address) £20; Senior citizen member

(over the age of 65) £11, Senior citizen family membership £15; Junior member (joining before

18th birthday) £11; Student member (over 18 in full-time education) £11; Overseas mailing

charge (£2). Subscriptions are due on 2 October 2003 and should be sent to the Membership

Dept, cheques and postal orders payable to Richard III Society