Issuu on Google+

Ricardian Bulletin

Spring 2005

Contents 2 3 7 8 10 11 13 16 18 21 24 27 29 35 38 40 42 44 47 49 50 52 54 55 57 62 63 64

From the Chairman Reception at the College of Arms for HRH the Duke of Gloucester A Princess is Remembered: The Memorial Service for Princess Alice Society News and Notices Developing the Potential: A Research Proposal £1m Lottery Fund Award to Bosworth Battlefield Centre Media Retrospective Match of the Day News and Reviews Then and Now: Reflections on the First 30 Years of the Ricardian Bulletin Anne Mowbray: In Life and In Death The Man Himself The Debate: Elizabeth of York’s Letter Richard’s Friend Francis Logge Notes and Queries: The Death of Joan Boughton by Lesley Wynne-Davies Richard III’s Easter by John Ashdown-Hill Paul Murray Kendall: A Child’s View by Callie Kendall Correspondence The Barton Library Book Review Booklist Letter from America Report on Society Events Future Society Events Branches and Groups New Members Obituaries Calendar Contributions

Contributions are welcomed from all members. Articles and correspondence regarding the Bulletin Debate should be sent to Peter Hammond 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 Judith Ridley. If you are interested in obtaining any back numbers, please contact Mrs Ridley to establish whether she holds the issue(s) in which you are interested. For contact details see back inside cover of the Bulletin The Ricardian Bulletin is produced by the Bulletin Editorial Committee, General Editor Elizabeth Nokes and printed by St Edmundsbury Press. © Richard III Society, 2005

1


From the Chairman

2

005 is a year for anniversaries. It is fifty years since the publication of Paul Murray Kendall’s biography of King Richard and the premiere of Laurence Olivier’s classic film of Shakespeare’s Richard III. Forty years ago, the discovery of the remains of Anne Mowbray was announced and, amazingly, it is twenty years since we commemorated the five hundredth anniversary of the Battle of Bosworth. Ten years ago in the autumn, we lost one of our much loved and still much missed members, Joyce Melhuish. I still find it incredible that it can take a dozen people to do the things that Joyce did alone. Most of these will be recalled throughout the year in the Bulletin. Next year, of course, we will celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the re-founding of the Society. Naturally, we want to celebrate this in style, and in June’s Bulletin we will outline the initial programme for the year. In the meantime, we will be talking to our branches and groups to ensure that the celebrations involve as many members as possible, in Britain and overseas. So, send me your suggestions for celebrating this milestone. All will be considered. However, it’s not all about anniversaries. The announcement by the Heritage Lottery Fund and Leicestershire County Council of funding for the Bosworth Battlefield Centre is perhaps the most exciting news we have heard for some time. In this issue, the Research Committee is putting forward an exciting new proposal and I would encourage those of you who want to get involved in research to respond to it. Although the idea of a research community sounds quite daunting, if successful, it should greatly help our research programme, further enhancing the Society’s reputation in historical scholarship. The Research Committee is the oldest of our standing committees, having started its life back in 1979. The annual report gives details about its composition and activities, the most important of which is its responsibilities for overseeing our research agenda. The Society has another busy year ahead with the regular annual events and outings and I look forward to meeting members at many of these. There are two additional events this year which I would like to mention. In April, Cambridge will host the Society’s triennial conference, and, down under in July, the Australians and New Zealanders will be holding their biennial conference in Sydney. I am sure both will be highly successful and I look forward to reading the reports in future issues of the Bulletin. Recently, we learned of the death of Jack Leslau, who believed that Holbein left us clues that the sons of Edward IV lived during the lifetime of Thomas More, and who was prepared to dig up Mechelen Cathedral to prove it! No matter what one thought of Jack’s theories, at least he made us think. I wonder if he now knows the answers. Another notable Ricardian who has died recently is Vera Legg, who will be remembered in the annals of the Society as the original promoter of Fotheringhay. She began the project, which led to the York Chapel window there. The fund raising for the window, with the first craft sale, gave rise to Joyce Melhuish’s long involvement with Fotheringhay, which in turn gave rise to mine, and to regular craft sales. Joyce’s first costume doll, of Queen Anne Neville and christened ‘Queen Dolly’, was won, fittingly, by Vera, at that first sale. Those of you who attended the AGM in Bristol last October will know that we had a talk about the accounts of William Worsley, Dean of St Paul’s Cathedral from 1479 to 1497, a key period in Yorkist history. The book about this interesting man who was closely involved with many of the great events of the time is now available from the sales team. Finally, thinking of books brings to mind that one of the best introductions to the Ricardian controversy is that by our former chairman, the late Jeremy Potter. In ‘Good King Richard?’, Jeremy included the question mark to acknowledge that the ‘good’ was still open to debate in some quarters. Last year was a good one for promoting a positive view of the king. Let’s make sure that 2005 is another such for good King Richard. Phil Stone

2


Reception at the College of Arms for HRH The Duke of Gloucester

R

ecently, as the Society prepares to celebrate the golden anniversary of its refounding in 2006 and the whole body of its achievement over those fifty years, smaller anniversaries and aspects of that achievement have also been marked. In 2003, the publication of a Festschrift, and the reception to launch it, celebrated twenty-five years of Anne Sutton’s editorship of The Ricardian. Last November it was the turn of the Society to record with gratitude the silver anniversary of HRH The Duke of Gloucester’s patronage, with a reception at the College of Arms, in the City of London, attended by around forty members. The choice of the College of Arms was highly appropriate, as it received its charter of incorporation from Richard III in March 1484 and so is a living legacy of his life and reign. The College was originally housed at Coldharbour, though at the start of his reign Henry VII granted this mansion to his mother – a decision that still appears to rankle! Somewhat ironically the College was to move to its current site, between St Paul’s and the river, through a grant from Edward Stanley, 3rd Earl of Derby – great-grandson of Lady Margaret’s husband. Shortly after this, in 1555, it received a charter of re-incorporation from Queen Mary and King Philip. Its present home, was built in the 1670s after Derby Place was destroyed in the Great Fire. The College’s officers consist of three Kings of Arms, six Heralds and four Pursuivants. In medieval times they were responsible for the organisation of tournaments and from this they developed their role in organising great ceremonies of state and their armorial expertise. Today, under the Duke of Norfolk as hereditary Earl Marshal, the officers remain responsible for organising great ceremonies of state, such as the state opening of Parliament and state funerals. Our college host for the evening was Win-

dsor Herald (William Hunt), who told us about the day-to-day work. This remains, as it was in 1484, the granting of arms and the heraldic and genealogical research and record -keeping that these grants involved. We were shown one of the most recent grants of arms; this was to the Society of International Bankers and represented £400 for 100 hours of work, the money is crucial as the College is entirely financially self-supporting. We were also shown the grant of arms to the late Sir Harry Secombe, showing a mermaid combing her hair and the motto GO ON. Other older artefacts were also on display. Windsor pointed out to us an armorial from 1510. He demonstrated to us how this sort of illustrated guide showed how arms were becoming more fussy during Tudor times, the entry for Richard III noted him as having killed the Princes. We also had a chance to view a pedigree of Edward IV, showing his supposed descent from Adam. The College has the Latin version of the Rous Roll and we could see how Edward of Lancaster had been inserted into the entry for Anne Neville, presumably after 1485. It was the practice of heralds to tour the country on visitations, to make grants of arms and to check that existing grants were not being misused. Just to show that some things do not change, we were shown an expenses claim from a 1683 visitation. The item that probably aroused the most comment and interest was non-heraldic though. These were the notes of a London citizen from the 1480s, with their intriguing claim that the Princes were killed by the ‘vyse’ of the Duke of Buckingham.* After this very interesting talk, it was time for the Duke of Gloucester’s arrival. He was greeted by our Chairman, Phil Stone, Garter Principal King-of-Arms (Peter Llewellyn Gwynn-Jones) and Windsor Herald. Fortunately, he found time to meet all the members, both before and after his own viewing of 3


Above left : Isolde Wigram receives her Vice President’s Badge. Above right: Murray Craig Below left: Peggy and Roger Martin. Below right : Andrea Lindow, Sally Henshaw and Ros Conaty.

Below left: Kitty Bristow, Phil Stone, Carolyn and Peter Hammond, Wendy Moorhen. Below right: Comparing regalia.

4


Above left: Bill Featherstone and Elizabeth Nokes. Above right: Margaret Stiles being presented to the Patron. Tom Wallis and Joan Dupont looking on.

Above left: William Hunt, Windsor Herald. Above right: Garter, Patron & Chairman during supper in the Earl Marshal’s Court. Below left: Anne and Bryan Hall. Below right: Carolyn West and Sandra Church.

5


the documents and to say a few words to many of them. Phil Stone, then presented the Duke with his badge as our patron. In his speech Phil recalled the sense of excitement and pride, within the Society, when it received royal patronage in 1980 – especially as it came from the first Richard of Gloucester since the great man himself. He mentioned how the Duke had unveiled plaques in the most inclement weather and also his previous visit to the College of Arms, when the society had received its own grant of arms; most recently the Duke had attended the Festschrift launch. In his short speech of thanks the Duke mentioned his own pride in being our Patron, his pleasure in visiting the College again and his hope that the Society would continue its research into the archives to show evidence of Richard’s innocence of some of the crimes of which he was accused. He concluded by say-

ing that he hoped to be our Patron until ‘whenever’. The Chairman also asked the Duke to present Isolde Wigram with her lapel badge as a Society Vice President, recalling that she was one of those involved in refounding the Society in 1956. After the formal business of the evening was over, we moved to the splendid Earl Marshal’s Court for a finger buffet – prepared by the College porter’s wife, so I was told, and she made a fine job of it, as the frequent refilling of plates showed. We lingered for a long time, no-one, including the Patron, seemed very keen to leave. Much thanks is due to Wendy Moorhen for all her hard work on such an enjoyable and well-organised evening. Howard Choppin * Published in the English Historical Review, 1981, vol. 96 – ‘Historical Notes of a London Citizen’ by RF Green.

A personal addendum from Phil Stone It was indeed, a splendid evening, and it was quite obvious that the Duke enjoyed himself. As he, Garter and I sat on the steps of the Earl Marshal’s chair during the meal, it also became obvious that our Patron is a widely read and extremely knowledgeable man: the subjects of conversation were many and various. Unfortunately I did not get a chance to give thanks publicly during the event but I want to say thank you to everyone who was involved with it, especially Wendy Moorhen, who made all the arrangements with the College of Arms and Windsor Herald. The College recorded the Society’s visit in their own Newsletter circulated last November: On 17 November members of the Richard III Society with their patron HRH the Duke of Gloucester, KG, made an evening visit to the College of Arms where they were shown the records and collections by William Hunt (Windsor). And finally I received the following letter of thanks from Kensington Palace: 3rd December 2004 Dear Doctor Stone, The Duke of Gloucester has asked me to thank you most sincerely for your hospitality and assistance during his visit to the Richard III Society on the 17th November which he very much enjoyed. His Royal Highness has asked me also to thank you and the Society for the presentation of his Patron’s medal. This is a great honour and a distinction he greatly appreciates. The Duke of Gloucester has enjoyed his long association with the Richard III Society and wishes it a long and successful future. His Royal Highness would ask that his thanks and best wishes are passed on to all those involved in making the evening such a success. Yours sincerely, Alistair Wood Private secretary 6


A Princess Remembered THE MEMORIAL SERVICE FOR HRH PRINCESS ALICE

O

n Wednesday 2 February a service was held in the St Clement Danes Church in central London to give thanks for the life of HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, mother of the Society’s Patron. The Duchess is held in no small affection by the Society, since she had been present at the dedication of the window in Fotheringhay and had unveiled the Leicester statue when His Royal Highness was called away at the last moment to represent HM the Queen in the New Hebrides. In a church filled with people from many walks of life, including a king and a queen and dukes and duchesses, but especially from the charities supported by the Duchess and by members of the armed forces, the Society was represented by the President, a Vice President, the Chairman and the Secretary - Peter and Carolyn Hammond, myself and Elizabeth Nokes. There was much music, with some fine singing from the choir, most notably in Duruflé’s ‘Ubi caritas’, while the readings included the famous lines about ‘time’ from Ecclesiastes, read by the late Duchess’s grandson, the Earl of Ulster.

The central part of the service was the address given by HRH the Duke of Gloucester, in which he spoke affectionately about his mother, suggesting that on Christmas Day 1901 no one present at her birth could have predicted that, over a century later, there would have been such a memorial service, and that it would have been a century of so much change in the land that she came to love so much. He spoke of her sense of duty, of service and of commitment, especially when she was working, and in particular, during her time in Australia. His Royal Highness said how happy he was that she had decided to become a mother, even if she had left it rather late! As a young woman, the princess-to-be was told by a fortuneteller, who didn’t know who she was, that she would marry ‘above her station’ which, as she thought at the time, was going to be difficult for a duke’s daughter. She had been a good mother, too, and an even better grandmother, spoiling his children, even when asked not to, as any grandmother would. He said that she would be missed by all, and that seemed to be the sentiment felt by all those attending the service. Certainly, 7


Society News and Notices Subscriptions Rates from October 2005 Please note: incorrect figures were included for the subscription increase due to take place for existing Society members from October 2005, on the inside front cover of the Winter Bulletin. The correct figures are now printed – we apologise for this error. Editor

Membership Number It would be very much appreciated if members could include their membership number in any correspondence to me including the payment of subscriptions. The membership number is printed on the inlay card that accompanies each issue of the Bulletin. This will help considerably with administration, particularly when members share similar names and initials or if the payment of subscriptions is from an account where the name and initials differ from the name on the member’s record. A number of members received letters in January to say that they had not paid their subscriptions when in fact they had but I had great difficulty in matching the payments with these members. Happily all these problems have now been resolved but it has taken a great deal of time. If you have not made a note of your membership number then perhaps you could include your postcode which is the next most unique item on your record. James Petre, Membership Manager

Discounted Entry Scheme The Visits Committee has negotiated reduced-price entry for Richard III Society members to the following:      

Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire (discount at party rate) Cardiff Castle (10% discount) Ingatestone Hall, near Chelmsford, Essex (2 for the price of 1) Moyses Hall Museum, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, (2 for the price of 1) The Richard III Museum, Monk Bar, York, (adults £1, seniors 50p.) (Please note that the Richard III Museum is not connected with the Richard III Society. Any comments which members may have regarding the museum should be addressed directly to the museum and not to the Richard III Society.)  The play An Audience with King Richard III at the Richard III Museum (adults £3, seniors £2)  Warwick Castle (£4 off standard adult entry) In all cases except Warwick Castle, to obtain the discount you will need to present a Richard III Society membership card. To obtain a membership card, please write to the Chairman, Dr. Phil Stone, enclosing SAE. Discounted entry to Warwick Castle will be by voucher, also obtainable from Phil Stone (again, by letter, enclosing SAE). If you require any further information please contact me. Please note that the Visits Committee will be pleased to receive suggestions (preferably with contact details) of other venues from whom we might seek discounted entry for Richard III Society members. John Ashdown-Hill 8


Branch and Group Liaison Formerly liaison with branches and groups was a shared responsibility, John Saunders looked after overseas branches and groups, and I looked after UK and European ones, while also being responsible for the world-wide dissemination of the ‘branch/group information form’. As from the beginning of 2004 the situation has changed, and responsibility for liaison with all branches and groups has been taken over by John Ashdown-Hill, who has mailed out the 2004 ‘branch/group information form’ and associated information. I bowed out at the end of December 2004, with a mailing to all branches and groups to advise them of the change, and notify them of the results of a telephone contact survey with UK branches and groups. As I bow out of this role, I would like to thank all branch and group contacts, world-wide, with whom I have liaised, and assure them that my formal retirement from this post need not sever informal contacts. I have enjoyed being in touch, and hearing about activities world-wide. I would also like to note that, while in the past, one message of change of secretary/contact details would suffice for the branch/group liaison officer and the Bulletin Editor, now that the two offices are held by different people, I, as Bulletin Editor will need to be notified (copied-in) on any contact detail changes, so I can report them in the Bulletin. Elizabeth Nokes

PALAEOGRAPHY BY POST Would you like to be able to read original documents yourself? Can you read this?

This script should not be too difficult the read because it is computer generated but the Society can help you read the real thing. The Society offers a correspondence course for beginners or near beginners who wish to read fifteenth-century hand-writing. The emphasis will be on private and business hands - the kinds of script to be found in government and family records – rather than the formal book hands employed in copying literary texts. The full course will consist of eight lessons which can be paid for in two groups of four if desired. Each lesson will include sample texts with a commentary drawing attention to such matters as abbreviations and characteristic letter shapes and to any particular problems. Part of the sample material will be fully transcribed; the student will be expected to transcribe the remainder and return it for correction and comment. As the course progresses the amount of commentary will decrease, and the texts set for transcription increase in length and difficulty so that the final lessons will be in effect an occasion for supervised practice. Any participants undertaking the course in order to be able to read a particular document may, if they wish, replace one or two of the final practice lessons with photocopies, (supplied by them), of a text of their choice. Transcripts of such texts would be corrected in the usual way by the tutor - allowing students to receive specialist help with their own work. Students can work at their own speed and no deadlines will be imposed. When one assignment has been completed the corrected version will be returned with the next lesson. The course can therefore take as much, or as little, time as the student feels able to spare. The cost of the course is £27.50 for each group of four lessons, payable in advance. There is an additional cost for overseas postage. To enrol or obtain details of overseas postage costs please write to the Research Office, Wendy Moorhen, 2 Field Hurst, Langley Broom, Langley, Berkshire, SL3 8PQ. Cheques should be made payable to the Richard III Society. 9


Developing the Potential A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

A

s a Society we exist to secure a re-assessment of the life and times of Richard III. To achieve this the promotion of research has always been our primary aim. Since its founding in 1924 the Society has initiated various research activities including: the publication of primary sources, such as the Harleian Manuscript 433; group projects, such as the transcription of the Logge wills and the Wills Index; and the organisation of regular research weekends, seminars and conferences. The Society’s Research Committee now wants to take things a step further. Research can be a solitary pursuit and, especially to those just starting out, a daunting prospect. Whilst it is true that some topics require specialist skills such as palaeography and Latin, much can be achieved through the study and interpretation of printed primary sources and secondary material. The Research Committee has published the Beginner’s Guide to Research and Speaker’s Notes to help members who are new to research or who want to give talks on the life and times of Richard III. Over the years many individual members have undertaken such research and seen the results published in The Ricardian, the Bulletin and branch magazines. Whilst the Wills Project was in progress, there developed a very strong sense of camaraderie amongst the participants. Linked by a newsletter and regular meetings at research weekends, the project became a real community of researchers. At the time we felt that this was a quality that we wanted to sustain and so we would now like to establish a wider ‘research community’ within the Society. By working together and making the best use of our resources we will have the potential to increase significantly the impact and effectiveness of the Society’s research agenda. And, most importantly, we will involve many more members in a core area of the Society’s work. Participation in the proposed community will be open to any member who is interested in research, irrespective of whether they are experienced, a beginner or just have aspirations. We would also be interested to hear from members who are archaeologists, especially those with experiences of working on medieval projects. History and archaeology are twin and mutually dependent disciplines and it would greatly enhance the Society’s research programme if we could encourage co-operation between the two. We already have two archaeologists contributing to the redesign of our web site and it would be a welcome development to extend such involvement to other research areas. We envisage a definite two-way communication process: the Research Committee will have a more informed understanding of the scope of members’ research interests and skills; and members will have more direct access to the committee and other members involved in research. Given that we have a wide geographic spread of members both within the UK and overseas, the mechanisms used to communicate and maintain the cohesion of the community will be crucial. Our primary means of achieving this will be through a regular newsletter which will include: case studies; reports on projects; notices of external events; summaries of research queries raised and responses as well as a general Q & A section; notification of relevant new theses; and much more. We would like to hold regular research events and a seminar on research methods for beginners is being considered. Personal contact can also be made via regular Society events. In the longer term we will explore the potential of the internet to strengthen our network. We hope that such a research community will encourage members to take the plunge and commence work on research projects of their own. Ideas on how the concept might be developed will be gratefully received. If you are interested in the ‘research community’, please complete the form in the centrefold section of the Bulletin. Wendy Moorhen 10


£1m Lottery Fund Award to Bosworth Battlefield Centre

T

he Heritage Lottery Fund has announced around the areas of Ambion Hill and Realmost £1m worth of funding to Leicesdemore Plain, the latter identified by Peter tershire County Council for a project they Foss and from which, members may recall, describe as a ‘world precedent’ to ‘uncover Mr Foard has already conceived a conjectual the true battlefield through a three-year proaccount of the battle. gramme of archaeological and topographical The story was picked up enthusiastically studies. Forensic techniques will be used to by the media on 21 January with reports on determine where radio, television woodland, marshand in the broades, fields and sheets and local roads would have press. Channel 4 been situated in featured a two1485 to help with minute segment the detective work from Bosworth and determine the complete with Les true battlefield. Routiers reMetal detecting enactment group will also be used performing in the to determine the background, a clip point where the from the Olivier armies met, known film of Richard III as the “clash and an interview point”’. The fundwith Glenn Foard. ing, £990,000, will They also reported also be used to that a mere update and devel£200,000 would be op the visitor censpent on the artre which will chaeological work. become a regisStories ran in The tered museum Independent, The displaying any Times and The finds from the Guardian. Howevarchaeological er, the reports were work. confusing. Channel The Winter 4 reported that the Richard III at Bosworth Field by A Hopkins and engraved 2004 issue of the areas to be examfor the 19th century edition of Staunton’s Shakespeare. Courtesy of Goff Wheeler. Bulletin published ined were ‘Ambion an article by Paul Hill, an Old Roman Startin of the Bosworth Battlefield Visitor Road a mile away and Fenny Drayton’. The Centre and this provides a brief summary of Times, on the other hand, reported on Michael the County Council's strategy towards excaJones’ theory that the battle took place at vating the site based on the report of the preAtherstone and went on to write that Mr liminary findings by Glenn Foard of the BatFoard was ‘satisfied that Dr Jones was incortlefield Trust. His survey was carried out rect’ from which it could be inferred that the 11


Atherstone/Fenny Drayton site may not be examined. Another ambiguous area relates to Richard’s final resting place. The HLF press release refers to the studies shedding ‘some light on the ultimate resting place of Richard III, something which until now has been subject to many myths and legends’. No reference was made to the fact that the fate of Richard's body only became uncertain after the Reformation and the dissolution of the Greyfriars monastery in Leicester. The East Midlands Branch chairman, Richard Smith, represented the Society at the press launch hosted by Leicestershire County Council on 21 January. Richard has confirmed that the exact locations for excavations were not given other than the mentioning of the villages of Shenton, Stoke Golding and Dadlington. Mike Jones has since commented to the Society that he has serious concerns over whether the Atherstone site will be properly considered. The Society has been in touch with Glenn Foard who believes ‘that everyone involved in the project will feel it

important that a range of individuals and groups are kept updated on the project, none more so than your Society’. Leicestershire County Council believe the archaeological and geographic survey will take many years as ‘the actual battlefield is likely to cover a large area, as there are thought to have been between 20,000 and 25,000 on the field.’ What was encouraging from these press reports was the political correctness in their treatment of Richard with none of the preconceptions of the monster stereotype we are all so familiar with. For example, The Times commented that Shakespeare ‘demonised’ Richard. The Guardian’s reporter asked the Society for a comment on the funding, and the sound byte they chose to publish closed their article: ‘Sadly nothing can change the outcome; treachery and betrayal led a brave man to his death - the last king of England to die on the battlefield’. Richard Van Allen

Your last chance to buy this important Trust publication A small stock of the Crowland Chronicle Continuations has recently been found and is now available for sale to Society members. This is one of the major sources for late 15th-century English history, containing information found nowhere else on crucial events, including those of the reign of Richard III. They have hitherto only been available in a 19th century English translation and a 17th century Latin version. The present book represents the first scholarly edition. It contains a long introduction which includes a discussion of the vexed question of the authorship, and parallel Latin and English texts. Price £18.50 plus £4.50 postage and packing from the Sales Liaison Officer. See inside back cover of the Bulletin.

12


Media Retrospective From Renée Jennison The Times 16 October, Giles Coren on David Starkey’s ‘Monarchy’ series: ‘David Starkey is fronting another dull TV history of England. Much more fun to make it up – like Geoffrey of Monmouth … God knows, history doesn’t have to be true. We remember Henry V and Richard III not because of Holinshed but because of Shakespeare – nobody gives a damn whether Richard really had a hump or offered rash bargains when horsedealing’.

From Ruth Margolis Metro 12 November, ‘ ... presents a new and intriguing spin on the reputation of Richard III, who has been maligned throughout the ages. Richard, famous for murdering his two nephews, was a much more complex figure than the man remembered in popular myth. His hunchback, for example, has been much overstated’. Radio Times, 6-12 November: ‘... film on England’s last medieval king, most famous for murdering his two nephews. Far from being the hunchbacked child-killer of Shakespeare’s Richard III, the king, we learn, was perfectly formed and a dutiful brother to Edward IV, only turning bloody after his death. And a revelation about Edward’s parentage throws new light on Richard’s real motivation for murder’.

From Elizabeth Nokes Nine to Five & Midweek, 8 November, Adam Scott on John Caird’s production of Anouilh’s Becket: ‘[Jasper] Britton ... his priggish, spoilt King Henry becoming almost as deliciously likeable as Shakespeare’s Richard III. … Anouilh plays as fast and loose with history as Shakespeare did in the aforementioned Richard III’. Daily Express 23 October. Margaret Holder, in an article on Prince Harry’s instinct for trouble, and how it resides in his royal genes commented, ‘Richard III is still a prime suspect in the murder of his nephews ... who died in the year of his coronation’. The Times 29 October, Derwent May on ‘The noble heritage of two great queens’ [Mechelen] referred to Margaret of York, who ‘gave her protection to the impostor Perkin Warbeck, choosing to believe that he was one of her princely nephews who were murdered in the Tower of London.’ Neither of these references was as bad as it might be, stopping short of an outright accusation against Richard, but the Editor wrote to the respective newspapers about both, and both letters were published. Thanks go to Geoffrey Wheeler for alerting her to the items.

From Marilyn Garabet Daily Mail 6 November 2004, Richard Pendlebury reporting on Christine and Neil Hamilton’s purchase of Bradfield Manor in Wiltshire: ‘like all rural properties of substance [it] is said to be haunted. The phantoms supposedly in residence are a medieval monk and a former owner who was executed for composing a seditious ditty about Richard III’. Collingbourne, we presume? From Andrea Fiander and Richander Birkinshaw From English Heritage magazine Autumn 2004, ‘Yorkshire Update’: ‘Haunting Beauty … Scarborough Castle … ‘Other Royals to have been associated with the castle include Richard III, who is thought to have wooed his wife, Anne, there. So attached was he to the castle that his ghost is said to wander around its grounds to this day.’ From Peter Hancock In the Daily Mail of 27 November 2004 they provided the answers to a series of questions posed to pupils aged eleven in 1898. Needless to say, since the test was largely on con-

The repeat of Tony Robinson’s Fact or Fiction: Richard III on Discovery Channel in November yielded comment: 13


tent and factual information, it proved difficult, even for the knowledgeable of today. However, for our purposes, question 2, under English History, proved most interesting: ‘Give some account of Egbert, William II, Richard III, Robert Blake, Lord Nelson’. In the answer section published that day in the Mail, the answer for Richard read: ‘Richard III: seized the throne when brother Edward IV died in 1483. Believed to have murdered Edward’s sons, the Princes in the Tower’. May be Richard got a better ‘shake’ at the turn of the 20th century than the 21st? At least the qualifier ‘believed’ was injected.

kings, who concisely summarises Richard III’s life and reign under thirteen subheadings, such as ‘Northern pre-eminence’, ‘Protector of the realm’, ‘the search for stability’, etc., into just over seven pages, but inevitably it is more dealing with ‘the king’s character’ and ‘image and reputation’, that will give some cause for concern among the more ardent of Richard’s defenders, as she believes ‘when he ordered the death of his nephews, he may very well have justified it to himself (as he justified his own usurpation) as a way of averting unrest, although that, of course, was synonymous with securing his own position’. Her views are reiterated in the entry for Edward V: ‘… the princes’ fate continues to arouse controversy. Chronicle accounts of their murder are inevitably speculative, and little light has been shed on their death by analysis of the bones found in the Tower in 1674 and assumed to be those of the princes. The most plausible explanation for their undoubted disappearance is that they were murdered in the summer of 1483, to try and preempt a rising in their favour’. As this new edition will doubtless be a prime resource for future researchers for many years to come, both in the library edition and online, it is perhaps regrettable that Dr Horrox could not have expressed a more moderate and reasonable view. A brief survey of other lives of interest to members reveals Michael Hicks on Clarence and Elizabeth Woodville, but surprisingly not Warwick ‘the Kingmaker’ (A.J. Pollard), Cecily, Duchess of York (Christopher Harper-Bill) and her husband Richard (John Watts), while Henry VII is dealt with by S.J. Gunn, who sees Richard III as ‘bellicose’.

From Livia Visser-Fuchs ‘George ... er.. Richard ... er ... George III. The announcement of the BBC2 programme Timewatch on 11 December 2004 in a Dutch TV Guide: ‘Historical documentary: How mad was George III ? Documentary about Richard III who sat on the British throne for some 60 years.’ From Geoffrey Wheeler Nicholas Barker, reviewing the new Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Times Literary Supplement 10 December 2004) ‘Chroniclers of the DNB from Sidney Lee onwards give the impression that British biography, or at least biographical dictionaries, sprang from the brain of Zeus, without antecedents Far from it: Aelfric’s Lives of the Saints inaugurated a long medieval tradition, and Thomas More’s Life of Richard III, written in Latin and English, looked back to Sallust, as well as forward to the exemplary plan of Izaak Walton’s Lives’. Later in the article, revealing his personal interest as the writer responsible for discovering the identify of the real ‘Jane’ Shore (Etoniana, No. 125, June 4, 1972), he comments: ‘the idea of joining forces (with the National Portrait gallery archive for illustrations) has proved a double benefit. It can be improved. The Eton picture of ‘Jane Shore’, is of a half-naked woman known (wrongly) as Diane de Poitiers, although the life-time portrait of Edward IV’s mistress is cited in the article’s references’. This entry is one of many contributed by Rosemary Horrox, writing on the Yorkist

From The Independent on Sunday, ‘Well Executed Art. This Bloody block ... ‘Come, lead me to the block: bear him my head. They smile at me who shortly shall be dead’. So says Lord Hastings in Shakespeare’s Richard III, before his life is curtailed in gruesome fashion. The real-life Hastings is just one of the many high-profile executees who are being commemorated by The Tower of London’s new sculpture on the site of the former chopping block in Tower Green. ... But while 14


Hastings was the victim of monarchic whimsy, the new sculpture’s installation will be a far more democratic process, with five shortlisted designs and ‘viewer feedback’ [and] an all-star selection committee including David Starkey and AS Byatt will listen to the views of the public, before disregarding them and making their final decision’. – Ed Caesar.

‘We know from history that the real Richard III was nothing like Shakespeare’s powercraving psychopath. But for Battistelli the play’s the thing, and it is the protagonist’s status as a prototype for the 20th-century monster that especially attracted him.’ It was inferred that the opera will be performed in Britain and the US.

From Christine Roberts, Elizabeth Butler, Geoffrey Wheeler and Elizabeth Nokes Daily Telegraph 15 January, ‘Books’, review by Diarmaid Macculloch of The Hollow Crown: a History of Britain in the Late Middle Ages, Miri Rubin: ‘It was generally those monarchs who showed no enthusiasm for carnage overseas who suffered violent deaths ... the gentle, insanely generous and often downright insane Henry VI ... Worse was the fate of the blameless boy Edward V, secretly murdered in prison by the worst royal thug of all, Richard III (who alone can bear the blame, despite all ingenious modern arguments to the contrary). Richard was so cynical that he promoted the martyr’s cult of Henry VI, whose only claim to martyrdom was that he had been murdered by Richard’s brother Edward IV’.

And finally: The Society’s Chairman is invited to comment on the rehabilitation of Macbeth, another Shakespearian ‘villain’ Glasgow Herald, 4 February 2005. Under the banner of ‘Is this a villain I see before me?’ the Herald reported on Conservative MSP Alex Johnstone’s belief that Macbeth is a much-maligned monarch who has Shakespeare to thank for his image problem and he claims that the ‘myth has overshadowed the man, and it’s time to reassert a few historical facts’. Sound familiar? Well, the journalist involved thought it did and she contacted Phil Stone who she described as knowing ‘a little about sticking up for history’s “villains”’. She wrote ‘he is one of 3500 people to have joined the 80-year-old society in its mission to reassess the king’s reputation as a child-murdering hunchback (although he does stress “we are not the Richard III Adoration Society, as I often tell members”). He says: “When it comes to having your name blackened, Richard III, King John and Macbeth all have done pretty well in that respect. I can completely understand why people would like to rehabilitate Macbeth and I suspect he, too, has suffered in the hands of Shakespeare. If you're interested in truth, then obviously this is paramount. Yes, they’re damn good stories, but they forget the truth. Shakespeare twists things. If it was beneficial to besmirch Macbeth’s character for King James, his rival’s descendant, then it was essential to foulmouth Richard, deposed by the Tudors, for the Elizabethan audience. We can’t let good drama and personal grudges get in the way of historical fact”, says Dr Stone, adding: “Maybe bad King John will have his turn, too.”’

From Pat Conway Ancestors January 2005. Lez Smart tells the story of the Chertsey Abbey Map ...‘Interestingly the abbey’s most famous visitor was dead when he arrived. Being King of England was not a secure position during the Wars of the Roses and Henry VI was murdered in the Tower of London in 1471, probably on the orders of his successor Richard III’. Ann Wroe alerted the Editor to a review in the International Herald Tribune on a new opera based on Shakespeare’s Richard III February 9 Antwerp. George Loomis reviewed the opera by Giorgio Battistelli with libretto by Ian Burton which had its world premiere the week before at the Flemish Opera with a mainly American and British cast.

15


Match of The Day 1485 This one is for the husbands, fathers, brothers, boyfriends, who drive ladies to meetings … and of course for all the ladies who are football fans too! Editor (GL) Good evening from BBC1 Television and welcome to the first Match of the Day of the season, The Charity Shield Cup sponsored by AXA Insurance. As usual we have Alan and Trevor here with us for comments and analysis. (AH) Looking at the way the second half went, Gary, is that AXA or Battleaxes? (GL) Yes, very good, Alan. (AH) And what’s more, Gary, on the day, I think you will agree, there were plenty of shields but not much charity! (GL) Hmmm. Very humorous, Alan. Well, today’s Match of the Day brings you a truly titanic struggle between two arch enemies, the Yorkists and the Lancastrians. Would you agree, Alan? (AH) Yes, Gary, this was a massive match. Absolutely awesome. (TB) Yes, Alan’s right, Gary, that this was an enormous encounter. Mind you, the venue was unexpected and it just goes to show what an effect all the dithering and delay with Wembley is having on staging big occasions. (GL) So, Trevor, you think it should have been fought closer to the City of London rather than in the Midlands? (TB) Well, I can see the argument that Market Bosworth was handy for the supporters of both sides rather than a venue down south. However, older viewers will remember the time these two deadly rival teams met in 1471, when Edward IV, captaining the Yorkists, won handsomely at the Battle of Barnet. (AH) Trevor’s right, Gary. The nation can’t afford to have these big events staged in any old field. (GL) It might have been that Richard saw a real advantage in choosing Ambion Hill at Bosworth Field. Early kick-off, sun rising behind him, bouncy pitch, and, I believe, short turf after they had moved the sheep off. (TB) I think you are probably right, Gary.

After all, the Yorkists had been up in Nottingham. Their camp was at the Castle and they had been using Forest’s facilities rather than those at Notts County for some early season training. I understand that when they heard that the match had been fixed, they assembled the team horses and came south. Filbert Street, (remember those days, Gary?), was talked about as a venue but a couple of Leicester City players had just gone down with plague after a pre-season friendly, a week ago, against an Italian club, Genoa I think it was. (GL) Well, at least the Yorkists had horses and team coaches to transport them to the match. It seems the Tudor team transport failed to rendezvous with them when they disembarked at Milford Haven, from their training camp in France, earlier in the month. Well, viewers, we can now go over to John up at Market Bosworth. John, can you confirm, first of all, that the Lancastrian team actually legged-it all the way from West Wales? (JM) Gary, today has been quite unbelievable. And yes, Henry Tudor’s team did walk here from Wales. (GL) Definitely one for the record book, there, John. (JM) Yes, indeed Gary, and I have to say this result will be something spectators and commentators will talk about for centuries to come, believe me. Firstly, Richard arrived, took up position on Ambion Hill with, it has to be said, a very expensive looking team. In contrast, Henry’s lot looked poorly kitted out, and had the wetter end of the pitch. (GL) What formation did the teams play, John? Were there differences? (JM) Very much so, Gary. Everyone here, thought both sides would play a 4-2-4 formation. Henry deployed the French players he signed up in the summer in very fluid midfield positions. Richard, however, appeared 16


to line up in a 2-3-5 pattern, with two wingers, a centre-forward and two inside-forwards. Very old fashioned, I think you will agree. (GL) That’s very interesting, John. Alan, do you think playing 2-3-5 led to Richard’s defeat? (AH) I think so, Gary. What’s more, he had too little strategy. It was all attack. Time and time again. He really should have stayed back. Let the Lancastrian side come to him up the slope. Instead, what did he do? He hurtled his troops forward, lost position, defence stayed stuck at the back and midfield was nowhere at all. (JM) Alan, I have to say, there were truly amazing scenes here after one of Richard’s forwards took a severe injury early on in the match. Howard Norfolk, sometimes known as The Duke, and playing in the No. 9 armour, was pole-axed by de Vere, Earl Oxford. From the commentary box it looked as if de Vere should have been shown a red card but after some delay it was only Norfolk who left the field, on a stretcher. Richard then called for Stanley, who was on the substitute bench, to replace him. But, and here is another one for the record books, Gary, Stanley didn’t move and ignored Richard completely. Some say Richard’s dual role as playermanager meant poor communication between the pitch and the bench. Unfortunately, now we shall never know. However, since the end of the match some members of the press are reporting that Stanley already had been in secret transfer talks with the Tudor team and has now signed a 3-year contract with them. (GL) Trevor, how did you see the second half, that clearly gave the Tudors their unexpected victory? (TB) Well, Gary, it has to be said that Richard showed real courage, but somehow he didn’t seem to get the support he needed from the rest of his team. Here on the replay you can see Richard rushes forward, perhaps to fill the vacant centre-forward position left by Norfolk’s early exit from the match. Northumberland, playing old-fashioned centre-half,

just stays back, gives no support whatsoever and midfield seem to have disappeared completely. It’s clear to me that if Richard had survived the day, both Stanley and Northumberland would have been dropped from the first team. (AH) Trevor, I think you’ll find given the occasion, ‘chopped’, might be closer to what Richard would have done to those two players! But, I agree, Richard’s tactics of a dash for death or glory, just handed victory to the Welsh no-hopers . The replay shows how well Henry marshalled his defence, played a neat offside trap and Richard fell for it. (GL) Alan, offside is one thing, but here today, August 22nd 1485, we've witnessed, ‘regicide’.

Cartoon by courtesy of the Yorkshire Branch. First published in The Yorkshire Jester.

(AH) Very good, Gary. (GL) Well, Trevor, Alan and, of course, John up at Market Bosworth, today’s unexpected result has delivered crowning victory to Henry Tudor. It would seem that after a truly battle royal, it’s the end of the Yorkist cause with the death the last of the Plantagenets and perhaps the start of a new dynasty. So that’s it viewers, I suppose with the Divine Right of Kings, still in fashion, this contest, this Battle of Bosworth, 1485, , hasn’t been your normal MOTD, more like Match of the Deity. Good night. Richard Shattock

17


News and Reviews News from Fotheringhay: Oak Trees The PCC plans to plant three oak trees at the west end of the churchyard to replace the three fallen horse chestnuts. They will be approximately 3m high and well grown. Juliet Wilson, the Society’s representative in the village, asks if the Society would like to sponsor a tree, perhaps to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the re-founding of the Society in 2006? The cost will be about £100 per tree – slightly more if they have to be delivered. They are pot grown and it will be possible to plant them as soon as the ground is ready for them. If you are interested in contributing to this scheme, send your cheques to me, Phil Stone, asap, at the address on the inside back cover. Please make them out to ‘The Richard III Society’ and write ‘Oak tree’ on the back. Thank you.

Photograph courtesy of Juliet Wilson.

Festal Mass for the Feast of Tongues at Pentecost On Sunday, 15 May, there will be a pentecostal mass – polyphony and praise – at 12 noon in Fotheringhay Church, presided over by the Venerable David Painter, Archdeacon of Oakham. There will be a special choir, directed by Stephen Rice, and appropriate music of the period of the English pre-Reformation. Vestments, incense and bells will feature in the liturgy. Mass will be followed by lunch in Fotheringhay Village Hall at 13.30, provided by Alan Stewart. Cost £10 per head (includes a glass of wine). Please book as soon as possible: Tel 01832 272026 e-mail hilary@oundlefestival.org.uk or from the Oundle International Festival Office, The Creed Chapel, Ashton, Oundle, Northamptonshire. Phil Stone

Graham Turner Exhibition Graham Turner, well known artist and Ricardian, will be holding an exhibition of his paintings and prints from the 22–24 April 2005 at the Rothschild mansion, Halton House, near Wendover in Buckinghamshire. Further information from Studio 88, PO Box 568, Aylesbury, HP17 8ZX. Tel. 01296 338504. E-mail www.studio88.co.uk 18


New DVD release of Sir Laurence Olivier’s 1955 film production of Richard III This DVD, although advertised as being a ‘fully restored, full length version’ with ‘newly discovered footage’, apparently only refers to the previously released American video and disc versions, which lacked ‘nearly 20 minutes of missing footage’. So unfortunately Buckingham’s execution scene and a number of other speeches to be found on the 3 LP disk set, released in the 1950s, are still missing. However, there are a few short sequences included in the climactic Bosworth scenes which now make more sense of what has always been seen as a rather ‘scrappy’ battle! Additionally, the second disc contains a gallery of off-set and production stills, posters and TV/cinema trailers, together with the 1965 BBC TV recording of Kenneth Tynan’s interview with Sir Laurence Olivier, in the Great Acting Series. Please note this DVD is in NTSC Region 1 format and may not play on UK-bought DVD machines. Geoffrey Wheeler

Cecily Neville, A Medieval Kingmaker The National Archives are currently running a series of lectures entitled ‘Movers & Shakers’, running in parallel with an exhibition ‘Geoffrey Chaucer to Elton John’ which looks at documents covering the ‘Movers & Shakers’ of the last 750 years. The first lecture in the series was given by Society member Joanna Laynesmith who is well known to many in the Society for her interesting talks and book on ‘Medieval Queens’. As usual Joanna did not disappoint. Her talk was fascinating and thought provoking. She started off with a look at the way Cecily has been viewed by historians from Shakespeare to the present day and summed up the changing opinions in the catchy phrase, ‘scold, saint, shopaholic and slut’. Joanna asked the question how accurate are these views and how do they fit together? Cecily had been a widow for thirty-five years and had very nearly been the first English woman to become queen. Her father Ralph Neville arranged a staggering series of marriages for his ten children by Joan Beaufort, the best being made for Cecily, to Richard, Duke of York. Only eight when they were betrothed in 1423, they did not set up their own household until 1432, when they moved to Fotheringhay. It was here that their first child Anne was born in 1439 and eighteen months later that their second child Henry died. When York went to France in 1441, Cecily went with him because he needed an heir. Edward was born in April 1442. The question of his legitimacy has recently been much discussed by Michael Jones and this is the idea of Cecily as ‘slut’. The evidence for Edward’s illegitimacy is slim; he was more likely to have been premature. The allegations made in Cecily’s own lifetime were transparently political. The ‘shopaholic’ was a view put forward by TB Pugh in the 1980s. While reviewing York’s accounts he came across an astonishing piece of expenditure on clothes and materials made by Cecily. The most damning evidence of her extravagance was the eight and a half ounces of gold and hundreds of pearls used to decorate one dress. Thirty of the pearls alone cost £6 each. However this expenditure was made at the time when York and his wife were escorting Margaret of Anjou to England for her marriage to Henry VI. The dress was a political statement of York’s wealth and his position as a member of the royal blood. Women were limited in the ways in which they could become politically involved. Dress was one way. Cecily was politically astute. Following the defeat at Ludford Bridge she was able to secure some of York’s lands to support herself and her young children. She also visited Kent while York was in Ireland, and it was probably no coincidence that this is where her son and brother landed 19


in 1460 to support York’s claim to the throne. Following the death of York at Wakefield in December 1460 she sent her youngest sons to Burgundy. The Duke was trying to remain neutral while King Charles of France was Lancastrian. Staying at the duke’s court was the dauphin, Louis, who to spite his father supported York. This was therefore a good place to secure her children. During the first years of Edward’s reign, Cecily was at his side. He granted her estates worth £3,000 p.a. and the papal legate advised the Pope that he should cultivate her friendship as she could rule the king. Cecily appears regularly in documents with her son until 1464 when he married Elizabeth Wydevile. Yet the only record that she was angered by the match comes in the reign of Richard III. She may well have accepted the marriage. Elizabeth was the daughter of Jacquetta St Pol who had been married to the Duke of Bedford before marrying Richard Wydevile. What did Cecily think of this match? Many of Bedford’s men had joined York’s household after his death. Also Jacquetta had links with Burgundy, so Cecily may not have objected to the marriage as strongly as is believed. Whoever Edward married she would have replaced Cecily. However Cecily now reinvented herself as ‘king’s mother and late wife of Richard, rightly king of England’ etc. She may have spent much of her time at Fotheringhay where she paid for a lot of work to be done on the church. This was a celebration of her dynasty, not just her piety. In 1469 she was with Clarence and Isabel when they were planning to marry. Was she supporting them or trying to stop them? This is also the first time rumours were aired of Edward’s bastardy, when Warwick claimed that Clarence was the legitimate king. When their rebellion of 1470 failed and they tried to return Henry VI to the throne, Cecily began working to persuade Clarence to return to Edward’s side. On Edward’s return from Burgundy he took his wife from sanctuary and placed her in the care of his mother, which suggests there was no great falling out. Cecily took part in major royal events, joining in the foundation of the Luton Gild of Holy Trinity. In the foundation miniature she is pictured behind the queen wearing royal robes which emphasised her position. At the christening of her granddaughter Bridget the herald records her as being ‘Queen by right’. In 1469 Edward granted her Berkhamsted and this now became her principal residence. She was less involved in politics and more involved in religion. In 1472 she founded a chantry at Lechlade and another at Kennington. Was her piety becoming deeper or simply more public? In the 1940s John Armstrong analysed her will and saw her as having ‘tranquillity of spirit’. This is the image as ‘saint’. She certainly built up a fabulous collection of vestments and items for the church, reliquaries, books and rosaries. She became politically involved again in 1483 when Richard stayed at her home to make his claim to the throne. Did this mean she supported his claim? Correspondence between them in 1483 suggests they were on good terms, and again she was present at important occasions. Did she believe the country would be safer in adult hands? Following Bosworth Cecily seems to have come to an accommodation with Henry Tudor. She asked for grants and favours, which she received and in return she gave posts to his supporters. Yet when one of her servants joined Perkin Warbeck’s revolt she ‘along with members of her household’ supported him, paying his fine. So where were her sympathies? In June 1495 she died and was buried at Fotheringhay beside her husband. Joel Rosenthal suggests her life was a series of epic chapters, connected by her closeness to the throne. She was certainly more of a ‘Mover & Shaker’ than many crowned queens of England. Lynda Pidgeon

Continued on page 43 20


Then and Now REFLECTIONS ON THE FIRST THIRTY YEARS OF THE RICARDIAN BULLETIN

T

he Ricardian Bulletin was first published thirty-one years ago in March 1974 and in this article we look back at its origins and how the publication has developed over the decades. Before the Bulletin Society news and information was included together with historical articles in The Ricardian which was first published in 1963. Prior to this newsletters and research reports kept members in touch; however by 1963 membership had grown enough to justify a formal quarterly journal. In 1973 the decision was taken to publish a separate magazine from The Ricardian to cover internal Society matters, thus freeing The Ricardian to concentrate purely on historical articles and research. This decision was prompted by a number of factors, not least the substantial increase in membership that had taken place that year and the recognition that The Ricardian would have a potential market outside the Society if its focus was solely on fifteenth-century history. The last edition of The Ricardian in its original format was a modest 32 bound pages and it ended on a particularly up-beat note with the publication of a letter to the then President, Patrick Bacon, from Roy Strong, the National Portrait Gallery’s director, who thanked the Society for its contribution to the Richard III Exhibition which had just closed. He wrote ‘It attracted over 41,000 visitors. It has certainly brought out a number of unknown facets and has, I think, added significantly to the study and understanding of Richard III and of late fifteenth-century England’. The exhibition was also the primary cause of the sudden increase in Society membership. In March 1974 The Ricardian appeared along side the new Ricardian Bulletin. The size of both was a uniform A5, smaller than the older 7” x 9” Ricardian, with a page count

for the fledging Bulletin of 16 pages. The Bulletin’s front cover was decorated with the Society’s badge of Richard’s White Boar and motto, similar to that which adorned (and still adorns) The Ricardian’s front cover. The badge had been designed by Royman Brown, a freelance heraldic artist, shortly after the Society was re-founded in 1956. The new Bulletin was a low-key publication which reflected the technology and financial resources then available to the Society and the first issue contained correspondence, notices and branch reports. There was also an article by the late Joyce Melhuish entitled ‘Concerning Courtesy’ which included a typically Joycean account of a recent encounter with a vicar who suggested the Society’s membership should be closed to ‘everyone except qualified people’ to which she modestly replied ‘well, that would leave me out’! The next issue clarified the editorial position

Design for the Society’s ladies’ scarf by Geoff Wheeler and featured on the front cover of the December 1975 Bulletin. [The scarf is still available from the Sales Liaison Officer, price £3 plus 50p p&p.]

21


by explaining that The Ricardian editor would be editor in chief of both publications, with Elizabeth Nokes having specific responsibility for the Bulletin’s content and printing. Inevitably the Bulletin soon developed its own identity and moved more and more out of The Ricardian’s stable. By December 1978 Elizabeth was being officially referred to as editor and in 1981 it was confirmed that the editorship of the two journals would be entirely separate. On the production side responsibility for the collation and typing lay initially with Ann Graham, followed in later years by Debbie Monks and Sue Taylor. Over the years the Bulletin developed in content and size, along the way introducing many of the features that are still enjoyed today. One of the earliest innovations came in December 1975 when Geoff Wheeler’s design for the Ricardian head square appeared on the front cover: thereafter his drawings remained a regular feature of the Bulletin. As the Society grew there became much more to report on in terms of activities and events, including regular accounts of the visits organised by Joyce Melhuish and other Society events. These were written by participants and became a popular feature of the Bulletin, particularly for members who were not able to attend such events. In 1981 the first of the Society’s triennial conferences was held at Oxford’s Trinity College and although it was reported in The Ricardian, future conferences, seminars and research weekends were covered in the Bulletin Humour became a regular feature during the 1980s with such memorable light hearted spoofs as ‘Lizzie’s Letters’ (Elizabeth of York of course) inspired by extracts from Dick’s Diaries. Regular contributions also came from Carolyn Hammond who kept members up to date with new additions to the library, and in later years offered them the opportunity to purchase surplus stock via the annual library auction. Another regular feature included defences or unlikely defences of Richard III, which eventually led to a section devoted to media watching. Geoffrey Wheeler diligently kept readers up to date with his reviews of plays and television programmes.

During 2002 as a part of the Society’s new strategy for the future it was decided that the time was right for the content and presentation of the Bulletin to undergo a comprehensive revamp. Whilst the old style magazine had served the Society well over the years the need to respond to the advances in information technology provided an opportunity to create a new style. At the time the decision had also been taken to publish The Ricardian on an annual basis so there was an additional need for the Bulletin to fill the quarterly void. So it was decided that the Bulletin would be expanded to include historical articles based on secondary sources. This would also provide an opportunity for members to contribute to the Bulletin and also to gain research and writing skills which in the longer term might give them the confidence to write for The Ricardian. A working party was therefore appointed with the brief to build on the Bulletin’s success and create a new magazine that would be both informative and entertaining. This involved a balance between retaining all that was good in the magazine and adding new features to widen its appeal to existing and potential members. Amongst the new features was ‘The Debate’ which enables controversial issues to be looked at in a new light and for members to contribute their views as an on-going part of the feature. We also introduced ‘Letter from America’ to give a voice to our largest overseas branch. The new Bulletin has also been used to communicate the work of the Executive Committee to the wider membership, particularly through the chairman’s introduction to each issue. Value for money was also an important consideration, especially as we were moving to a bigger magazine with greater use of information technology. A key issue in keeping costs down has been to edit the Bulletin technically in-house using desktop publishing and producing camera-ready copy for the printers. We went out to tender for the printing and the contract was won by St Edmundsbury Press who provided the most competitive estimate. They were already printing The Ricardian so we already had experienced of the quality of their work. Despite all the improvements and 22


that it would become a standing committee with each member having specific responsibilities in the production process. So we now have the Bulletin Editorial Committee which meets every quarter to consider the content and size of the current issue and look ahead to future issues so that articles can be commissioned in good time. The size of the magazine has to be maintained at a strict 64 pages, excluding the blue insert and cover, if we are to manage our costs properly and this sometimes leads to tough decisions as to what goes in an issue and what has to be held over. We hope we do get the right balance and that members feel that the Bulletin is a good read. Certainly the feedback so far has been very positive. We have come a long way from the early days of The Ricardian and newsOne of last pages from the old-style Ricardian (December 1973) featuring the popular series on Coats of Arms by Laurence Greensmith and which continued letters that were produced in the new-style Ricardian until December 1978. using duplicating machines and stencils (and many more pages the cost of each copy of the how many members can remember these and new Bulletin came to only a few pence more the bright pink squidgy eradicating liquid?). than the old style. This made the Treasurer Then it was despatched using an old addressvery happy and he commented that we had a labelling machine with the envelopes filled ‘win-win situation’. The first issue was pubmanually. Nowadays technology takes care lished in the summer of 2003 and over the of most things, except of course the content past two years the magazine has not stood and for that we depend, as we have always still and new features have already been introdone, on our members. So in reflecting back duced, such as the ‘The Man Himself’ which over the past thirty years we should not forget focuses solely on King Richard. to thank all those who have contributed to the The original intention was for the working Bulletin as compilers, illustrators, typists and party just to manage the revamp and launch contributors – and most especially we should of the Bulletin; however it soon became clear thank the lady who started it all and remains a that it had a continuing role to oversee the onkey member of the current editorial team: going production and development of the Elizabeth Nokes expanded magazine. It was therefore agreed Bulletin Editorial Committee 23


Anne Mowbray IN LIFE AND IN DEATH Inscription: Here lies Anne, Duchess of York, daughter and heiress of John, late Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal, Earl of Nottingham and Warenne, Marshal of England, Lord of Mowbray, Segrave and Gower. Late wife of Richard, Duke of York, second son of the most illustrious Prince Edward the Fourth, King of England, and France, and Lord of Ireland, who died at Greenwich on the 19th day of November in the Year of Our Lord 1481 and the 21st year of the said Lord King

over 40 years ago, on 15 January 1965, J ust the London Museum announced that the

Clarence languished in the Tower awaiting his fate. There is no documentary evidence about the remainder of Anne’s life. It is generally presumed she became part of the Queen’s household as it was at the royal manor of Greenwich that she died in November 1481. King Edward spent £215 16s 10d on her burial and ordered three barges to transport the body and its entourage in state to Westminster. King Edward’s open-handedness, however, was not difficult to understand. He had arranged matters such that, if Anne died without issue, her lands and titles would remain with her husband. She was buried in the Chapel dedicated to St Erasmus in Westminster Abbey but in 1502 the chapel was demolished to make way for the construction of Henry VII’s own mausoleum. Anne’s body was removed to the Abbey of the Minoresses without Aldgate (Stepney), a few hundred yards north of the Tower of London where her mother became a ‘tenant’ in 1487/8. This may only have been meant to be a temporary arrangement as it has been suggested that it was due to an outbreak of plague in 1515 that her return to the Abbey was indefinitely postponed and then forgotten. On 11 December 1964 three workmen crashed a 14lb hammer through chalk and brick walls to reveal a vaulted chamber, measuring 6’ in height and 7’ in length, where Anne’s coffin had been placed. It was found 11’ underground on a site near St Clare Street off the Minories. The workman contacted the police and the press. The London Museum (now the Museum of London) were contacted some three hours later. Although commended by the Museum for their prompt action (The Guardian) the workmen were later criticised

remains of Anne Mowbray had been discovered a few weeks earlier in Stepney. The date for the announcement had been carefully chosen, the anniversary of her wedding to Richard, Duke of York, the younger son of King Edward IV. The story hit the headlines as the poignancy of Anne’s story and her marriage at the age of five caught the imagination of the media. I am sure many members will remember this important discovery but for those newer and younger members it is perhaps appropriate to recall the brief life of one of the great fifteenth-century heiresses and to review the events of 1964-65. Anne was born on 10 December 1472 and baptised at Framlingham church by William Waynflete seven days later. She was the daughter of John de Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, a distinguished supporter of the house of York, and his wife Elizabeth Talbot, halfsister to Lady Eleanor Butler. John died suddenly when his daughter was just three years old and she immediately became a great heiress. She became a ward of the crown and King Edward assumed the management of her estates. Two years later Anne married the King’s son, who had been created Duke of Norfolk almost a year earlier. The marriage of the children took place in St Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster, on 15 January 1477/8, a ceremony that was attended by the great and the good of the Yorkist court and recorded for posterity by a herald. The reason, however, for such a good attendance was rather sinister. Parliament had been assembled to hear the bill of attainder against George of Clarence. Whilst his nephew prepared to become a bridegroom, George of 24


by officials of the Museum as the coffin had been stood on end for press photographs ‘thus destroying any chance of the bones remaining intact and in their original position’ (The Telegraph). Labelled as ‘found property’, and thought to be a Roman burial, the hundredweight leaden coffin was then taken to Leman Street police station before being transferred to the London Museum. Here a special room was set up to examine the coffin and its contents. The coffin was opened on the instruction of the Coroner and with the approval of

carry out their investigations. This omission was to have dire consequences for the project. Oblivious of the gathering storm, the team of specialists, which included radiologists, anatomists, osteologists and dentists, minutely examined the remains, which had been wrapped in a shroud of 12 layers of woven linen, coated with beeswax and decorated with gold leaf. Meanwhile 20th century politics now took a hand. Bill White takes up the story: ‘interference at a high level began to have a baleful influence upon the research in train. Questions were asked in the House of Lords, notably by the then Baron Mowbray and Segrave, an hereditary peer who regarded himself as the living representative of Anne Mowbray’s family. Likewise, the 15th Duke of Norfolk, declared that as a relative [sic] he had been upset by a photograph in the press showing the skeleton in its coffin. Lord Stonham for the Home Office responded that this was not the same “as if it were a comparatively recent interment”. However, there was a lot of unwelcome pressure on the Government behind the scenes and the Duke of Norfolk, in his capacity of Earl Marshal, sent Garter King of Arms to lobby the Cabinet Office. Despite the fact that the Government had only been elected the previous October with a Parliamentary majority of only five, the first Labour administration for 13 years did not wish to be seen by its supporters to be giving into pressure from the House of Lords but in this instance the upper house appears to have had the upper hand. The Home Office went into action and the burial licence was issued on 12 April 1965. It forbade any new research and work in progress had to be brought to a close by 15 May prior to her re-burial in Westminster Abbey. The team observed these strictures and made a special effort over the careful replacement of Anne’s bones in the coffin, sewing them into a new lining so that they should retain their anatomical position.’ The ceremony took place in the evening of 31 May 1965. Anne was laid in state in the Jerusalem Chamber, as she had been in 1481, surrounded by burning candles, and a long wreath, almost the length of the coffin, was placed next to it. She was carried ‘between

Engraving after the painting by James Northcote RA (1820). Courtesy of Geoff Wheeler.

the Dean and Chapter of Westminster in the presence of the Director of the museum and a six-strong team of archaeological, medical and technical specialists led by Dr Francis Celoria, the Museum’s field officer. Overhead cameras recorded the proceedings. Society member Bill White commented that they ‘had devised a protocol for the careful opening of the lead coffin and the examination of all the contents, not just the skeleton – a welcome departure, compared with the precedents of Henry VI, in 1910, and that other exhumation in 1933’. Unfortunately, the Museum had failed to follow the correct procedure by not applying to the Home Office for a licence to 25


flickering candles through the cathedral to the Henry VII Chapel followed by a dozen clergy dressed in white’. The Queen was represented and Lord and Lady Mowbray were in attendance as was Sir Frank Soskice, the Home Secretary. Plans for the reburial in the Abbey had been announced at the press launch back in January and the London Evening News quoted the museum as saying that Anne would ‘in a sense, be reunited with her husband Richard’. This was firmly rejected by Lawrence Tanner, librarian and keeper of the Muniments at Westminster Abbey, who said that the Dean and Chapter had decided to rebury Anne in the Abbey ‘because she was originally buried there’ and he was sorry that this ‘suggestion crept into the Press hand-out. It was not authorised by the Dean and Chapter’. The Telegraph further quoted him as saying ‘There was no question of reuniting the bones with the bones of her husband … Whether those bones are the remains of Richard, Duke of York, is quite another question’. This statement appears to be a volte face by Mr Tanner, whom members will be familiar with as the co-author of the report on the examination of the alleged bones, with Dr Wright, over thirty years earlier. However, this rebuttal was overlooked by many reporters who glibly wrote along the lines that the children would be reunited in death. The treatment of the ‘Princes in the Tower’ story by the press during this time was an unequivocal ‘they were probably murdered in the Tower in 1483 or 1485’, obviously the line fed to them by the press release but which for the most part was fortunately not exploited to encompass any involvement by Richard III. Whether due to laziness of the media in researching their stories or the work of the Society it is difficult to decide. Anne Mowbray’s story is a sad one, a little girl who in her own time only touched history when she was born, when she married and when she died. In the 20th century she made news as her remains went under the microscope. Not for the faint-hearted the reports of what was found in the coffin nor to view the photographs made available to the public. It was widely reported that the find-

ings would be published in the form of a comprehensive report. Ironically the complete findings of the investigation never made the light of day, although reports have been published on her skeleton in London Archaeologist and her dental health in the British Dental Journal. The Society hopes the file is not finally closed, and we shall continue to make enquiries. If the full archaeological results are not forthcoming, do we learn anything more about Anne by re-visiting the documentary evidence? There is one curious anomaly and this was raised at the time of the discovery in a letter to the Daily Telegraph by Eado P J Stourton, a latter-day relative of Anne. He had always understood that the ceremony in 1477 was a betrothal and not a marriage. The inscription on the coffin is quite clear – Anne is Richard’s wife and the report of the ceremony on 15 January 1477 is that of a marriage. However, a dispensation for the couple was required as they were related within the forbidden degrees but what the Pope actually agreed to was the ‘espousals forthwith, and as soon as they reach the lawful age to contract marriage’. Clearly, King Edward was prepared to ride roughshod over the niceties, and when, as tradition demanded, the procession of the wedding party was halted and the marriage forbidden because of the couple’s relationship, no doubt the king looked sufficiently stern in case anybody dared to read the papal bull that John Gunthorpe had produced. Nothing was going to come between the crown and the Mowbray inheritance. If Richard of Gloucester can be accused of being acquisitive he had learned, no doubt, from a master – his brother. Wendy Moorhen I would like to thank Bill White for making available to me the script of his talk to London Branch in 1999 and for allowing the quotations. Further reading: ‘Anne Mowbray’ by Philomena Jones, The Ricardian, vol 4, no 61, June 1978, pp. 17-20. ‘The Mowbray Inheritance’ by Anne Crawford, The Ricardian, vol 5, no 73, June 1981, pp. 334-40. Both re-printed in Crown & People edited by James Petre, Gloucester 1985. ‘The Ladies of the Minories’ by W E Hampton, The Ricardian, vol 4, no 62, September 1978, pp. 15-22.

26


The Man Himself RICHARD, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER AND CARLISLE CASTLE

T

here are many reminders of Richard III scattered throughout England in the form of places with which he was associated. Chief among these is Middleham Castle in Yorkshire, which was his home both as a boy in the household of the Earl of Warwick, and later when he governed the North in the reign of his brother, Edward IV. While Middleham is the best-known reminder of Richard III as Duke of Gloucester, there are others, and among these is Carlisle Castle. Richard, Duke of Gloucester, was granted the lordship of the castle of Penrith by Edward IV in 1471, and in 1474 he was made warden of the West Marches towards Scotland and thus the castle and town of Carlisle came under his jurisdiction. The wardenship of the West Marches was enhanced the following year when he was made sheriff (for life) of the county of Cumberland. and he retained all these three offices until his accession to the throne in 1483. His administration was peaceful and successful and, in recognition of this, parliament in 1482 made a special provision to allow the wardenship of the West Marches to descend to his heirs male, together with the possession of Carlisle and various lands in Cumberland. Earlier in the same year, on 24 February 1482, he had been granted a licence to buy 2,000 quarters of wheat and 1,000 quarters of barley, rye, oats, maslin, (a mixture of rye and wheat), beans and peas in all places in the realm, Wales or Ireland, for the support of the additional garrison maintained on the border. This was essential for the provisioning of the garrison, as there had been an increasing scarcity of food in the Marches because of its size. One of the chief places on whose strength the security of the West Marches depended was Carlisle, both town and castle. The castle is situated at the northern end of the town on

a crag looking northwards into Scotland. In 1471 the castle looked, in main outline, much as it does today. All the major building operations had been completed long before 1471 when Gloucester first arrived in the area. However, it was in a sorry state of repair largely due to the disturbed state of the border in the previous few years. It has been assumed that while Richard was warden of the West Mmarch he repaired and rebuilt parts of the castle. Much alteration to the fabric was certainly done at this time to the inner ward and to William de Ireby's tower (the main gatehouse) as well as to the ‘Tile’ Tower, which is situated outside the castle proper in the western wall which joins the castle to the town. (See page 34 for a layout of the castle.) The main gatehouse has a plaque over the entrance facing the town on which, at one time, was engraved a coat of arms, which is unfortunately now obliterated. There is some doubt as to the origin of the arms as they have been thought in the past to be those of Richard III, which would seem probable as he spent some time there as well as conducting the repair work, but more recently it has been thought that they were those of Henry VII. The association of Richard III with the ‘Tile’ Tower is because of the badge of a white boar carved high up on its southern face, and it is mentioned in Camden’s Britannia that Richard repaired the tower. There is also a legend that he lived in the tower while he was in Carlisle, but this assumes that both the keep and the palace were uninhabitable at the time. Inside the inner ward was the royal palace which was built during the reign of Edward I and this was apparently much altered by the Duke of Gloucester. The palace originally stood on the site of what is now the museum of the Border Regiment, but there is 27


very little trace of the original building as it was largely pulled down between 1824 and 1835, leaving only part of the original staircase called Queen Mary’s Tower still standing. The keep was originally built by the Norman kings, probably before 1175, but there had been some alteration done to it during the reign of Edward I. It is built as a square keep with four floors. Originally each floor was one large room but has been divided into two rooms by the addition of a cross wall running north and south. This is particularly noticeable on the first floor where there is a fireplace which would be much too big to heat the room and it is apparent that it was intended to heat the whole floor. These interior additions have been credited to Lord Scrope, who reported to Elizabeth I on the state of the castle to the effect that it was in ruinous condition, and as a result repair work was undertaken. However, it has been thought that this work was some of that done under the wardenship of Richard, Duke of Gloucester. On the second floor of the keep, in the interior of the east wall, is a mural chamber which runs to the north and south and leads out of a window embrasure, making three rooms in all. These rooms have been used as cells, and in fact were at one time known as ‘Major Mclvor's Cell’ after the character in Sir Walter Scott's Waverley, who was traditionally imprisoned in the castle after the 1745 rebellion. In the entrance to the cells (in what is actually the window embrasure), are numerous carvings on the walls. It has been assumed in the past that these were the work of prisoners, and legend made Major Mclvor

the artist. The carvings, however, are mainly religious and heraldic devices, and from the subjects it can be seen that they date from a much earlier period than the eighteenth century. The religious carvings include pictures of St Michael weighing souls; the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene; St Sebastian; St George and the dragon; as well as a fox preaching the geese, which was a popular subject in the medieval period. The majority of the carvings are heraldic and include the white rose of York, the water-bouget of Roos, an escallop and ragged staff of Dacre, a ‘lion passant guardant crowned’ of Greystoke of Greystoke, a fetterlock of Percy, and the white boar of Richard III. There are three separate carvings of the boar, the main one of which is illustrated here, and it can be seen that there is no doubt that this is the badge of Richard. As many of the carvings have animals as subjects, it had been assumed that they were the work of poachers who were imprisoned in the castle at various times from the fourteenth century onwards, but since it has been recognised that many of the carvings are heraldic badges it is possible to date them as belonging to the second half of the fifteenth century. An attempt has been made to identify all the badges as well as to identify the author, but this last seems an impossible task until more is known about the region during the reigns of Edward IV, Richard III, and Henry VII. Although much of what is known of Richard, Duke of Gloucester, and Carlisle Castle during the period 1471 to 1482 is largely supposition and local legend, it can be seen that in at least two respects there is tangible evidence of his association with the castle. Jean M Perkins First published in The Ricardian, no 47, 1974, pp. 13-16. Reading List 1. Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1476-1485. 2. Victoria County History, Cumberland, vol 2, 1905. 3. R.S. Ferguson, ‘Carlisle Castle’, Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, vol 2, 1874-75. 4. G.P.H. Watson and G. Bradley, Carlisle Castle: Cumberland, H.M.S.O., 1937. 5 F.J. Field, ‘The Carvings in the entrance to Major Mclvor's Cell, Carlisle Castle’ TC&WA&AS vol 37 (NS), 1937.

Engraving of the boar badge of Richard of Gloucester on the ‘Tile Tower’, Carlisle Castle. Courtesy of Geoff Wheeler.

28


The Debate ELIZABETH OF YORK’S LETTER We have had a good response to this Debate. It is an interesting story and while we may never know if the letter ever existed the possibility of its existence has provided some fascinating articles for us. Interestingly two of them link the letter to the suggested marriage of Richard III and Joanna of Portugal. smooth his sister’s path to the throne and Elizabeth was sent to Sheriff Hutton Castle. Another piece of evidence appears, in retrospect, to give grounds for their fears. In December 1502 12d was granted from Queen Elizabeth’s privy purse to a Pontefract man who had lodged Anthony Woodville in his house on the last night of the earl’s life. If, long after the event, the queen could still be moved by the sorrow and pity of her uncle’s fate, then how much more raw would the degraded princess’ feelings been in 1485? It would seem likely then that the bitter animosity between Richard’s leading supporters and Elizabeth was mutual. This animosity can be traced into the next reign. In 1494, Richard’s former Master of the Rolls, Thomas Barowe, endowed a chantry in Cambridge with a request for prayers to be said for Richard III, Henry VII and Lady Margaret Beaufort, but Queen Elizabeth was omitted. The Queen ignored Cambridge’s Queens’ College, so generously endowed by Richard and Anne, and it was left to her mother-in-law to offer patronage after Elizabeth’s death. In contrast, Katherine, Lady Hastings received a handsome Book of Hours from Elizabeth, possibly in gratitude for Lord Hastings’ sacrifice. As Livia Visser-Fuchs mentioned, in 1993 she wrote about Elizabeth’s ownership, during her uncle’s reign, of Boethius’ De consolatione philosophiae (Consolation of Philosophy) and its meaning to her. The article showed how the text, originally composed by Boethius when imprisoned awaiting execution in the sixth century, had also offered comfort to Louis de Gruuthuse, James I of

From Howard Choppin

A

s Livia Visser-Fuchs implies, Elizabeth of York’s supposed letter to John Howard, Duke of Norfolk provides a slender foundation on which to base too much interpretation of her relationship with her uncle, though this has not stopped considerable speculation and argument. However, all seem to agree that Elizabeth was seeking Norfolk’s assistance and anxious that he should provide it. This in itself shows her pragmatism, since, notwithstanding her apparent praise for his loyalty and service to her father and his children, he owed title and land to the destruction of her youngest brother in June 1483. If she was willing to do business with one beneficiary of her family’s downfall then she may well have been willing to do business with the biggest beneficiary of them all. Whether this stretched to marriage is of course now a moot point. Elizabeth’s attitude to any marriage remained a moot point in 1485 also, since according to the Crowland Chronicle two of Richard’s leading councillors, Catesby and Ratcliffe, vetoed the project, and the king was forced into a public denial of the whole idea. The councillors’ opposition stemmed from their belief that Elizabeth was not as pragmatic as she perhaps wished to appear; specifically they feared she desired ‘to avenge the death of her uncle, Earl Anthony and of her brother Richard [Grey], upon those who had been the principal counsellors in the affair.’ They had not successfully aborted the reign of a half-Woodville king, in order to eventually 29


Scotland and Sir Thomas More, when they found themselves in similar situations. Elizabeth’s interest in the text probably reflects a similarly unhappy frame of mind, but it also shows an intelligent and sophisticated mind as well. Her use of her uncle’s motto may have been a subtle way of deflecting attention from the text’s generally accepted significance as a comfort to those who, like her, found themselves ‘imprisoned in misery’. In early 1485 Elizabeth’s intelligence led her not just to draw comfort from Boethius, but also to try to engage in court politics. She pragmatically chose as her would-be patron someone who had benefited from her family’s eclipse, and was a loyal servant of her uncle, but had also served her father and therefore might have residual sympathy for her. However, the northern Ricardians, with no such record of service to Edward IV, were highly suspicious of Elizabeth’s stance and as I suggest above, they were probably right so to be – they inflicted a short-lived defeat on her. After Bosworth, Elizabeth, elevated to the queenship and with her family restored; surrounding herself with the Hautes and Gaynesfords who had served her mother; identifying with the victims of June 1483 rather than the victors; showed where her loyalty was really bound.

hood as a possible opportunity to forge an alliance with a powerful foreign power, and to sire another heir to the kingdom - something that had been dangerously lacking since the death, in April 1484, of the king’s only legitimate son, Prince Edward. There is also a strong probability that Anne herself would have recognised the necessity of remarriage, and it is surely not too presumptuous to assume that Richard and Anne would have discussed the matter. An important, though generally ignored, consequence of Queen Anne’s death is the proposed Portuguese marriage, which has been researched thoroughly by Barrie Williams and highlighted in Jeremy Potter’s Good King Richard? According to a chronicle preserved in the monastery of Aveiro, King John II of Portugal received a number of foreign proposals for the hand of his elder sister, the Princess Joanna. Barrie Williams and Jeremy Potter are in no doubt that the ‘King of England’ who is referred to in the document as sending emissaries to Portugal in 1485 could have been none other than Richard III. There is perhaps reason to speculate that, as Henry Tudor supposedly proposed himself as a prospective husband for Joanna, the ‘king’ in question could have been Henry. However, given that the emissaries left England for Portugal on 22 March 1485, just six days after Anne’s death, there can be no doubt that the ‘king’ was in fact Richard III. Crucially, as both Williams and Potter have pointed out, the proposed union between King Richard and the Princess Joanna was to be accompanied by a second marriage – that between the Princess Elizabeth of York and the Duke of Beja, a cousin to the Portuguese royal house. This takes us back to Elizabeth’s letter. Of course, there is no evidence to prove that the letter ever existed, but, on the supposition that it did, I believe that the Portuguese marriage proposals could indeed explain its tenor. The Princess Elizabeth had been involved in other marriage arrangements. One to the Duke of Bedford, son to John Neville, Marquis Montagu; another, more well known, to the Dauphin of France, son to Louis XI. Given that these came to nothing, would it be

From Wendy Johnson

I

t was with considerable interest that I read Livia Visser-Fuchs’ debate article concerning Elizabeth of York’s alleged letter. The question of Elizabeth’s real intention has fascinated me for some time and I am grateful to Livia for bringing the subject once more to our attention. I believe that there is every possibility of an explanation other than that most commonly provided by historians. According to the Croyland Continuator, by Christmas 1484, and certainly by the early months of 1485, it was widely known at court that Queen Anne Neville was mortally ill. Whether Richard found the subject delicate or not, he would be compelled to face the inevitability of his wife’s death, and the dynastic imperative of remarriage. Richard and his advisers would clearly view the event of widow30


such a leap of imagination to suppose that Elizabeth considered herself let down and disappointed? And would she not be eager to assure herself of an honourable match elsewhere? It could, of course, be argued that this view lends support to the contention that Elizabeth desired the prestige of a marriage to her uncle the king. However, upon further consideration, I offer the following interpretation. Upon discovering the seriousness of his wife’s illness, Richard, as discussed above, would have had to consider the future – not only of the house of York, but also of his kingdom. The king was childless, and consequently needed to remarry as soon as possible. Richard was facing the threat of invasion by Henry Tudor, and, as a king without an heir, remained particularly vulnerable. England had recently endured a civil war, and therefore required a strong and secure king who could provide dynastic continuity. The question of Henry Tudor also raised the problem of Elizabeth of York. As Henry had sworn in December 1483 to invade England and marry Elizabeth, Richard needed to find a fitting husband for her, which would foil Tudor’s plan at a stroke. The Portuguese marriage alliance provided an ideal solution. Both Richard and Elizabeth would indeed be married – but not to each other. Could it not be that Elizabeth, in her letter, speaks of the marriage proposed between them as being just that; not a marriage as man and wife, but arranged between them to the Princess Joanna and Manuel, Duke of Beja? Elizabeth’s concern that her aunt, the queen, had not yet died and the greater part of February was past, could well be an indication that the Portuguese had only agreed to the marriage should both parts of the agreement be adhered to. In other words, until Richard became a widower he could not enter into his part of the agreement. The negotiations would, by necessity, have to remain secret. As seems to be the case, rumours began to circulate that Richard was planning a marriage involving both himself and Elizabeth. While Anne remained alive, and until the Portuguese ratified arrangements, Richard was unable to acknowledge or explain the real purpose of

the negotiations. King Richard could only deny that he intended to marry his niece; he was not in a position to reveal his true intent. In the event, Princess Joanna remained unmarried, despite offers from some of the most powerful men in Europe. She died in May 1490, living a sequestered life in the convent at Aveiro. As for Richard, there had also been an offer of the hand of the 15-year-old Infanta, Isabella of Aragon, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella. Interestingly, as Barrie Williams points out, it was not the youthful Isabella who appealed to him but the 33-year-old Joanna. It has to be said that marriage to either Joanna or Isabella would have forged for Richard an alliance with a powerful foreign power, a prospect which could hardly have been achieved by a marriage to his English niece. The offers in themselves also prove, contrary to the picture painted for us by Tudor historians, the esteem in which Richard was held by at least two European monarchies. It is doubtful whether John II or Ferdinand and Isabella would choose to ally themselves with a man whom they believed to have murdered his nephews. Elizabeth herself, had her proposed Portuguese marriage proceeded, would, in fact, still have worn a crown. Alfonso, the only legitimate son of Joanna’s brother John II, was killed in a riding accident. Upon John’s death, it was the Duke of Beja, Elizabeth’s intended husband, who succeeded to the throne as King Manuel I. It is ironic that the marriage proposals extended by Richard to the deeply pious princess of the house of Avis, and the secret negotiations which accompanied them, should have led to the circulation of malicious rumours challenging Richard’s morality. Reading List O Mosteiro de Jesus de Aveiro (Lisbon 1963) Domingos Mauricio Gomes de Santos, tr. Barrie Williams. ‘The Portuguese Connection and the Significance of “The Holy Princess”’ by Barrie Williams, The Ricardian, No 80 March 1983. Good King Richard? Jeremy Potter (Constable, London 1983) 31


A contribution by Wendy Moorhen entitled ‘A Hypothesis’

L

ivia Visser-Fuchs’ debate prompted me to re-read the earlier articles and exchanges that she mentioned in order try and make some sense, not only of Elizabeth’s possible indiscretion but why Richard found himself in the position that he had to deny he intended to marry her. Personally I have always found it nonsensical that Richard ever considered his niece as his next wife. It has been discussed many times that as he had bastardised her he would seriously compromise his position by such an action and that’s without even contemplating the incestuous nature of the union and the overwhelming difficulties of obtaining permission from the pope. It also needs to be taken into consideration that six days after the death of Queen Anne, the king sent Sir Edward Brampton to Portugal to open marriage negotiations with Princess Joanna. However, the subject under debate is the alleged letter written by Elizabeth. Although no longer extant, it seems obvious that it did exist. Buck would hardly have fabricated the story, as suggested by some of his critics, as he presumably wanted his manuscript published, and as it was dedicated to the man who owned the letter, ‘the Most Illustrious Lord, Sir Thomas Howard etc’, any falsehood would have been quickly discovered. The reading of the letter was obviously an event and one which Buck clearly recalled ‘An he keepeth that princely letter in his [Lord Howard] rich and magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments’. Livia touched on some of the problems with the manuscript and in the Hanham/ Kincaid riposte in the 1980s Dr Hanham suggested that marriage was not the subject of the letter. This was strongly rebutted by Dr Kincaid who pointed out that the account of the letter was positioned such in the text that it could have no other meaning as Buck immediately reports on Richard’s denial of the marriage in the Great Hall at St John’s. What was useful, however, was that Dr Kincaid reexamined the BL MS Cotton Tiberius E X and the crucial section that Elizabeth wanted 32

Norfolk to act as a mediator ‘for her in the cause of the marriage to the king’. The words ‘the marriage’ were an emendation taken from another manuscript known as British Library MS. Egerton 2216’, hence Dr Hanham’s comment. The syntax is ambiguous and the phrase could have two meanings, first that Elizabeth wants Norfolk to mediate for her in the matter of her marriage (in the general sense) and secondly in the matter of her marriage with the King. Later in his article Dr Kincaid wrote ‘I would further conjecture that Elizabeth in her letter was referring to a hoped-for marriage – not necessarily with the king.’ If Dr Kincaid is correct in his conjecture (with his knowledge of the texts and expertise and I would take him very seriously), then the way is open to a hypothesis of events in February/March 1485. First, however, there is the interpretation of the letter by Buck who clearly believed Elizabeth wanted to marry the king. It would appear that he was shown the letter by Lord Howard and that it is unlikely he was able to make a verbatim copy of the letter or even take any notes at the time. It is likely, therefore, that as his notes were written up after the reading and at some stage, maybe immediately or maybe later, Buck associated Elizabeth’s talk of a marriage to be with the king. Buck, of course, was the first historian to read the Crowland Chronicle (which is the main source for the report of Richard having to deny the rumour) and he was also perhaps influenced by Cornwallis’ Encomium which he had seen and as a consequence he drew his own conclusions on Richard’s actions based on hindsight and an imperfect recollection of the letter. Let us just suppose then that Elizabeth had no intention of marrying her uncle but was anxious for the wedded state, and that Richard wanted to secure a foreign princess as his bride. We are left with one fact, that there were rumours of the marriage. I would now like to speculate on what may have happened. Perhaps Elizabeth already had somebody in mind as her husband. As she was no longer a royal princess, her choice for a prospective husband was considerably widened. Alternatively, her mother was no doubt anxious to


see her settled. Elizabeth was already nineteen years old, with four younger sisters. Dr Kincaid has suggested Elizabeth may have written the letter at the prompting of her mother, Elizabeth Woodville. Of course, Elizabeth, was already ‘promised’ to Henry Tudor but the former queen may, some fourteen months after Henry’s declaration in Rouen Cathedral, have considered that his chances of ousting Richard were slight and life must go on. Margaret Beaufort, on the other hand, would have taken the opposite view and if she learned of the former princess’s plans, she no doubt went into panic mode – how could she stop any prospective marriage? Perhaps she came to the conclusion that desperate times warranted desperate measures and she embarked on a high-risk plan and through her network of friends and allies she began the rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth himself. It would have been a gamble but one that succeeded. Richard could have immediately married Elizabeth off to anybody but, in the event, he didn’t but sent her to Sheriff Hutton under the care of the earl of Lincoln while he prepared for the Tudor/ French invasion and the outcome of his embassy to Portugal which included offering Elizabeth in marriage to the Duke of Beja.

daughter in such plans this would have been made known to Henry Tudor and it would have rankled! Perhaps this explains his action in 1487 when the former queen was sent to Bermondsey. The official reason for her banishment was the trust she placed in Richard when she came out of sanctuary, and perhaps this is not so far from the truth if Richard was considering a marriage for her daughter. This does leave the problem of the final part of Elizabeth’s letter when Buck wrote ‘… she feared the queen would never die’. The condition of the queen was no doubt uppermost in the minds of those at court in midFebruary and as Dr Hanham has suggested, a closing remark on the subject would not have been out of place. The BL MS reads ‘… the queen would neu ...’ and the insertion of the end of the word ‘never’ and the word ‘die’ was an emendation taken from the Egerton manuscript, which had been edited by Buck’s great-nephew, George Buck, Esq. and which is highly suspect. He had embellished the story of the letter in his version; for example, he had referred to the royal marriage as being ‘propounded between them’ and the problems of this manuscript are rehearsed fully by Dr Kincaid in his introduction to the ‘History’. Dr Hanham’s delightful reconstruction substituted the word ‘live’ for ‘die’ and under the circumstances this seems a reasonable solution. Livia closed with ‘… there is enough other evidence that Elizabeth Woodville and her daughters were on “speaking terms” with Richard in 1485 and we need not depend on dodgy transcriptions, tendentious interpretations and damaged manuscripts for corroboration’. Fair comment but we do have a piece of evidence written during a crucial period that I believe we cannot ignore. Whilst the original letter remains missing, and considering the problems with the Buck manuscripts, we can never be absolutely certain about its contents or of Buck’s summary and interpretation. The testimony has to be treated with care and with caution but if its contents can provide the basis for a speculative scenario that could fit with other known facts then it surely serves some purpose. Sometimes we have to use not only deduction but also imagination.

This theory, is of course, pure conjecture, but two small items lend it support. Livia, in her Ricardian article, advised that ‘we do not have to consider the later versions of the story (the letter) by Polydore Vergil and Edward Hall as they do not add anything to our knowledge’ which, of course, is correct, but in his Anglica Historia, Vergil writes that Richard is confiding in Thomas Rotherham, Archbishop of York. According to Vergil the king is complaining about his marriage and his wife’s barrenness but whilst this seems just another occurrence of Richard being maligned by a Tudor historian, it is perhaps true that Richard was in conversation with Rotherham and mentioned that plans for a marriage for Elizabeth was under consideration. As a supporter of Margaret Beaufort the prelate would be well-placed to be both informer and scandal-monger. Secondly, if Elizabeth Woodville was promoting or supporting her 33


Additional sources consulted: The Encomium of Richard III (1616) by Sir William Cornwallis the Younger, edited by A N Kincaid, 1977 The History of King Richard III (1619) by Sir George Buck edited by AN Kincaid, Gloucester 1982 Three Books of Polydore Vergil’s English History edited by Sir Henry Ellis, Camden Society 1844, p. 211 ‘The Portuguese Connection and the Significance of “The Holy Princess”’ by Barrie Williams, The Ricardian, Vol 6, No 80, March 1983, pp. 138-145.

abeth’s wording was plain enough, and that she could hardly have been more explicit. That she had a ‘crush’ on her uncle is indeed possible, and one must remember that young teenagers (though nineteen is perhaps a bit old for this) often fall victim to hero worship, and Elizabeth seems to have found Richard a man that people could love. With regard to Queen Anne Neville’s approaching death, Livia and Dr Hanham can of course interpret the letter according to the usage of the time, but it might be remembered that nearly two hundred years later Charles II apologised to his courtiers for taking so long in dying, though of course his reference to himself and not a third person considerably alters the sense. One further point. Richard’s advisers urged him to deny publicly the rumour that he was going to marry his niece, saying that it would alienate his supporters in the North, but not a word about the possible murder of Elizabeth’s brothers … Can we not leave the mystery of Elizabeth’s real meaning at her description of Richard as ‘her only joy and maker in the world’ and even perhaps the hope that Queen Anne Neville’s death might not be long delayed, to spare her further suffering?

Finally from Isolde Wigram

L

ivia Visser-Fuchs is of the opinion that I thought Elizabeth of York’s signature on the verso of the last flyleaf of the French translation of Boethius’s De Consolatione Philosophiae and the addition of Richard’s own motto Loyaulté me Lie were connected. Livia is of the opinion that what the letter to the Duke of Norfolk really said cannot be ascertained beyond doubt. Livia obviously knows more about all this than I do, but I would have thought Eliz-

Plan of Carlisle Castle by Geoff Wheeler from drawing in the British Library, see p. 27.

34


Richard’s Friend Francis This article is adapted from the notes by Lesley Wynne-Davies given to participants in the firstever day trip organized by the new Visits Team after the death of Joyce Melhuish. On Saturday 12 April 1997, a beautiful sunny day, we went to Minster Lovell in Oxfordshire, home of Francis Lovell. These notes, articles in The Ricardian in June 1985 and June 1990, and a booklet on Lovell written and published by the West Midlands branch, filled in the background for us.

P

aul Murray Kendall describes Francis Lovell as ‘a shadowy figure’, saying that the rhyme for which Colyngbourne was executed in 1484 probably provides the most direct indication for his importance in Richard III’s government:

of an erstwhile Lancastrian supporter from Ravensworth in Yorkshire, who had got himself into Edward’s good books. It might have helped that Anne’s mother was the sister of Warwick the Kingmaker. Then Francis was sent to Middleham to begin his knightly training under Warwick in 1467, where apparently he DID NOT meet Richard of Gloucester. Richard was there from 1461 to 1465, but was at Court by the end of 1465. When Warwick was killed at Barnet in 1471, Francis was made the ward of John, duke of Suffolk, and his wife Elizabeth, sister of Edward IV and Richard. Later, Edward IV took back the wardship for himself. In 1473 Francis and his wife became members of the prestigious Corpus Christi guild of York. Alice Deincourt died in 1474, which added her vast estates to Francis’s property (whose revenues Edward IV was still pocketing in right of the wardship). Francis came of age and petitioned for his estates in November 1477. He was appointed Commissioner of Array for the North Riding of Yorkshire in 1480, to raise troops against the Scots, and he went with Richard of Gloucester on the 1480-81 campaign, and was present at the taking of Berwick. Richard knighted him in 1481, on the soon-to-be-fateful date of 22 August. Francis himself knighted Richard Ratcliffe (‘the Rat’) at Dumfries in 1481. Edward IV made Francis a Viscount on 27 January 1483. An account of his investiture survives and is printed in the West Midlands booklet. In 1483 he became Chief Butler of England, in charge of the royal wine supply, appointed by Edward V, and then by Richard III, and then he was made Chamberlain of the

The Cat, the Rat, and Lovell our dog Rule all England under the Hog. The ‘dog’ reference isn’t necessarily to Lovel’s character or his supposed fawning on Richard, but to the fact that a wolfhound sits on his crest: ‘on a helmet befitting his degree, on a torse of the liveries, is set for crest a wolfhound sejant argent ducally gorged and leashed’, says the West Midlands booklet. (See page 23 for a representation of the Lovell wolfhound.) Francis Lovell was born towards the end of 1456, the only son of John, Lord Lovell, and Joan Beaumont. His paternal grandparents were William, Lord Lovell, Burnell and Holland, and Alice, baroness Deincourt and baroness Grey of Rotherfield. All these lines were wealthy, but Alice was really rich, and Francis was the heir. His family were Lancastrian, and did very well under Henry VI. Francis’s father, in spite of taking an active part against Edward IV in 1460, managed not to be attainted, although the Lovell lands were confiscated. He was dead by January 1465. Ten months later, Francis’s mother married again, this time to Sir William Stanley, but died within the year. Francis, a rich child of nine years old, was now (like his property) in the custody of Edward IV, who could marry him off into any family he wished to reward. In 1466 Francis was married to Anne Fitzhugh, third daughter 35


King’s Household and a knight of the garter. The drawing of his arms in the West Midlands booklet is based on his garter stall-plate. At Richard’s coronation on 6 July 1483 Francis carried the Temporal Sword of Justice. Francis accompanied Richard on his tour of the realm. They went first to Reading, Oxford and Gloucester, and one of the stops was at Minster Lovell. This was at the time when Richard was enjoying his great popularity, and would have been a happy man. We know that the party stopped here because Richard wrote a letter to his Chancellor, John Russell, dated ‘at this manoir of Mynster Lovel the xxixth day of Juyll’. This is the well-known letter ordering the trial of unnamed persons for unspecified crimes, which has caused so much speculation about its background. Richard obviously trusted Lovell, and heaped honours and responsibilities on him. Rosemary Horrox thought Richard hoped Lovell would establish a power base in the Thames Valley, but Lovell didn’t maintain his local contacts. He preferred instead to associate with the northern friends he had made in the Middleham years. It is also interesting, as Joanna Williams points out in The Ricardian (June 1990), that among the feoffees he chose for his Northants estates in 1484-5, as well as northerners, were Sir Richard Ratcliffe and William Catesby, the Rat and the Cat. Was Colyngbourne’s doggerel accurate? Francis Lovell received a personal summons to attend the Parliament of January 1484. With the Chancellor, John Russell, and John, duke of Suffolk, he founded a guild of the Holy Cross at Abingdon, Berkshire. He was prominent in endowing Magdalen College, Oxford, in this respect following the footsteps of his grandmother, Alice Deincourt. Richard appointed him to most commissions dealing with Oxfordshire and the surrounding counties. Was he at Bosworth? And if not, why not? Richard had sent him to Southampton after Whitsun 1485 to defend the south coast against Henry Tudor. Did he get back in time when it was found that Tudor had landed in Pembrokeshire? Early accounts say he was at Bosworth, and Henry announced after the battle that he had been killed there – but that

wasn’t true. We shall probably never know if he was there. What Happened to him? The accepted view in Tudor times was that he had been killed at the Battle of Stoke, 16 June 1487. Obviously, his body wasn’t identified, but what with bloodlust and looting that need not be surprising. A herald with the Tudor army said that he had fled from the battle. The story that he had drowned in the river Trent at Fiskerton didn’t appear until Hall wrote in in his Chronicle in 1542. There are various possible references to him as alive in the years after Stoke, but none is 100% convincing. The really interesting reference is that Bacon, in his History of the Reign of Henry VII, published 1622, says, ‘yet another report ... [is] that he lived long after in a cave or vault’. The Minster Lovell Body This was found in 1708. We hear about it in a letter written by William Cowper, clerk of Parliament, to Francis Peck, the antiquary, on 9 August 1737: ‘On the 6 May, 1728, the present D[uke] of R[utland] related in my hearing that, about twenty years before [i.e. 1708, when there was chimney building at Minster Lovell] there was discovered a large vault or room under ground, in which was the entire skeleton of a man, as having been sitting at a table, which was before him, with a book, paper, pen etc. In another part of the room lay a cap; all much mouldred and decayed. Which the family and others judge to be this lord Lovel, whose exit hath hitherto been so uncertain.’ Another account is in A Genealogical History of the House of Yvery, published in 1742, which adds that the body remained whole until the air was admitted and that it was richly clothed. All this is discussed carefully in David Baldwin’s article in The Ricardian of June 1985. He also notes another interesting point: that the Minster Lovell ruins are the home of the ancient, strange story of The Mistletoe Bough Chest, in which the bride of a Lord Lovell, playing hide-and-seek with the wedding guests, hid in a chest from which she couldn’t escape. Frantic searches for her fol36


lowed, but nobody thought to look in the chest, and her crumbling skeleton was found many years later. A form of this story appeared in a Reliques of Literature about 1600, i.e. EARLIER than the discovery of the body. But the bride who dies on her wedding day is a popular literary theme. We are assured that the papers of the Dukes of Rutland have no reference to the discovery of the body in the cellar, but there is a perfectly good transmission route for the

story: Thomas Coke, who owned the manor of Minster Lovell in the 1720s, and John Manners, the future Duke of Rutland, were both Whig M.P.s at that date, and their careers would clearly have ensured they knew each other. We wondered if the parish registers of Minster Lovell had any reference to the reburial of a body, but alas, the earlier registers are lost.

Medieval Miscellany An occasional series of short pieces about the fifteenth century Anyone for the Tro Briez?

A

t this time of the year in the Middle Ages some people might be thinking of going on a pilgrimage, to Canterbury, perhaps, or even Santiago de Compostela; but across the seas in Brittany there was also the Tro Breiz, a very popular pilgrimage, at least in Breton eyes. It is said to have originated in the twelfth century, and lasted until the Duchy of Brittany lost its independence in 1532. There is a theory that it may have been based on a previous Celtic ritual in honour of seven brother-gods. The journey was dedicated to the seven saints who founded the first seven bishoprics in Brittany: St Samson in Dol de Bretagne, St Malo in St Malo, St Brieuc in St Brieuc, St Tugdual in Tréguier, St Paul Aurelian in St Pol de Léon, St Corentin in Quimper, and St Patern in Vannes. Every Breton was supposed to make the journey of the Seven Saints at least once in his life, because anyone who failed to do so would have to do it after death, and would then only be able to advance by one coffin’s length every seven years. The route was 370 miles long, and could be travelled in either direction as long as it took in all seven bishoprics. The pilgrim had to bow before the graves of all seven saints and make an offering at each. The usual rate of progress was a dozen miles a day for thirty days, and many chapels and fountains still stand along the traditional route. Today, four of the original seven cities are no longer bishoprics: Dol, St Malo, St Pol de Léon and Tréguier, but all have the architectural inheritance of their past prominence. There have been recent attempts to re-establish the pilgrimage: apply to the association ‘Les Chemins du Tro Breiz’ in St Pol de Léon ... ‘you will need a rucksack, an inflatable mattress, a sleeping bag, good walking shoes, your musical instrument and your address-book’, says the publicity.

37


Logge Notes and Queries: The Death of Joan Boughton LESLEY WYNNE-DAVIES

I

n the Bulletin of December 2003 I suggested three topics for research, and two members took me up on this; perhaps we shall be reading about their researches in a future Bulletin. A third topic, the unnatural death of Sir John Yong’s mother-in-law Joan Boughton, and her possible connection with the Boughton family of Warwickshire, was not claimed. Sir John Yong is one of the testators in the Logge register (no. 31), and (some will remember) docked his daughters of their legacy of plate because he had had to pay out too much lately in his defence in a quarrel with Lord Ferrers. He was a member of the Grocers’ company, an alderman of Bread Street ward, and mayor of London in 1467. He was knighted on 21 May 1471, a remarkable day – the very day that Edward IV entered London after winning the battle of Tewkesbury. Steinberg’s Historical Tables (a most useful book for setting out what happened when in the world) adds to the events of 21 May: ‘Henry VI murdered’. You’d think that the restored Yorkists would be too busy to knight anybody that day, but maybe Sir John had distinguished himself somehow on their behalf. He made his will on 8 November 1481, and died soon afterwards, so was safely in his grave when his mother-in-law met her fate. Joan Boughton was aged over 80 when she died at Smithfield on 28 April 1494. The place of her death tells all: she was burnt alive at the stake as a heretic Lollard. The Great Chronicle’s compiler was very hostile to her, or perhaps to heretics in general. He called her ‘an old cankered heretic’, and has a long description of her trial and death (p. 252):

‘Upon The xxviij daye of apryll was an old cankyrd heretyke that dotid ffor age namyd Johanne Bowghton wedowe & modyr unto the wyffe of sir John yong, which dowgthyr was soom Reportid had a grete smell of an heretyk aftyr the modyr, Brent in Smythffeeld, This woman was iiij score yeris of age [or more] and held viij oppynyons of heresy whych I passe ovyr, ffor the heryng of thym is nothyr plesaunt nor ffrutefful, She was a dyscypyll of wyclyff whome she accomptid ffor a Seynt, and held soo ffast & ffermly viij of his oppynyons that alle the doctors of london cowde not turn hyr ffrom oon of theym, and when It was told to hir that she shuld be brent ffor hyr obstynacy & ffals byleve, She set nowgth at theyr wordis but deffyed theym, ffor she said she was soo belovid wt God & his holy angelys, That all the ffyre In london shuld not hurt hyr, But upon the morw a quarteron of ffagot wyth a ffewe Rede consumyd hir In a lytill while, and whyle she mygth Crye she spak offtyn of God & owir lady, But noo man cowde cause hyr to name Jhesus, and soo she dyed. But It apperyd that she lafft soom of hyr dyscyplys behynd hyr, ffor the nygth ffolowyng the more part of the asshys of that ffyre that she was brent In, were hadd awaye, and kepyd ffor a precious Relyk, In an erthyn pott, so afftyr was provid In the tyme of sir Henry Colett beyng mayer, as aftir shall be shewyd’. Which eight of Wycliff’s opinions Joan Boughton maintained we shall never know. The main Lollard beliefs were that the Bible was the sole authority in religion, and all people had the right to read it and interpret it for themselves – so of course it had to be translat38


ed into English. Priests and sacraments were thus not really necessary. They did not believe in transubstantiation, venerating the images of saints, that you could buy indulgences to shorten your time in purgatory, or that it was any use to go on a pilgrimage. As to the more detailed rules, Margery Baxter of Norfolk roundly declared before bishop Alnwick during his persecutions of Lollards in 1428 that it was more economical if on a Friday you ate the cold meat left over from Thursday rather than went off to the market to buy an expensive fish. She also, on meeting a friar, told him to go off and get a job of work. (Margery was not the stuff martyrs were made of: she prudently abjured her beliefs before the bishop.) It appears from the account in the Great Chronicle that Sir John Yong’s wife, another Joan, was also suspected of heresy, having ‘a great smell of an heretic’, but she is not definitely recorded as having joined her mother in the flames. A Lollard named Joan Baker, the wife of a merchant tailor, tried in early 1511, apparently told her parish priest that Lady Yong had ‘dyed a martir be for god’, and that if she herself died for refusing to honour images, as Lady Yong had done, she would be dying well. (But then she abjured her heretical views.) It may be that Joan Baker confused Lady Yong with her mother, Joan Boughton. Students of Lollardy find this mother and daughter interesting, in that they were based in London, and higher up the social scale than many Lollards, but no more is known about them. One wonders what Sir John’s own religious opinions were. Did he keep them to himself, or did he too incline towards Lollardy? Or perhaps his wife and mother in law only revealed themselves as Lollards after his death. His will is orthodox, as J.A.F. Thomson points out in his book The Later Lollards: “In his will he endowed a chantry, provided for the observance of an obit, and made bequests to the various orders of friars in the

city. His connexions with the church establishment can be seen too in the fact that the archdeacon of London was one of his executors and the Archbishop of York the supervisor of his will’. Foxe’s Acts and Monuments (usually known as his Book of Martyrs), of course, has a different opinion of Joan Boughton. This is the version in the first edition of 1561: ‘ ... a woman, who for her constancie and vertue, was greatly to be commended and praised, beynge called the mother of a certaine lady Surnamed yong she persevering even unto the fier with a stoute and manly courage for the confession of the Gospel was burned in the yeare of oor Lord 1490’. I have not found any connection yet between Joan Boughton and the Warwickshire Boughtons, but Warwickshire was a very Lollard area earlier in the fifteenth century, and Sir John Oldcastle (the prominent Lollard) took refuge there after his abortive rising against Henry V in 1415. The fifteenth century was the one in which the statute requiring heretics to be burnt, de Haereticis Comburendis, was first enacted. Josephine Tey in The Daughter of Time picked on this as one of the salient points of the new Lancastrian dynasty: ‘For three generations the usurping Lancasters had ruled England: Richard of Bordeaux’s Henry unhappily but with fair efficiency, Shakespeare’s Prince Hal with Agincourt for glory and the stake for zeal, and his son in halfwitted muddle and failure’. In fact, it was Henry IV who instituted the stake for zeal, in March 1401, though it had been urged earlier by church authorities as Lollardy increased in popularity and they felt the need to combat it. The statute came in nice time to take people’s minds off the fact that his usurpation was not going as well by 1401 as it had been in the heady days of 1399. I wonder if any heretics were burnt at the stake in the years when Richard III was king?

39


Richard III’s Easter JOHN ASHDOWN-HILL

E

aster, the oldest and most important Christian festival, is tied to the Jewish feast of Passover and to the lunar calendar and so has never been held on a fixed date. The two Easters of the reign of Richard III both fell in April: that of 1484, on 18 April, and that of 1485, on 3 April. In the fifteenth century, as today, the Easter season was preceded by the penitential period of Lent. The seventh Sunday before Easter marked the beginning of Shrovetide, three days of spiritual and practical preparation for Lent which were characterised by a degree of jollification, still found in Catholic countries where the tradition of the carnival is kept. All meat had to be used up, for it could not be eaten during Lent. Nor could the so-called ‘white meats’, which included cheese and eggs. ‘Shrove Tuesday’ was a day for confessions (‘shriving’) and for using up prohibited foods, such as fat and eggs, a tradition still reflected in England by the custom of making pancakes on that day. On Ash Wednesday, at mass, the ashes, made by burning the previous year’s Palm Sunday branches, were (and are) placed by the priest on the foreheads of the people, with the injunction ‘Remember man that you are dust and to dust you will return’. This rite signalled the beginning of Lent. In the Middle Ages Lent was a very solemn period and strict abstinence was observed in the diet. On the second Sunday before Easter the Passion (the Biblical account of the death of Christ) was read, and total gloom descended on the church building as all the figures of saints in the church were veiled, even to the figures high up on the rood screen. Many painted altarpieces (diptychs and triptychs) were hinged specifically in preparation for this moment, so that they could be closed, and the paintings hidden. In both years of his reign Richard III may

well have felt the full force of the Lenten gloom, for in the second week of Lent 1484 his desperately sick wife, Anne, died, while in 1485 the anniversary, or ‘year-mind’ of her death fell in the week before Passion Sunday. In the middle ages a year-mind was a solemn occasion, and as Richard was at Westminster on the anniversary day, he may well have attended anniversary obsequies for Anne at Westminster Abbey, where he had buried his queen beneath a tomb slab in the Sanctuary probably surmounted by a memorial brass. On the Sunday before Easter (Palm Sunday) Christ’s entry into Jerusalem was and is re-enacted, in a procession with ‘palm’ branches. Palm trees being conspicuous by their absence in medieval England, it was customary in those days to make do with any greenery that came to hand. The use of sallow, willow and yew is recorded. Palm Sunday marked (and marks) the start of Holy Week. On the following Wednesday the chrism mass was celebrated in all cathedrals and the sacramental oils (chrism) for the coming year blessed. It is possible that Richard III attended the chrism mass at St Paul’s Cathedral in 1485, for he was in London at the time. The next day is Maundy Thursday, commemorating the Last Supper and the institution of the mass. In the fifteenth century on Maundy Thursday priests, bishops, abbots, some aristocrats, and the king, re-enacted Christ’s washing of the feet of his disciples, as priests, bishops, and even the pope, still do today. In 1484 Maundy Thursday fell on 15 April. Richard III was in Nottingham, and must have observed the customary ceremonies there. In 1485 (31 March) he did so in London. At the Maundy Thursday mass, church bells were rung for the last time, and then fell silent until the Easter vigil. At the end of the mass the blessed sacrament, usual40


ly kept in a prominent place in the church, was carried in solemn procession to the Easter Sepulchre, where it was deposited, reflecting the burial of Christ, after which the faithful kept vigil before it. This rite is still observed. No mass was celebrated on Good Friday. Instead there was a solemn liturgy unique to that day, which included the ceremony of veneration of the cross called, in the Middle Ages, ‘creeping to the cross’. Even kings and queens took part in this procession, genuflecting and kissing the cross, while the choir sang the improperia (‘reproaches’) in a mixture of Greek and Latin. There were, of course, no hot cross buns on Good Friday in the Middle Ages. The lenten fast would not have permitted them, and they are an eighteenth-century invention. The fall of darkness on Holy Saturday began the Easter vigil. All lights were extinguished, and in total darkness the faithful assembled outside the church, where the priests kindled the new fire. From this the huge pascal candle was lit and carried into the church to chants of Lumen Christi (‘The Light of

Christ’). The people lit small candles from the large one, and light spread throughout the church as the plainchant Exultet was sung by a deacon. The Lenten veils were removed from the images of the saints, the litany was chanted and the two-hour long vigil mass, was celebrated. Easter day itself was marked by a further mass, with a different liturgy, and by feasting to celebrate the end of the lenten fast. In the fifteenth century this meant that meat and eggs, prohibited since Shrove Tuesday, could now be eaten again, and in token of this, eggs were blessed in churches. They were real eggs, of course, not chocolate ones (chocolate, like America, being then still undiscovered). The Easter season was brought to a close by the secular celebration of Hocktide, two weeks later. There were games, including a tug-of-war, and it was the custom in many places for groups of women to capture and tie up the menfolk, holding them to ransom. The money raised in this way went as alms to the needy.

Memorials of the Wars of the Roses Another occasional series, this time devoted to notables who lived during this period and whose memorials were published by W E Hampton in 1979. Thanks to Bill for allowing them to be reproduced in the Bulletin and to Geoff Wheeler for the brass effigy images Windsor, St George’s Chapel 1483. SIR THOMAS ST. LEGER AND HIS WIFE, ANNE, DUCHESS OF EXETER Azure, fretty argent, a chief or Brass, lightly engraved, the figure kneeling; tabard, heraldic mantle; now mural, N wall of the chapel found by St Leger in 1481, now known as the Rutland Chapel. Son of John St Leger by Margery Dannet; his first wife’s name is unknown; m.2, Anne, sister of Edward IV and Richard III. In order to marry St Leger (her accepted lover by 1467) Anne obtained a divorce from her attainted and exiled husband, Henry Holland 2nd Duke of Exeter, from whom she had been separated since c. 1464. In 1465, St Leger, brawling within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster, was arrested, and John Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester, Constable of England, ordered that his hand be struck off. Only the king’s intervention saved him. Conspiring with the Woodvilles in 1483, he was taken, executed in mid-November, and attainted. His marriage to the King’s sister ‘by seduction means’, her husband ‘then being on lyve’, was denounced in the Parliament of 1484. Anne died in childbirth, 12 January, 1476, six months after the corpse of her first husband had been found in the sea between Calais and Dover. 41


Paul Murray Kendall: A Child’s View CALLIE KENDALL 2005 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Paul Murray Kendall’s Richard III, and the Bulletin will be publishing a series of articles on this topic throughout 2005. We begin with an article by Callie Kendall, Paul Murray Kendall’s daughter. Further articles will look at the impact of the book.

I

don’t know when Richard III became a member of our family, the exact moment that he crossed that boundary between almost mythical historical figure and flesh and blood. But, whenever it happened, it was my father who breathed life into him and made him real. Even as a child of nine – for that is how old I was when Richard III was published – I stoutly defended Richard’s reputation to all challengers. Woe betide anyone who held up Shakespeare’s characterisation of the king as the true man! I remember one of the teachers at my primary school quizzing me about who did murder the Princes in the Tower. I must have been a very earnest child. Richard was virtually our own for three years before publication of the book, during which time I honed my techniques in leaping to his defence. In the interim we visited every castle, great house, cathedral, church, battlefield, museum, gallery and ruin in England and France, or so it seemed to me. We sped along the byways of France in our Morris Minor convertible with the top down. I knelt on the back seat, looking out at the road behind in case the French either pursued us or lurked in the forest, and egged on my father to drive faster. I rode White Surrey, he galloped along on Bucephalus (being the only other horse name I knew besides Black Beauty, which would have been highly inappropriate), and my mother, not really entering into the spirit of the chase, followed on Stubble. Her horse was so named because he was scared, took up the rear, and would really

rather have stayed at home: thus he ‘never had a close shave’. This irked me: I felt it was beneath the dignity of our serious intent. However, when we stopped for our picnic lunches (it was years before I could face a salami again), we were vigilant in case an enemy scout should come upon us unexpectedly. All this was in defence of the realm of King Richard III, and my father was happy to indulge my imagination. We would talk about Richard, what he did, the kind of life he led, when he was worried, and how he felt about things. The rest of the world might have thought an English king had died half a millennium ago, but there was a six-year-old for whom he lived. Paul Murray Kendall had a gift for bringing history and past lives and times into the present, and he spent an inordinate amount of time ensuring his daughter grew up embracing a passion for the subject and a feel for the Middle Ages in particular. Fifty years on, I found the copy of Quentin Durward he had read to me. (The novel takes place in fifteenth -century France.) Huge passages had been marked out in pencil to make the text manageable for a four-year-old to absorb as a bedtime story. By the by, I have yet to find another person who was deliciously terrified at the same age by the telling of the eighthcentury epic poem Beowulf. The first adventure began in 1952. We lived in Chiddingfold, a delightful village in the English countryside, where we used ration 42


of John Paul Jones’s desk, shown off by his great niece, who lived down the road from us. And all the time, in the background, Paul Murray Kendall was researching and writing about Richard. He was producing ever more cascading piles of notes and jottings to incorporate into a book, once the research had reached a critical mass. The research I remember most vividly was a trip to Bosworth Field, where we stood on a rise and surveyed the open landscape while my father explained the tactics of the battle. From my vantage point on his shoulders I could see with ease the troops amassed and waiting to strike Richard down. Three years later, on 7 February , the local newspaper ran a feature that included a large photograph of the three of us poring over an atlas and smiling for the camera: ‘Kendalls Leave for London to Continue Study’. Richard III’s imminent publication had made us the local experts on England. I still have the scrapbook I kept of all the reviews of the book that were sent by the publisher and by literary friends. (I have been accused of inheriting his enthusiasm for life.) There is C V Wedgwood’s review in the Daily Telegraph on 25 November 1955: ‘Neither “Bunch-Backed Toad” Nor Hero’ says the headline. There are pages and pages of reviews that have sat untouched on the bookshelf for fifty years. Yet one glance at the lovingly collated A3-size scrapbook leaves the reader in no doubt as to the profound effect the publication of Richard III had on the child record-keeper. Paul’s daughter was immensely proud of his book, and always her father’s and Richard’s champion.

Paul Murray Kendall

coupons for butter, sugar and meat. I learned to go to bed when it was still light in the summer and in the winter. Attempting to skate, I fell through the ice on the village pond next to the blacksmith. On the way home from school, I ate blackberries along the path through the cow pasture, and when I reached the top of the hill I would look to see if Chanctonbury Ring was visible. I was in awe

News and Reviews Continued from page 20

International Medieval Congress: 11-14 July 2005 in Leeds A four day conference covering all aspects of the European Middle Ages with over 300 sessions. This year’s special thematic strand is ‘Youth and Age’. Details may be found at http:// www.leeds.ac.uk/imi/imc/imc.htm or by contacting: International Medieval Congress, Institute of Medieval Studies, Parkinson Building, Room 1.03, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT. Tel. 0113 343 3614. Fax. 0113 343 3616. E-mail:imc@leeds.ac.uk 43


Correspondence Dear Editor, In response to Geoffrey Wheeler’s query regarding enamel preservation or degradation (Bulletin Autumn 2004): he and John Ashdown-Hill are both correct. To clarify: true enamel is a vitreous material composed of silica, alkaline oxide modifiers and colourants fused to a metal backing, which, as Wheeler rightly observes, can be preserved sufficiently well to allow for accurate identification of badges and motifs. However, enamel rarely survives without some degree of degradation related to its composition and the conditions under which it was buried. Essentially, soluble components leach out into soil water, leaving behind a porous matrix often far removed in colour and translucency from the ‘as new’ appearance. The more fragile and ‘de-vitrified’ this matrix becomes, the more likely it is to disintegrate altogether - hence the areas of loss so typical of enamelling on objects recovered from archaeological contexts. White enamel seems particularly prone to such deterioration and, moreover, seldom survives in its original colour due to absorption of corrosion products from the backing metal (blue-green in the case of copper alloys, and red-brown-orange in the case of iron). Helen Cox, Archaeological Conservator

the so-called sorcery of Elizabeth and her mother Jacquetta – I had heard the first accusation, but Jacquetta married Sir Richard Woodville for love on being widowed of John, Duke of Bedford – a distinct social come-down and not very efficient sorcery. To return briefly to the sapphire. The phrase ‘or anywhere else since, till Regency times’ may be due to shortening, as there is certainly evidence of the sapphire in France from a portrait of the nineteen-year-old Jacobite James III and VIII taken in 1707 to encourage the Scots, still angry at losing their parliament and no doubt prepared to support his rising of 1708. This portrait shows the sapphire on a table, set in a temporary crown. It had been smuggled to France by James II in 1688, probably in the heel of his shoe, and he used to keep it in his pocket and finger it frequently. Its history is known after its return following 1804, but the gap is, as stated, between Barnet and the Restoration. Regarding Elizabeth of York, I understood that she sent a ring to Henry Tudor in Brittany (‘The Lady Bessy rose up like the dayspring’ – Brereton’s song) indicating that she would marry him, whereupon he took the oath to do so in a local church. This must still have been in the reign of Richard III, but perhaps by then Richard had denied intending to marry Elizabeth and was negotiating for a marriage with Portugal. Pamela Hill

Dear Editor, Thank you very much for allowing space about the not strictly Ricardian question of the Stuart Sapphire. However, Richard did have connections with Scotland – as Gloucester he took Berwick and Edinburgh, and one of his allies was James III’s rebel brother Albany, who later escaped to France. James III himself was proposed by Henry VII as a means of getting rid of Henry’s inconvenient mother-in-law Elizabeth Woodville, but James, partly for his Lancastrian convictions, was killed in 1488 before the marriage could take place. I should be interested to learn more about

Dear Editor, I write further to Pamela Hill’s letter about the royal Scots sapphire. From my research on the More, George Neville’s house at Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, I understand that it was not ‘ransacked’ immediately after the battle of Barnet in April 1471 but following Neville’s impeachment for high treason and arrest by Edward IV in April 1472. It was then that the manor of the More and all his other properties were seized for the king by royal officers. According to Warkworth’s 44


Chronicle, soon after this Edward ‘brake the seyd Archebysschoppes mytere, in the whiche were fulle many ryche stones and preciouse, and made therof a croune for hyme self. And all his other juels, plate, and stuff, the Kynge gaff it to his eldest sonne and heyre Prince Edward’. (Warkworth’s Chronicle of the First Thirteen Years of the Reign of King Edward the Fourth (Camden Society, London, 1839), p. 25). Unfortunately I can shed no light on the missing jewel. Heather Falvey

Editor: we have now received two opposing views on members’ interaction with the Executive Committee: we would welcome your views – please write to the Editor detailing what you think is right/wrong in this relationship, what works well, what you think could be done better. Dear Editor, I would like, if I may, to make a point which appears to have been overlooked in the debate regarding the legitimacy of Edward IV. Edward IV won the crown by right of conquest, not once but twice. It did not matter whether his claim was as spurious as that of William I or Henry Tudor, he was still rightful king of England. Tracy Upex

Dear Editor, Thank you for the (as usual) excellent Winter Bulletin. Just a couple of comments on the contents if I may. Firstly, I cannot quite see the point of P.A. Hancock’s article ‘Archetypes and the problem of Richard III’. I think that no one would deny that things that are drummed into us at an early age stick with us for the rest of our lives and are very hard to dislodge, however debatable they may be. But I cannot quite see why Mr Hancock has to take three pages trying to prove this rather obvious fact. Secondly, however, if I find Mr Hancock rather bewildering, Carolyn West’s letter leaves a slightly unpleasant taste in the mouth. You, in your editorial capacity, have dealt fully, and completely satisfactorily, with the question of the Royal Garden Party tickets, but I must take issue with Ms West regarding her remarks about the Executive Committee. I have been a member of the Society for nearly fifty years and have never found members of the committee ‘aloof’ or ‘remote from the grass-roots membership’. On the contrary, I have always found them more than willing to talk to me, to discuss the Society, and listen to my opinions, however dubious. It seems to me that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to those members, elected by us, who are willing to undertake a large amount of work, unpaid, to make our Society more enjoyable and rewarding for the rest of us. John Knights

Dear Editor Dr Michael K. Jones’ recent chance discovery in the records of Rouen is igniting many new and exciting questions about Richard’s life but should it not also be begging other important questions from us as a Society? For example, should we not be asking what else is still out there and waiting to be found and what are we, as a Society, doing about it? In this country the possibility of a new discovery on Richard is, as we know, highly unlikely due to Henry Tudor’s [almost] systematic destruction of anything pertaining to his predecessor’s rule and here the Society is doing an excellent job with many ongoing schemes and sponsorships, but my question relates specifically to where the vast majority of new discoveries are coming from, and that is Europe. For example, surely it is not beyond reasonable probability to concur that the Vatican is holding many important papers that relate to Richard. Have we [as a Society] ever approached the Vatican and if not, why not? Do we have [or need?] a Catholic student priest/ historian within the membership [or out of it] who would not only be eager to undertake such research but would be someone to whom the Vatican would be willing to give authorisation? If such projects are out of reach of the Society’s limited resources should we not 45


then be calling upon the membership not only to help fund this kind of research but also to be volunteering to help in any way - the Vatican being only one example of what may be waiting for us out there? Perhaps there is a history of such attempts of which I am unaware but, if not, as a Society dedicated to Richard surely we need to be recognising firstly where the majority of findings are coming from and then be focusing our efforts to secure them? For example, could we form

a special research group [with the backing and influence of our Patron, HRH The Duke of Gloucester] whose sole purpose would be to secure permission from these many European organisations and then to commit to researching them? We have a superb research officer in Wendy who is doing an excellent job but should we not be sending out an army for our king if we are to be successful in securing his good name? Philippa Langley

THE ROYAL FUNERALS OF THE HOUSE OF YORK AT WINDSOR Anne F. Sutton and Livia Visser-Fuchs with Ralph A. Griffiths Available from 1 April 2005 This study is a companion volume to the Reburial of Richard Duke of York. It presents in the same format and with five colour and twenty-one black and white illustrations everything that is known about the funerals of Edward IV (1483), Queen Elizabeth Woodville (1503), their son George (1479) and their daughter Mary (1482). Each funeral has an introduction discussing all the details of the ceremony, followed by an edition of the surviving documents. Also included are a study and edition of all the surviving verse laments on the death of Edward, a new discussion of his tomb and chantry in St George’s Chapel – what it looked like and where it was situated – and an account of the discovery of his tomb and remains in 1789. Finally there is an up-to-date survey of the many locks of Edward’s hair preserved in various collections. 152 pages, 4 pages in full colour, 21 black and white figures and index. Order from the Society’s Sales Liaison Officer, 42 Pewsey Vale, Forest Hill, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 2YA. Price £10 plus £2.75 postage and packing.

46


The Barton Library Latest Additions to the Non-Fiction Books Library Listed below are the latest selection of books that have been added to the Non-fiction Books Library. All the books are hard back unless otherwise described. AUSTIN, John D Merevale Church and Abbey (Brewin Books 1998 Paperback) Merevale Church was originally the Gate Chapel of Merevale Abbey (1148) and contains the most important Cistercian stained glass in Britain, including the famous Jesse window. There are chapters on how medieval stained glass was made and in iconography of Jesse windows. There are beautiful colour plates of all the stained glass windows. BUCKLEY, JA Medieval Cornish Stannary Charters 1201 - 1507 (Penhellick Publications 2001 Booklet) History of the charters issued to the Cornish tin miners from the first charter issued by King John to the Cornish Revolt in the reign of Henry VII. BUCKLEY, JA Who’s Who in the Wars of the Roses (Penhellick Publications 2004 Paperback) Listing alphabetically of the famous personages in the Wars of the Roses with very brief descriptions together with brief synopsis of the major battles. CLARK, John (editor) The Medieval Horse and its Equipment (Museum of London/The Boydell Press 2004, new edition - first published in 1995) Horses played a vital role in the Middle Ages and this is borne out by the number of artefacts linked with horses which are excavated in London. Among them are harness, horseshoes, spurs and currycombs, from the ordinary to highly decorated pieces. The role of the horse in Medieval London is considered, from historical and archaeological sources, including the price of horses and maintenance costs plus hiring ‘hackneys’, the size of horses and the use of carts in and around London. The role of the farrier or ‘marshal’ is also explored. This new edition has an introduction updating the reader on new research since 1995. CLARK, Linda & CARPENTER, Christine (editors) The Fifteenth Century 4: Political Culture in Late Medieval Britain (The Boydell Press 2004) Essays include History and Memory in Lancastrian England; Common Law, Counsel and Consent in Fortescue’s Political Theory; Prelates and Politics; Religious Symbols and Political Culture; Political Culture of Medieval London; Political Life of the English Village; The Press of the Public on Later Medieval Politics; National Pride, Decentralised Nation. Contributors include Christine Carpenter, Maurice Keen, Caroline Barron and John Watts. CORRIDON, Christopher & WILLIAMS, Ann A Dictionary of Medieval Terms & Phrases (Boydell Press 2004) This dictionary is intended to assist the non-specialist readers with their research. It contains around 3,400 terms, including Latin, Old English and Middle English, ranging from legal and ecclesiastical to words of everyday life. There are also examples of medieval terms and phrases still in use today. DIEHL, Daniel & DONNELLY, Mark P Tales from the Tower of London (Sutton Publishing 2004) An entertaining collection of historical tales from the Tower, including the fate of the Princes in the Tower. This book explores the court intrigues, clandestine liaisons, unimaginable tortures and grisly executions which took place within the Tower and brings to life some of the most famous and infamous characters of its long and colourful past. GOLDBERG, PJP & RIDDY, Felicity (editors) Youth in the Middle Ages (York Medieval Press 2004) Essays include Childhood and Youth in the Early Middle Ages; Childhood and the Jewish Society; Femininity in Late Medieval England; Authority in Narratives of the Child King Richard; Provision for Children; Youth and Gender in Later Medieval England; Advice on Leav47


ing Home in the Romances. Contributors include PJP Goldberg, Felicity Riddy, Edward James and Helen Cooper. GROSS, Anthony The Dissolution of the Lancastrian Kingship: Sir John Fortescue and the Crisis of Monarchy in Fifteenth Century England (Paul Watkins Publishing 1996) The author challenges the traditional view of the late Lancastrian Court as one struggling to survive by tracing an intelligent Lancastrian strategy, led not by Henry VI or Queen Margaret but by their ministers and principally by Sir John Fortescue. Gross analyses Sir John Fortescue’s Governance of England to show that his books were more intimately associated with the immediate political struggle than previously recognised. LACEY, Robert 1387 - 1688: Great Tales from English History: Chaucer to the Glorious Revolution (Little, Brown 2004) Robert Lacey’s popular re-telling of some of the truly classic stories of English history between 1387 and 1688, including Dick Whittington, the Battle of Agincourt, The Wars of the Roses and William Caxton. Great fun! LINDLEY, Philip Gothic to Renaissance: Essays on Sculpture in England (Paul Watkins Publishing 1995 Paperback) Art historian, Philip Lindley reviews the origins and development of the craft of sculpture in medieval England. There are eight specialist essays prefaced by a comprehensive introduction. Subjects covered include the range of methods and materials; the relationship between patron and artist; the place of sculpture in architectural settings and images of kingship and the hero, especially St George fighting the dragon. STRATFORD, Jenny (editor) Harlaxton Medieval Studies Volume XIII: The Lancastrian Court (Shaun Tyas Publishing 2003) A collection of essays which challenge traditional views about the Lancastrian Court. They explore the nature and role of the Court in England and in France, in peace, in war and in exile, from the accession of Henry IV to the deposition of Henry VI. Contributors include Barry Dobson, Alfred Hiatt; John Watts, Carole Rawcliffe and Nicholas Rogers.

Non-fiction Papers Library Recent additions to the Non-fiction Papers Library include the following: CADW - WELSH HISTORICAL MONUMENTS Beaumaris Castle (A guide book) EDGAR-BEALE, RS The Battle of Bosworth 22 August 1485 - The Location (Living History Register Digest, Vol 22, No 2) This article explores the possible whereabouts of the battle by using contemporary or near contemporary accounts. HARRIS, Gerald Cardinal Beaufort (Medieval History, Vol 1, No 1, 1991) The author looks at the life of Cardinal Beaufort, one time Bishop of Winchester, Cardinal of England and uncle to King Henry VI.

Audio-Visual Library Update Additions to the audio and visual material over the past three months have included a transfer to video from the USA DVD release of Laurence Olivier’s 1955 film production of Richard III. (A short review of this DVD can be found under the News and Reviews section.) Other new items are video tapes of Channel 4 TV’s concluding programme in the first series of David Starkey’s Monarchy series, covering the reigns of Richard II to Henry VI and Lord of the North by Sydney L Charlton. Lord of the North is the author’s video of dress-rehearsals for the 1996 play, based on episodes in Richard’s life from PM Kendall’s biography, which was first performed at the People’s Theatre, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and won the People’s Play of the Year Award.

48


Book Review WITHIN THE FETTERLOCK BY BRIAN WAINWRIGHT

A

lthough this novel is not ‘Ricardian’ I am sure most members would enjoy reading it. It is set during the last years of Richard II’s reign and the reign of Henry IV. The main character is Constance of York, the daughter of Edmund, Duke of York, uncle of King Richard II. Constance is therefore cousin to both Richard II and Henry Bolingbroke, later Henry IV. She is married to Thomas Despenser, and, through the marriage of her younger daughter Isabelle to Richard Beauchamp, great grandmother of Isabelle and Anne Neville. Her brothers were Edward, second duke of York, and Richard of Conisbrough, later earl of Cambridge, who married Anne Mortimer. The son of Richard and Anne was Richard, third duke of York and father to Edward IV and Richard III. The book centres on Constance’s involvement with many family plots and intrigues, first to see who would be heir to the childless Richard II, and then, after his deposition and murder, to unseat Henry IV and replace him with Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, a more senior descendant of Edward III. After her husband’s death Constance enjoys a love affair with Edmund Mortimer until he is taken prisoner by Owain Glyn Dwr. She then goes on to have an affair with, and then secretly marry, Edmund Holland, later earl of Kent. Throughout all of this her brother Edward is busy plotting, first with one side and then the other, always making sure he ends up on the winning side, and not regretting who he betrays along the way.

This book is extremely well researched and written. My only comment would be it might have been helpful to have had a family tree at the beginning for anyone not completely familiar with the period and the different branches of the family. Published by Trivium Publishing 2004 (ISBN 0-9722091-1-5). Available from the Fiction Library. Anne Painter

49


Booklist A service to members from the Editor detailing fiction and non-fiction historical books that have recently been published or will be published in the near future. AREFORD, David & Rowe, Nina A [editors] Excavating the Medieval Image: manuscripts, artists, audiences: essays in honour of Sandra Hindman, Ashgate, £55, October 2004 BALDWIN, David Elizabeth Woodville, new edition, Sutton Pub, pbk, £8.99, November 2004 BELL, Susan Gloag Lost Tapestries of the ‘City of Ladies’: Christine de Pisan’s Renaissance Legacy, Univ California Pr, £26.95, December 2004 BEVAN, Bryan Henry VII: the first Tudor king, Rubicon Press, £16.99, pbk, £11.95, September 2004 BOOGAART, Thomas A Ethnography of late medieval Bruges: evolution of the corporate milieu, Mellen Studies in Geography Series No 11, E Mellen Pr, USA, £84.95, October 2004 BURNS, E. Jane [editors] Medieval fabrications: dress, textiles, clothwork and other cultural imaginings, New Middle Ages Series, Palgrave Macmillan, £50, October 2004 CAMPBELL, Lorne Van der Weyden, Chaucer Press, £15.99, October 2004 CARTER, Robert The Language of Stones, HCP, pbk, £6.99, February 2005 (fiction – historical/fantasy: ‘combining myth, magic and legend in 15th-century Britain’) CLARK, Linda & CARPENTER, Christine [editors] Political culture in late medieval Britain, 15th Century Series, vol. 4, Boydell Pr, £45, November 2004 CORREDON, Christopher & WILLIAMS, Ann Dictionary of Medieval terms and phrases, D.S.Brewer, £25, September 2004 CRIEGHTON, OH Castles and landscapes: power, community and fortifications in medieval England, ne, pbk, Equinox Publishing, £19.99, August 2004 CULLUM, Patricia H. & LEWIS, Katherine J [editors] Holiness and masculinity in the Middle Ages, Univ Wales Pr, pbk, £16.99. DAVENPORT, Anthony P Medieval narrative: an introduction, Oxford Univ. Press, pbk, £14.99, September 2004 DAVENPORT, Will The Perfect Sinner, HCP, pbk, £6.99, March 2005. Fiction. (‘dual time, medieval and contemporary, with the medieval story ... the stronger’) DAVIS, Norman [editor] Paston letters and papers of the fifteenth century, Early English Text Society, Supplementary Series, Nos 20 and 21, Oxford University Press, £50 each, September 2004 DODSON, Aidan, Royal Tombs of Great Britain, an illustrated history, Duckworth, £25. November 2004 DUFOURNET, Jean Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, Onlybook, pbk, £12.99, September 2004 DUFFY, Eamon, The Stripping of the Altars: traditional religion in England 1400-1580, new edition, Yale Univ. Pr, pbk, £15.99, February 2005 EDWARDS, J Ferdinand and Isabella, Longman, pbk., £14.99, October 2004 GATHERCOLE, Patricia M Depictions of Angels and Devils in medieval French manuscript illumination, Studies in French Civilization, No 32, E. Mellen Pr, USA, £64.95, October 2004 GRAEME-EVANS, Posie The Innocent, Hodder, £18.99 [December 2004], pbk, £6.99 [March 2005]. Fiction. (‘court intrigue (Edward IV), forbidden love ... first of a trilogy. Comparisons with Philippa Gregory but it is younger and a great deal sexier’ – Bookseller) (… well, that’s a bodice-ripper, then ... [Editor] – but the cover of the paperback appears quite tasteful ...) GRIFFITHS, Ralph Reign of King Henry VI, new edition, Sutton Pub, pbk., £19.99, December 2004 50


HICKMAN, Trevor Battlefield of Leicestershire, Sutton Pub, new edition, pbk, £16.99, October 2004 HOWE, Nicholas [editor] ‘Home and homelessness in the medieval and renaissance world’, Univ. Nôtre Dame Pr., £30.50, pbk, £15.50, November 2004 JAGER, Eric The Last duel: a true story of medieval crime and punishment, Century, £14.99, January 2005 (‘... true story of a notorious duel in medieval France between a knight and a squire accused of violating the knight’s beautiful young wife ...’) KALOGRIDIS, Jeanne The Borgia Bride, Harper Collins, £17.99, February 2005. Fiction (‘set in the Vatican during the 15th century when Pope Alexander VI ... began a reign of terror’) KING, Edmund Medieval England from Hastings to Bosworth, Tempus, pbk, £12.99, June 2004 KOEN, Thomas & McKENDRICK, Scott Illuminating the Renaissance: the triumph of Flemish manuscript painting in Europe, J. Paul Getty Trust Pubns, new edition, pbk, £95, September 2004 KREITNER, Kenneth Church music of 15th-century Spain, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Music vol 2, Boydell Press, £45, September 2004 LABARGE, Margaret Wade Medieval Travellers, Phoenix, pbk, £7.99, January 2005 (‘... account of the lavish trains and embassies that traversed the lands during the middle ages ...’) NORMINGTON, Kate, Gender and medieval drama, Gender in the Middle Ages Series, vol 1, D S Brewer, £40, November 2004 PASSARO, Maria C Pastore Representations of women in medieval and renaissance texts, Studies in Renaissance Literature Series, No 27, E Mellen Pr, USA, £69.95, November 2004 RAWCLIFFE, Carol & WILSON, Richard Medieval Norwich, Hambledon and London Ltd, £25, November 2004 RUBIN, Miri The Hollow Crown: a history of Britain in the late middle ages, Allen Lane, £25, January 2005 SAUL, Nigel Companion to Medieval England, Tempus, pbk, £19.99 April 2004 SAUL, Nigel Three Richards: Richard I, Richard II, Richard III, Hambledon and London Ltd, £19.95, November 2004 SOAR, Hugh David Hewitt Crooked stick: a history of the longbow, Weapons in History Series, Westholme Pub, USA, £15.99, November 2004 STONOR, Frances The Diabolical Englishman, Faber & Faber, £17.99, September 2004 (... examines the life of John Hawkwood (1320-94) son of a minor Essex landowner and a captain in the Black Prince’s Army, who in 1360 deserted, headed south to Italy and, as Giovanni Acuto, became one of the most successful, clever and reliable mercenary leaders of his time’.) STOPFORD, Jennie Medieval floor tiles of Northern England: pattern and purpose: production between the 13th and 16th centuries, Oxbow Books, £40, September 2004 TABRI, Edward E Political culture in the early Northern Renaissance: the court of Charles the Bold Duke of Burgundy, 1407-1477, Renaissance Studies Series No 7, E Mellen Pr, USA, £69.95, November 2004 TOMAN, Rolf, Gothic: Architecture, Sculpture, Painting, Koenemann, £24.99 August 2004 WALSH, Richard Charles the Bold in Italy 1467-1477: Politics and Personnel, Liverpool Historical Studies No 19, Liverpool Univ. Press, £55, October 2004 WATT, Diane [editor] The Paston Women, Selected Letters, Library of Medieval Women, DS Brewer, pbk, £15.99, November 2004 WHEATLEY, Abigail The idea of the castle in Medieval England, York Medieval Press, £20, November 2004

51


Letter from America dom focusing exclusively on this topic and time period. It is made possible through a bequest from Maryloo Spooner Schallek and is administered on behalf of the Society by the Medieval Academy of America. Application deadlines are February 15 for the $2,000 awards and October 15 for the $30,000 award. Ricardians are encouraged to make eligible students, or faculties with eligible students, aware of this funding opportunity. Additional information, including downloadable application forms, can be found on the Academy's website, http:// www.medievalacademy.org/

First US ‘Dissertation Year’ Awardee Sharon D Michalove, the American Branch’s representative on the Medieval Academy of America’s Schallek Awards Committee, reports: ‘The first recipient of the Schallek Fellowship is Janelle Werner, who is a PhD candidate in the history department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her dissertation director is the distinguished medieval historian Dr Judith Bennett. ‘Ms Werner's dissertation is titled “As long as their sin is privy”: Clerics and Concubines in Late Medieval England, 1375-1558. Focusing her research on the diocese of Hereford, she will use part of the fellowship funds for a research trip to England in the fall of 2005. Her main questions, dealing with clerical concubinage, are: “how did late medieval clerics and laypeople view violations of clerical celibacy?” “how common were clerical unions and what was the nature of long-term clerical relationships?” and “how were the women perceived and treated by their communities, and were they punished more or less harshly than incontinent clerics?”’ ‘The committee was impressed with the scope and ambition of the project as well as by the interesting research questions that Ms Werner is posing, which may totally change our view of this aspect of clerical life in late medieval England as well as on the position of women in clerical households.’ The William B. and Maryloo Spooner Schallek Memorial Graduate Awards are given to North American (US or Canadian) graduate students who focus on later medieval English history and culture. Janelle Warner is the first recipient of the $US 30,000 dissertation year award; the program also includes five $US 2,000 dissertation awards. We believe that this is the largest scholarship program in North America or the United King-

American Branch Tour of Ricardian England, June 18-29 Every year or so, American Branch Ricardian Linda Treybig puts together an intimate tour for branch members and other interested parties. It focuses on Ricardian sites and takes in other historical venues along the way. If you’ve ever had a hankering to meet up with American Ricardians, you might be able to catch them at these ‘ports of call.’ Or, with the current favorable exchange rates, you may find this tour an attractive holiday possibility if space is still available. June 18 – arrive Manchester, coach to the Lake District, recover from jet lag. June 19 – Penrith; drive through Lake District; Levens Hall June 20 – Hadrian’s Wall, Chesterhold (Vindolanda), Brinkburn Priory June 21 – Warkworth Castle; Lindisfarne June 22 – Durham Cathedral; Rievaulx Abbey; York June 23 – York (self-guided) June 24 – Yorkshire Dales: Towton, Lead Chapel, Skipton Castle, Bolton Castle June 25 – Middleham Castle, church of St Mary and St Alkelda, Castle Bolton June 26 – Sandal Castle, Hardwick Hall 52


June 27 – Bosworth and environs: Sutton Cheney, Battlefield Centre, Dadlington Church; Ashby-de-la-Zouch June 28 – Fotheringhay castle and church; Castle Rising; Ely Cathedral June 29 – Cambridge walking tour; Thaxted, return to London. Linda has already arranged for members of some branches and groups to meet up with the tour participants for transatlantic fellow-

ship at several venues. If you’re interested in meeting up with the tour group, her contact information is Linda Treybig, 11813 Erwin Avenue, Cleveland OH 44135, 216-889-9392, treybig@worldnetoh.com. Additional tour details are on the American Branch website at http://www.r3.org/travel/tours/2005/ index.html. Laura Blanchard, Philadelphia PA, USA

The Estate and Household Accounts of William Worsley Dean of St Paul’s Cathedral 1479-1497 Edited by Hannes Kleineke & Stephanie R Hovland In 1495 William Worsley was arrested, along with three other clergymen, for their alleged involvement in the Perkin Warbeck Conspiracy. The background to Worsley’s involvement in the plot remains obscure but he was attainted and placed in the Tower although after only sixteen weeks his attainder was reversed and in June 1495 he was granted a general pardon. Hannes Kleineke and Stephanie Hovland have painstakingly transcribed and presented William Worsley’s accounts and provided an introduction to the life and career of this fascinating cleric. There are biographical details of the individuals mentioned in the accounts, a pedigree, six black-and-white images, glossary, bibliography and index. This latest edition to the catalogue of the Richard III & Yorkist History Trust is now available from Sally Empson, Sales Liaison Officer, 42 Pewsey Vale, Forest Hill, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 9YA at £18 plus £2.50 postage and packing.

‘A fascinating glimpse into the life of this important cleric’ Peter Hammond, Society President 53

Drawing of Dean Worsley’s tomb brass in pre-fire St Paul’s.


Report on Society Events

Christmas at Fotheringhay 2004 and 2005

T

he Society’s 2004 celebration of Christmas at Fotheringhay was another great success, despite numbers being reduced on the day owing to illness - the pre-Christmas cold virus seemed to have been especially virulent this time. Before the service, lunch in the village hall gave us all a good start. Alan Stewart always provides us with a great spread, from the soup to the mince pies, and whilst the hall may not be as historic a venue as the Falcon of old or as decorative as the golf club, it is most definitely a good substitute, and at a very reasonable price. It helps to support the village, too. Acknowledged as a great start to the Christmas season, and based in style upon the historic festival of nine lessons, the service in the church was a mix of traditional and modern, with biblical and poetry readings, Latin and English hymns. The recent innovation of singing “While shepherds watched” to its original tune, better known as “On Ilkley Moor”, has been a great success, and personally, I thought that this year’s service was one of our best ever. The congregation was in good voice, the readers told the Christmas story well and the choir gave a superb performance of a most enjoyable variety of carols in several languages. On behalf of all who were there, I thank everyone who played a part in making the day such a great success. This year, 2005, we are going to move the event to the Saturday in the hope that this will make it more convenient for more people to attend. Certainly, the choir and the church would prefer it. So, look out for the booking form in the Bulletin in September, but in the meantime put Saturday, 10 December, 2005, in your diary for the Society’s Lunch and Christmas Service at Fotheringhay. The great way to begin the festive season with good food, good music and good company - you know it makes sense! Phil Stone Fotheringhay Co-ordinator

Forget-Me-Not Books Out of print and second hand history books, fact and fiction. For my new Spring catalogue please contact: Judith Ridley •

11 Tamarisk Rise

Wokingham • Berkshire • RG40 1WG Email: judith_ridley@hotmail.com

54


Future Society Events Reminders and Late Bookings Requiem Mass and Anne Neville Commemoration The annual Requiem Mass will take place at St Etheldreda’s Church, Holborn, at noon on Saturday 12 March 2005, followed by a buffet and wreath-laying at Westminster Abbey. Full details and booking form in the Winter 2004 Bulletin.

LAST CHANCE – DON’T WAIT ANOTHER THREE YEARS! The Cambridge Conference Friends and Foes: Richard III and the East Anglian Magnates There are still a few places left on the Society’s ninth triennial conference to be held at Queens’ College Cambridge from 15-17 April. The theme of the conference is Richard’s relationship with four of the most important East Anglian families of the second half of the fifteenth century: the Mowbrays, de la Poles, Howards and the de Veres. Apart from an exciting programme and first class speakers, other attractions include:  the opportunity to meet the speakers, other Ricardians and fifteenth-century enthusiasts.  the chance to stay in a college that dates from 1446, and has close associations with Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Neville and Richard III.  time to visit the university city of Cambridge.  Saturday book stalls run by Bennett & Kerr (second-hand books), Oxbow Books (including a selection from Tempus Publishing) and the Society’s own bookstall (which will include our complete range of Society and Trust books).  the refurbishment of the college’s library should also be completed by April and the librarian is hoping to assemble some documents dating back to the late fifteenth century for us to view. Day rates are now available, at £45 per day including dinner on Friday, and lunch on Saturday/Sunday. Please contact me if you would like to know which lectures are on which day. For full details of the conference see page 50 of the Winter Bulletin. If you would like to attend the conference please complete the blue booking form to be found in its centre. However, please note that your booking form should be sent with your payment to Jacqui Emerson at 5 Ripon Drive, Wistaston, Crewe, Cheshire CW2 6SJ and not the address on the booking form. Places are likely to be taken up very quickly so don’t delay in sending in your application. Wendy Moorhen

Bookable Events Medieval Colchester Visit – 4 June 2005 Did you know: That Richard III visited Colchester (as duke of Gloucester)? That John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, lived in Colchester? That Viscount Lovel took sanctuary at St John’s Abbey, Colchester, after the battle of Bosworth? That John de la Pole described himself as Richard III’s heir on his seal? This visit will allow me to share the results of both some of my PhD research and some of the work I am engaged in at Colchester Castle Museum. The programme for the day is: 55


11.00 12.15 14.00 15.00

Guided walk round fifteenth-century Colchester Free time for lunch Visit to St John’s Abbey Gatehouse Opportunity to examine fifteenth-century seals at the museum resources centre.

The visit will begin at the War Memorial in Colchester. Colchester is easily accessible by train from London (Liverpool Street – about 50 minutes). Please note that while all are welcome to the morning walk, places for the afternoon visit are limited, as the museum resources centre is a small building. Early booking is therefore advised. Please complete the booking form in the centre pages of this edition of the Bulletin. John Ashdown-Hill

Day visit to Hertford Castle and Hatfield House – Saturday 21 May 2005 This visit comprises a guided tour of Hertford Castle in the morning combined with a visit to Hatfield House in the afternoon. The cost of the visit is £22.00 per person. This includes the coach, the cost of the guided tour and the entrance fee to Hatfield House, also the driver’s tip and administration costs. There is little of the original Hertford Castle which dates back to the 11th Century but the modern building is still used as Council Offices and parts of this date from the 18th Century. It is still possible to make out Edward IV’s coat of arms which is over the main entrance to the Castle. There are also the Castle grounds which we will also see during our guided tour. Hatfield House is probably best known as being the childhood home of Elizabeth I and still remains in the Cecil family. As well as the house there are extensive grounds. The itinerary for the day is:09:00 Coach leaves Embankment. 10:30 Guided tour of Hertford Castle. (approx. 1½ hours) 12:00 Own arrangements for lunch. 13:30 Leave Hertford for Hatfield House. (Group admission) 17:30 Leave Hatfield House for return journey to London. Those coming by their own transport meet at Hertford Castle at 10:30 a.m. for start of tour. Parking in Hertford is at the multi-storey car park in Gascoyne Way (unfortunately wherever you park you have to pay), the car park in St Andrew Street or Bircherley Green shopping centre. A map will be enclosed with the information sent to you nearer the time. If you want to join us on this visit please complete the booking form in the centre pages of this edition of the Bulletin. Carolyn West

Saturday 11 June: Event to Commemorate 25th anniversary of Croydon Group and 10th anniversary of the death of Joyce Melhuish The event will take place on Saturday 11 June, from 11.00, with lunch at 12 noon, at Seaford Church Hall, Seaford, Sussex. It will include tea/coffee on arrival, lunch, comprising a cold buffet of salmon, cold meats, salad, dessert and wine, at a cost of £7. There will be a raffle, craft stall, and guided tours of the historic twelfth-century church and other period buildings. It will be an opportunity for a Ricardian get-together, and will be in aid of the Ricardian Churches Restoration Fund. Tickets £7 in advance available from: Mrs R Linsell, 59, Sherwood Road, Seaford, East Sussex, BN25 3ED. Travel directions will be supplied with bookings: Seaford can be reached by train from London, changing at Lewes. If you would like to attend this event, please complete the booking form in the centre pages of this edition of the Bulletin. Shirley Linsell Continued on page 63 56


Branches and Groups New Group Shirley and Roy Linsell are seeking to form a Group in East Sussex, and would welcome contact from members interesting in being involved: Mr and Mrs R Linsell, 59 Sherwood Road, Seaford, East Sussex BN25 3ED. Tel. 01323 891910

Change of contact details Edinburgh Group: Philippa Langley, 85 Barnton Park Avenue, Edinburgh. EH4 6HD. Tel. 0131 336 4669

Continental Group Report of the Meeting of the Continental Group on Saturday 6 November 2004 in D-Oberems/Taunus Long distances and organisation problems prevented Continental Ricardians from getting together since 2000, but this year we were able to meet again. That was a good thing to face, according to old times. The result was maybe not a complete re-activation of the Group in its past form, but new ideas were introduced, giving a chance for a new way with activities we are able to afford in the future, and with the already mentioned problems a Group like ours has to live with. But of course Richard keeps us together and this is the most important reason for what we do. An old Richard sympathiser, Kevin Buckley from England, was our guest and we all enjoyed having him with us. As usual in the past we met again in the Taunus mountains. The day started with a little service in the protestant village church at eleven o’clock. As usual we decorated the altar and the little choir with Richard’s portrait, fresh white roses, candles, etc. The service was celebrated by the former vicar of Oberems, Pfaffer Eckhart Seifert. Both languages were used in text and song and of course Richard’s prayer from his Book of Hours. The service ended with Martin Luther’s famous composition A Mighty Stronghold is Our Lord. After lunch at Rita’s home the meeting began there at 2.00 p.m. The most important decisions that we made were that in one year we hold our meetings and in the next we meet for day or weekend trips to places, exhibitions or similar events of historical interest. If necessary, we discuss group matters during this time. A change of our bank account had to be decided after our old one became too expensive to run, but we found a good alternative. We continue to publish two smaller magazines or newsletters each year, we run our library with our experienced librarian Gabi Unverferth from Dortmund, and we reduce the membership subscription for singles and students from 10 to 5 Euros. We might organise another trip for the next Landshut festival in 2009 and will of course welcome fellow Ricardians to share that event with us. As it now seems, we can return to our second meeting place, the Trappist Abbey of Tegelen in Limburg province in Holland. In 1998 the Convent’s guest house had to be closed, but we kept in touch and recently received the good news that the guest house had opened again and that we can return to the nice old abbey for our meetings. So in 2006 we cross the border and continue to meet in Holland – what a great pleasure. The meeting ended with a proper meal in our local restaurant ‘Deutsches Haus’ well known to us from former meetings. Seasonal menus such as venison and roast goose were served along with a good wine and a toast to Richard. Everything tasted absolutely delicious. Late at night that marvellous day ended and we look forward to the next one and of course to our other activities. Rita Diefenhardt-Schmitt 57


Edinburgh and Lothian Court [2004] Firstly, our very grateful thanks go to Stuart Akers for his exhaustive work over the past two years having taken on board not only the responsibility of our ‘Court Journal’ but also that of secretary. Thank you to Stuart for being the glue that has kept us together over this time. With the visit of the Society imminent in June 2005 we thought that the readers of the Bulletin might be interested to read about our most exciting weekend of 2004 when we not only welcomed Dr Michael K. Jones back to Edinburgh for a talk entitled ‘Richard III as a Military Commander’ but also completed a full week-end of visits based on ‘Ricardian Scotland’. We began on a bitter February morning with the north wind blowing as only it can in Scotland and met up outside the ancient and gothic St Giles’ Cathedral in the Royal Mile, Edinburgh. Marilyn came from Argyll, Juliet from Perthshire, Margaret from Fife, Doug from Kent, Dave and Wendy from York, Stuart from Peebles, Johanna from Rotterdam, Dr Jones from London, and myself and Dave Fiddimore with two new members from Edinburgh – Muriel and Alexander. Our first stop was the Old Parliament House where Richard spoke to the Scottish nobles in 1482. Its site (as it no longer exists) is marked with brass cobblestones that are located just outside the main door of St. Giles’ Cathedral. The Old Parliament House (or Old Tollbooth as it became known) was knocked down in 1817 but if you wish to see its dark stones they still exist in a building that stands at the corner of Trafalgar Street and Trafalgar Lane in Leith that is known locally as the gaol building. Interestingly the door and padlock were taken by Sir Walter Scott and re-erected at his home at Abbotsford in the Scottish borders, should you also wish to see them. A lovely description of this famous building comes from the Scottish historian Robert Chalmers, ‘At the north-west corner of St Giles’s church, and almost in the very centre of a crowded street, stood this tall, narrow, antique, and gloomy-looking pile, with its black stanchioned windows opening through its dingy walls, like the aperture of a hearse, and having its western gable penetrated by a hole which occasionally served for the projection of a gallows.’ Lovely! Our next stop was just around the corner (and thankfully indoors) at the National Library of Scotland where the rare books department had kindly organised a private viewing of the Chronicle of Fabian. Having Dr Jones with us led to much discussion on the scribbled notes along its margins, as did the viewing of the old maps of a very different and smelly Edinburgh that Richard would have seen – one of open, running sewers for streets. We then returned to St Giles for a guided tour and although they could give us no certain proof that Richard had actually visited this grand old place of worship we agreed that it was most likely due not only to its close proximity to the Old Parliament House but also because of its ‘Albany Chapel’ and the fact that it had been made a Collegiate church in 1476. A must–see for all those coming to Edinburgh, as is the Scottish Parliament House (c.1600) that is situated just behind St. Giles and now forms the law courts with one of the finest examples of a renaissance hall in Scotland (open to the public during the week) complete with roaring log fires, oak-beamed roof, portraits of the great and good, and advocates going hither and thither in black gowns and wigs. On the following day, we set off for Berwick-upon-Tweed for a talk with local historian, Jim Herbert, on the castle and how it was likely to have been besieged by Richard, using a fabulous reconstruction, as it would have been in medieval times. An interesting fact for those of you coming by train to Edinburgh is that when you stop at Berwick you are actually stopping in the Great Hall of Berwick Castle itself – the hall that Richard would have surely walked in. Of course, nothing is left of it today bar a few stones but should a train ever be caught in a time warp there surely many brave medieval men-at-arms would be seen running for their lives from such a monstrous steel monster. During the talk Jim went on to tell us about the local tradition that King Richard camped his men (and knighted those such as Tyrell) at Hutton Field, some ten miles away. At a later date Stuart went and visited the area and the laird of Hutton Castle only to discover that there was no tradition that they knew of and after some discussion they thought it 58


highly unlikely as it was perhaps too far away to launch and control a siege. Perhaps time may yield more information about the elusive Hutton Field. After Jim’s fascinating talk we were then taken on a tour of 1482 Berwick, or at least what remains of it, and, entering a small terraced house, we were told that we would not be disappointed with what we were about to see and boy were they right. Going through the house we came out into the small garden and onto a site that was simply breathtaking. There we were standing hundreds of feet high upon the remains of the inner southwest wall of the castle with its view that stretched outwards over much of the existing outer wall of the castle and the entire plain of the Tweed. In that single moment, we all had more than an idea of what it must have been like to have been standing guard on those very walls and watching as Richard and the massed English army drew closer and closer. Our grand finale came in the grounds of Lennoxlove House, near Haddington where we walked the virgin land known as ‘Belvedere’ that was originally a Roman camp and where Richard also camped his army in 1482. As we walked the land it became clear just what a good choice this was. As Dr Jones pointed out, it was not only higher than the surrounding area so therefore quite easily defendable but it was also very close to the fortified tower of Lennoxlove (as it existed in Richard’s time) so also afforded an ideal and relatively comfortable stopping-off point for Richard and his captains. Walking the land, which is now quite heavily wooded, it was more than a little eerie and dark and foreboding, and a local tradition still says that on wet and windy nights you can hear the screams of the English soldiers who died there. The following comes from the Lennoxlove records themselves: ‘Belvedere as it is known is on the hill about 200 yards to the rear of the house. This hill was used as a quarry for the house and also as a camp for the army of Richard III of England, then Duke of Gloucester, in his invasion of 1482 … During the ownership of the late Major William Baird three stone cists were dug up from the side of the quarry. Unfortunately, these are no longer extant, but they have been thought to have been the coffins of soldiers who had died of plague on the 1482 English expedition.’ One final note for Lennoxlove and those of you coming to visit it in June – a portrait exists there of ‘Henry VII’ but, as Doug Weeks pointed out, it is clearly (to us anyway) a portrait of Henry VI. Doug wrote to Lennoxlove and queried their ‘Henry VII’ but to no avail. They firmly believe that it is the victor of Bosworth and we have to say, we do believe they are wrong. Have a look and let us know what you think. Philippa Langley

Gloucestershire Branch Having completed a successful winter programme we are all now looking forward to a very busy Spring and Summer schedule of activities [see details below]. During the winter the Bristol Group Christmas Dinner was particularly popular. The Castle Inn at Castle Combe in Wiltshire proved an excellent venue and location. The village is relatively ‘remote’, compact and comprises primarily buildings of the fifteenth century. The Castle was very festively and tastefully decorated and extended both a very hospitable welcome and fine cuisine – all-in-all the perfect start to Christmas! This could be a regular venue for future years. Future Programme Saturday 12 March ‘The Newport Medieval Ship’ Audio/visual presentation by Bob Trett from Gwent Archaeology on this key maritime discovery as featured in the recent television programme. Could this ship have served as part of Warwick the Kingmaker’s fleet? [Branch] Please note the later date for this meeting. This is to allow members to attend the ‘Wars of the Roses’ Symposium at Oxford which occurs on the previous weekend. 59


Friday 18 March Saturday 2 April Saturday 7 May Saturday 20 May Saturday 4 June Saturday 18 June Saturday 2 July

‘Edward IV – was he illegitimate?’ Video and debate on the recent assertions made by Michael Jones. [Bristol Group] ‘Ludlow connections and the death of Prince Arthur’ Talk by Mickie O’Neill [Branch] Field Visit to Wales: Glendower connections - Kentchurch Court etc. Details to be finalised [Branch] Field Visit – ‘The Three Castles’: visit to Skenfrith, White Castle [Llantilo] and Grosmont. [Bristol Group] Field Visit - Medieval Worcester: the cathedral and environs. Details to be finalised. [Branch] Field Visit - The Churches of North Herefordshire and South Shropshire. Conducted visit led by Mickie O'Neill. [Bristol Group] ‘Misericords’ - Illustrated talk by Peggy Martin [Branch]

Please note: during May we are also planning to spend a day in Medieval Coventry. This will include looking at medieval buildings and a private visit to view medieval civic records (including a letter from Richard III to the City Council requesting a supply of horses!) The event will be held in conjunction with the Tewkesbury Battlefield Society and full details will be available shortly. Additional items may also be ‘squeezed’ in so please keep in touch at Branch or Group level to ensure you remain up-to-date with ongoing plans. Keith Stenner

Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire Group Report We have had a busy and fruitful year with a programme balanced as usual between home meetings, local visits, lectures and all-day excursions. Locally we braved a City Ghost Walk, toured Southwell Minster, and visited Holme Pierrepont Hall, a beautifully warm redbrick, fifteenth-century mansion guided by Robin Brackenbury whose family have lived there for more than four hundred years. Further afield we visited the marvellous Gothic Art for England exhibition at the V & A and made a journey into the North Country taking in the wonderful peace of Rievaulx Abbey (those monks certainly knew where to settle) and to Scarborough Castle. Apart from the obvious lure of paddling in the sea (well, I got my feet wet!) we were fascinated to find that we were there exactly five hundred and twenty five years to the day from Richard's visit, when he went to inspect and oversee the building of a new jetty in the harbour. In August, Broughton Castle was jewel-like in its green Oxfordshire setting, a glorious backdrop for many scenes in the Oscar winning film Shakespeare in Love. Quite a thrill to stand where Colin Firth stood! – and Joseph Fiennes is in fact a distant relation of the family who have lived there since Elizabethan times. Our planned talk on The Greys of Bradgate had to be cancelled due to the speaker’s illness, but Jean Townsend of the Lincolnshire Branch kindly stepped into the breach to give us ‘The Death of Kings’, an excellent overview of royal mortality from the Tudors onward. We generally try to have two talks a year and our second was really an on-site, on-the-move affair. With the knowledgeable guidance of Jill Campbell and Mike Cox we trudged the muddy length of East Stoke Battlefield, seeing the Burran Stone, the local church and both ends of the infamous ‘Red Gutter’, an unexpectedly high ridge with a deep track now densely covered in undergrowth. Despite this, it was still impressive to look down that steep slope and imagine the treacherous footing as the fleeing Yorkists slipped downwards on the bodies and blood of their fallen companions. Home meetings have been slightly more mundane with our annual book & bric-a-brac sale, quizzes and videos, but one very successful one was an afternoon of Medieval Cookery, swap60


ping recipes and tasting home-made examples such as date and honey sweetmeats, wonderful flavoured bread, and even my own cheese and mushroom pasties were well received. Finally at our Midwinter Fuddle and Quiz, after last year’s Medieval Call My Bluff, we again contrived a new twist on an old theme – wait for it – Ricardian Bingo! We had cards differently printed with various characters in the Richard story and then names were pulled out randomly from a container as in normal Bingo. It was a refreshing change to have an activity that depended on luck rather than a good memory or deep academic knowledge. Our only problem was whether to shout out ‘House!’ or ‘Castle!’ I can supply further details if anyone wants to use the game for their own activities. Plans for this year include the Nottingham Galleries of Justice (I understand there is a medieval section to the tour), Grafton Regis, Raby Castle and a talk by Ann Wroe on Perkin Warbeck. Details are to be found in our Itinerary which I can send to any interested member – you’d be very welcome to join us for one or all of the events; we’re slightly scatty but we don't bite! Anne Ayres

Worcestershire Branch We have had a good end to 2004, visiting the Shakespeare Centre at Stratford-upon-Avon, which was specially opened for us on a Saturday afternoon, and where we had a talk by Dr Susan Brock on the staging of Shakespeare’s Richard III through the ages by the RSC. This was followed by an excellent tea as well as a chance to see a first folio edition of Shakespeare’s plays, as well as some of the centre’s other early books, including a copy of Holinshed’s chronicles. In October we had a business meeting, followed by three short talks by members on various subjects, and in December we had our Christmas lunch at Holy Innocents Church hall in Kidderminster with thirty-four people present. Future Programme 12 March Quiz at Beoley 9 April AGM and chance to browse the branch library, at Holy Innocents Church Hall, Kidderminster 14 April Guided Tour of Ludlow Castle Jane Tinklin

Yorkshire Branch The Branch’s December meeting usually takes the form of a pre-Christmas get-together with members bringing ‘medieval’ (or approximate) dishes. Several of us met this time at our secretary Moira Habberjam’s and enjoyed good food, drink and conversation. During the evening we took part in a challenging ‘Picture Quiz’, where one of the questions asked us to identify some famous fifteenth-century people only from their pictured hands. One of us remains convinced that Margaret of York was actually Henry VI – well, have you ever seen them together? On 30 December we went to Sandal, to commemorate the Battle of Wakefield with a brief act of remembrance at the Duke of York’s statue in Manygates Lane followed by a visit to the castle. We are grateful to Sheffield member, Pauline Pogmore, who again provided an arrangement of flowers to be placed by the statue. This year the weather was milder than in 2003, but the party was still glad of refreshments at the castle Visitor Centre and an opportunity to talk about the battle (if the word can be used for such a hurried and muddled disaster) in comfort. Contact numbers for the various Yorkshire Groups may be found on page 54 of the Winter 2004 Bulletin. Members living in the Airedale or Leeds area are welcome to contact me about local monthly meetings in the spring. We have a talk on medieval boats scheduled for June and an evening trip to Skipton (with supper) in July. 61


May I remind members that our annual Branch Spring Lecture will take place on Saturday 19 March at 2.00 pm at the Leeds City Art Gallery. Dr Ann Wroe will speak on ‘Perkin Warbeck: who was he?’ All members and friends are welcome. On Sunday 20 March (Palm Sunday) the usual commemoration of the Battle of Towton will be held at Towton Hall, with guided walks of the battlefield and re-enactments by various groups including the Towton Battlefield Society. Events start about 10.00 – 10.30 am. New Branch merchandise, available from our Treasurer Christine Symonds, includes laminated bookmarks (only 50 pence each) showing a range of full colour drawings of Ricardian castles or King Richard and his principal supporters. Ideal for keeping your place in your copy of Michael Jones’ or Ann Wroe’s book! In connection with purchases, please note the Treasurer’s new email address: cjsymonds@blueyonder.co.uk. Angela Moreton

New Members UK 1 October 2004 – 31 December 2004 Catherine Aitken, Bournemouth Jane Beckley, Farnborough Nigel Birch, Rotherham Peter Brown, Richmond Samantha Brown, Weybridge Deborah Brown, London Lynn Buckley, Matlock Fiona Collier, Salisbury Mrs SL Cottrill, Worcester Helen Cox, Doncaster Simon Craig, Newcastle-on-Tyne Anthony Davis, Market Harborough David Evans, Bristol

Ian Fraser, Leeds Kathryn Green, Manchester Vicki Hadfield, Chesterfield Isobel Hunt, Mitcheldean Christine Kirby, Great Bookham Diana Newhill, Blackpool Marian Owens, Portland John Price, London Niamh Riordain, London Richard Shattock, Bangor Ann Smith, Sevonoaks Graham Thomas, Stocksbridge

Overseas 1 October 2004 – 31 December 2004 Mrs S Du Plessis, Vanwyks Dorp, S. Africa Isabel Gortazar, Barcelona, Spain

Angela Mcdermott, NSW, Australia

US Branch 1 October 2004 – 31 December 2004 Margaret R Adams, Massachusetts Victoria Ives Adamson, Texas Barbara & Sarah Ayars, Illinois Kristin Canzano, New Jersey Kimberly Klane Dallas, Indiana Mary Jane Dodds, Wisconsin Wendy J Eager, NewYork Robert L Felix, South Carolina Barbara Fleisher, Maryland Maureen & Matt Giles, Virginia Shawn M Herron, Kentucky Karen Hiatt, California

Lorelle J Hunt, California Laura K Johnson, Iowa Barbara Lashmet, Arizona Raymond Long, Connecticut Marion Low, California Erika Millen, Indiana Theresa Mueller, New York Victoria Pitman, Oregon Stuart Rice, South Dakota Bettina Ortiz Rini, West Virginia Steven B Rogers, Washington Cynthia Tonkin, Illinois 62


Obituaries Vera Legg We are very sad to report the death of Vera Legg on 28 October 2004. Vera was a founder member in 1971 of the recently disbanded Kent Branch, and went on to become Chairlady and later President of the Branch. She was instrumental along with many others in having the stained glass window dedicated to the House of York installed in Fotheringhay Church. From the early 1970s when the idea was first suggested Vera worked tirelessly to raise funds for the window to be installed, and this was brought to a successful conclusion with the dedication ceremony in March 1975. Vera was a very private person, a kind and compassionate member of the Society and of our Branch. She steered the Kent Branch through some difficult times, always ready with advice and help. Through her knowledge of Richard III and the Plantagenet times Vera provided quizzes and talks at our meetings to the enjoyment of all. I am sure all ex-Kent Branch members will join with us in conveying our sincere sympathy to Vera’s family. We will remember her with affection. Joan and Alf Daniels

Jack Leslau Sad news at the passing of Jack Leslau on 6 December 2004 after a final two and a half month illness. I am sure that those who knew him will agree that it was only his spirit that kept him searching for his goal that kept him with us for so long. Although never a member of the Society, many members would have known Jack from his articles in our publications and the responses they generated (perhaps a reprint would be a fitting tribute to the over a quarter of a century’s work that he shared with us?) plus talks to branches and groups with performances of his play ‘The Debt’ too, and television appearances. Jack was certainly a ‘larger than life’ character, once met, never forgotten. His theories will go on, strengthened by a team of academics (Jack was self taught) he had placed in waiting to take over. Hopefully one day this will bring final proof. Doug Weeks

Future Society Events Continued from page 56

Forthcoming Event The Norwich Study Day The Norfolk Branch of the Society presents: ‘Knighthood and Battle – the Hundred Years’ War and the Wars of the Roses’, 12 November 2005, at the Assembly House, Theatre Street, Norwich. Cost: £16.00. Speakers to include Dr Michael K. Jones and Prof. Anne Curry. Full programme and booking form in the Summer issue of the Bulletin. If you wish to book in advance please telephone: Annmarie Hayek on 01603-664012. NB the raffle at the 2004 Study Day raised £40.00 for the Ricardian Churches Restoration Fund Annmarie Hayek 63


Calendar We run a calendar of all forthcoming events: if you are aware of any events of Ricardian interest, whether organised by the Society - Committee, Visits Team, Research Committee, 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

12 March

Requiem Mass, St Etheldreda’s, Buffet and Wreath laying Westminster Abbey

Visits Committee See page 55

19 March

Yorkshire Branch Annual Lecture - Dr Ann Wroe ‘Perkin Warbeck: who was he?’

Yorkshire Branch See page 62

20 March

Towton Battle Commemoration

Yorkshire Branch See page 62

15-17 April

Cambridge Triennial Conference, Queens’ College, Cambridge

Research Officer See page 55

21 May

Visit to Hertford Castle and Hatfield House

Visits Committee See page 55

4 June

Repeat visit to Colchester, St John’s Abbey Gatehouse Visits Committee medieval seals See page 55

11 June

Croydon Group 25th anniversary / Joyce Melhuish Commemorative Event, Seaford, Sussex

2005

See page 56

29 June-5 July Visit to Scotland

Visits Committee

20 August

Bosworth commemoration – Leicester, service, plaque unveiling, tea

Visits Committee

September Date to be confirmed

Week-end visit to Mechelen for ‘City in Female Hands: Women of Distinction’ including Margaret of York and Margaret of Austria

1 October

AGM and Members’ Day, English Heritage Lecture Theatre, Savile Row, London

12 November

Norwich Study Day - ‘Knighthood and Battle - the Hundred Years’ War and the Wars of the Roses’

Norfolk Branch See page 63

10 December

Fotheringhay Nine Lessons and Carols and Lunch

Fotheringhay CoOrdinator

64


2005 03 spring bulletin