murreyandblue

A great WordPress.com site

Archive for the tag “Battle of Bosworth”

A Song for the Stanleys

On the battlefield of Towton

We were rearmost of the rear

We were tasked to guard the baggage

And to keep the exits clear

But when the foe was vanquished

And ran away in frantic fear

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We showed them we’re the bold Stanleys

 

When King Edward crossed the Channel

To take the Frenchies by the throat

We were last men at the muster

And we nearly missed the boat

But when Louis offered friendship

With big pensions and fat bribes

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We showed them we’re the bold Stanleys

 

At Bosworth we were wary,

And avoided either pack

We considered prompt withdrawal

As things were looking rather black

But when we saw a golden moment

To stab our sovereign in the back

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We charged right in (We charged right in)

We showed him we’re the bold Stanleys

Advertisements

The history of Sandal Castle, and Richard’s place in its past….

Sandal Castle in about 1300

Here is an article about Sandal Castle, and Richard’s place in its history.

A new interpretation of 1580s events

We all know that Mary Stuart was beheaded at Fotheringhay on 8 February 1587 and that the Spanish Armada sailed to facilitate a Catholic invasion of England in the following year, leaving Lisbon on 28 May and fighting naval battles in late July, at Plymouth and Portland. The traditional view is that Mary Stuart’s execution and Elizabeth I’s support for the revolt in the Spanish Netherlands provoked Phillip II’s wrath.

It is quite possible that this was not the case and that Phillip had

sought to overthrow his quondam sister-in-law much earlier. Mary, as the daughter of Marie de Guise and widow of Francis II was the French-backed Catholic candidate for the English throne and Franco-Spanish rivalry ensured that Phillip, great nephew of Catherine of Aragon and a Lancastrian descendant proper+, would not act in concert with any of her plots; however her death cleared the way for him, especially as the French Wars of Religion were still to resolve themselves.

We can compare this with the England of 1685-8, as William of Orange allowed the Duke of Monmouth to attempt an invasion first and only asserted his stronger semi-marital claim against James VII/II afterwards. In 1483-5, by contrast, the Duke of Buckingham was legitimately descended from Edward III when he rebelled against Richard III, only for Henry “Tudor”, of dubious lineage, to benefit.

h/t Jeanne Griffin

+ See The Wars of The Roses, Ashdown-Hill, part 4.

Medieval murder at Richard’s Red Tower in York….

The Red Tower

Here is a tale of how a 15th-century trade dispute in York got out of hand, and for once Richard isn’t getting the blame!

The following extract is from here:

“A building in York, which was once the scene of a medieval murder over a trade dispute during its construction 500 years ago, is set to be transformed into a brand new café and community hub.

“Croft Farm Construction is carrying out the refurbishment of the Grade-I Listed, The Red Tower, near Navigation Road, York.

“The building was part-funded by King Richard III, before his death at Bosworth Field in 1485, and later completed by his successor as the only section of the city’s medieval walls built from brick rather than magnesian limestone.”

Aha, and therein lies the murderous rub, as becomes clear here :

“The construction of the original building was part-funded by King Richard III before his death at Bosworth Field in 1485, and later completed by his successor Henry VII. As the only section of the city’s walls built from brick rather than magnesian limestone, the brick tower did not please local stonemasons, [who were] unhappy that tilers were asked to build the property.

“The tilers sought protection from the city council to stop masons threatening them and breaking their tools. In 1491, a tiler, John Patrik was murdered. Two masons, York’s Master Mason, William Hindley, and an accomplice, Christopher Homer, were charged with murder but later acquitted.”

So it appears that the Red Tower’s red bricks caused a mini-war between tilers and stonemasons in York. Oh dear, at least these days disputes seldom, if ever, reach the point of murder!

I hope the Red Tower approves of its future as a café and community hub. Only if the conversion is spot-on, I imagine. Nothing garish and too bright will do in such surroundings.

 

 

 

Richard III’s lost queen….

Ann and Richard - Rous Roll

What follows is a word-for-word opinion of Anne Neville, and Richard’s attitude/feelings for her. I make no comment, the article by Elizabeth Jane Timms speaks for itself.

“Amidst the chronicle of lost tombs at Westminster Abbey is that of Queen Anne Neville, wife of King Richard III. Queen Anne’s invisibility in these terms underlines the purported neglect on behalf of Richard III; this lack of a memorial was rectified however when a bronze plaque was placed to Queen Anne’s memory at Westminster Abbey, in an attempt to redress this act of historical forgetting. The fact though that no memorial existed to Queen Anne Neville up until the 20th century meant that whatever hope there had been in establishing the exact location of where she was buried, was slim, given the fact that her tomb is generally described as ‘lost’. This also added to the sense of mystery which already surrounded Queen Anne’s death.

“Instead of Richard III, it is Henry VII – who won victory over the former at the great Battle of Bosworth in 1485 and is remembered at Westminster Abbey. His legacy to it is most apparent in the magnificent Henry VII Chapel. All of Henry VIII’s (legitimate) children are also buried in the Abbey, thus as branches of the Tudor rose, which the marriage of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York helped to create through the union of the two hitherto warring dynasties. Henry VII’s spouse, Queen Elizabeth of York – who Richard III seems to have regarded as a possible wife after Queen Anne’s death, no doubt in an effort to neutralise the threat his niece represented to him as the undoubted Yorkist heir – lies in glory, in the tomb created for her and Henry VII by the great sculptor Pietro Torrigiano. Queen Anne Neville by contrast, lay technically ‘forgotten’ at Westminster Abbey until 1960.

“Queen Anne Neville also does not share a tomb with King Richard III, whose skeleton was, of course, discovered under a car park in Leicester, once the site of the Grey Friars church where his body, ‘pierced with numerous and deadly wounds’, was buried after Bosworth and – subsequently reburied at Leicester Cathedral in 2015. This was done, however, due to Leicester’s proximity to Market Bosworth, as opposed to any statement on the royal marriage; Richard III was simply buried alone because of the battle. By the time of Bosworth, he had not remarried after the death of Queen Anne. The tomb that was erected for King Richard in the church’s choir was paid for by Henry VII; posthumous respect for a King who had fought ‘like a most brave and valiant prince’, as even those who were not sympathetic to Richard acknowledged. The body of Richard III was of huge importance to Henry VII because it underlined his victory at Bosworth, proclaimed his new dynasty and proved that the last Plantagenet King was indeed, dead.

“Henry’s own claim to the throne was understandably one about which he was extremely sensitive, as we can see from his attitude towards both the young Earl of Warwick and pretenders such as Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck; he was, however, keen to stress that his own right to the Crown rested on a divine right won at Bosworth, as opposed to simply through the Yorkist heiress, Princess Elizabeth. Elizabeth, of course, had a far stronger claim to the English throne than his own, for which reason she had to be rendered submissive to his authority; she could have been his greatest threat – instead, she became his wife – but that fact was obviously never forgotten by King Henry.

“Some short time before Queen Anne Neville’s death, she and King Richard lost their only son. Indeed, this was a strange turn of events, given the fact that Richard III was widely supposed to have had Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, the historical ‘Princes in the Tower’, murdered, and now had lost his own ‘heir male’, for which reason it was easy to understand why a superstitious age might have ascribed this to God’s will, to avenge Queen Elizabeth Woodville, their mother. Queen Anne’s son, Edward of Middleham, died on 9 April 1484; cutting off Richard III’s direct line like this, meant that Elizabeth of York remained the true heiress in many minds, despite Richard’s Act of 1484, the Titulus Regius, which had declared her illegitimate. We may believe though, the descriptions of the Croyland Chronicle when it described Queen Anne and Richard III ‘almost bordering on madness by reason of their sudden grief’; it was alluded to in Richard’s reburial service in 2015. In parallel, we might be reminded of the scene when the news that the two Princes were thought to have been killed by order of the King, was broken to their mother, Queen Elizabeth Woodville, who ‘shriek[ed]… struck her breast, tore and pulled out her hair’ (Alison Weir, Elizabeth of York, Pg  105, 2013).

“Perhaps it was the death of her son, which weakened Queen Anne Neville; we simply do not know. It is possible that grief may have debilitated her nervous system, making her more susceptible to a medieval infection. The grief could have brought a closeness between the King and Queen – instead, we read in the Croyland Chronicle, that the King ‘shunned her bed’ (Ibid, Pg 127). The ‘Chronicler’ further reported that Queen Anne fell ‘extremely sick’ several days after Christmas; common opinion had it that the cause was tuberculosis. Croyland emphasises the ‘wound in the Queen’s breast for the loss of her son’ when referring to Christmas, 1484 (Ibid, Pg 121).

“We know little about Queen Anne Neville, even her appearance is elusive – but then, Richard III’s reign was of course, short. She features in the famous Rous Roll, illustrated on several occasions. Richard III’s marriage to Anne – the widow of Prince Edward of Lancaster – was likely to have been one borne out of political strategy because of the mighty Warwick lands which she brought with her as a daughter of the great Richard Neville, Warwick the Kingmaker. However, Anne was also Richard’s cousin, so perhaps he chose a girl he knew, as well as understanding what she would bring with her. A papal dispensation had been granted for Anne Neville’s marriage to her Yorkist cousin, Richard. Their wedding took place – fittingly, in the light of Anne’s missing tomb – at Westminster. Anne was crowned with Richard on 6 July 1483; the King and Queen walked on red cloth from Westminster Hall to Westminster Abbey. Lady Margaret Beaufort – mother of the future Henry VII – carried the Queen’s train (Ibid, Pg 102).

“Queen Anne died on 16 March 1485 – five months before the massively decisive Battle of Bosworth; she died ‘upon the day of a great eclipse of the sun’ (Ibid, Pg 128). On 22 March, less than ten days later, Richard III had sent an envoy to begin negotiations for a Portuguese marriage; this again was not a comment on his own personal feelings for Queen Anne Neville. Richard III would have been desperately aware of the fact that he had to maintain a tight grip on his throne and replace the son that had so recently died because his direct branch of the Plantagenet dynasty could die after him. After the Queen’s death, vicious rumour bussed about that the King had had her poisoned, but historically, there is no evidence for this. More importantly, these rumours show that the King was thought capable of such a thing, as he had been believed to have murdered the two Princes, so the attestation is valuable for how Richard may have been regarded by recent posterity. Although admittedly, this was a posterity in which Tudor propaganda was a powerful tool, as subsequent portraits of Richard which have been later tampered with, have shown. Any physical ‘deformity’ of Richard III would have been viewed significantly in an age when this was thought to be reflective of character; Richard III – as his skeleton shows – suffered from scoliosis, but apparently no – Shakespearean – withered arm.

“It was indeed a far cry from another Queen Anne by another King Richard; Queen Anne of Bohemia was greatly loved by Richard II, who was utterly distraught by her death from plague in 1394. They share a tomb at Westminster Abbey with clasping hands. There is nothing like this for Queen Anne Neville and Richard III.

“Queen Anne was believed to have been buried on the south side of the altar, according to the Victorian cataloguer of the Abbey’s monuments, A. P Stanley, Dean of Westminster, in his book Historical Memorials of Westminster Abbey. The grave is unmarked, and the plaque instead commemorates the Queen herself. Westminster Abbey states that she was buried in this location, in front of the ‘Sedilia’, or chairs for the priests. It may have been exposed when Sir George Gilbert Scott was making preparations for his new High Altar in the late 19th century.

“A stained glass window exists in Cardiff Castle, depicting Anne Neville next to one of Richard III.

Anne and Richard - Cardiff Castle

“The bronze plaque in the south ambulatory to Queen Anne Neville was erected at the behest of the Richard III Society, bearing a quotation from the Rous Roll (‘full gracious’) and her heraldic shield is topped by a crown. It is the primary memorial that exists to an – almost – forgotten queen.”

©Elizabeth Jane Timms, 2018

 

Back to life

 

IMG_2346

I can hear the clash of swords and halberds

I see him, he will be mine

I go straight towards my target

I need to do it for my people, my kingdom, myself

nothing is lost yet.

My horse runs, the drum in my chest beats fast

my breath warms my face under the helmet,

this is my moment.

The noises of the battle are roaring for me

my knights are ready

the White Boar will win.  Again.

Suddenly my horse stops, I fall down

I need to fight on my feet.

Soldiers  are waiting for me in the storm of the battle

They look at me, I look in their eyes

but hatred and rage burn

I can see the fire of treason.

Alone.  I feel alone

the clash of swords and halberds is upon me now.

I fight with all my strength against my assailants.

Something enters my body,

I feel the acute pain of metal in my flesh

I am falling, my helmet is lost, nothing can save me now.

All is lost.

The White Rose is losing his petals,

something warm and red is covering my face

I can taste blood in my mouth

the White Boar can’t win anymore

treachery is murdering him.

My crown is lost, my kingdom is lost, life is abandoning me.

Oh Lord, save my soul.

Silence and darkness.

The noises of battle are distant now.

I can’t hear them anymore.

I see my naked body viciously mistreated

but I don’t feel pain nor the blood in my mouth

just the bitter taste of loneliness.

Time goes by. Years, decades, centuries

but I am not ready to be found.

Slanders and hate on my name

I am a monster now, the most maligned monarch ever

Richard the murderer, the hunchbacked king.

I lay here in the darkness.

I can hear the monks’ choir, the horses’ hooves

the carriages’ wheels, the roar of iron lions upon me

but I am not ready yet.

Finally,  my day arises.

It’s the same day I was hidden to the world

the day they stopped looking at my abused body

and put an unnamed gravestone on what remained of me.

Today, I will rise again

I have chosen my rescuer who will bring me back to life.

No clash of swords and halberds

just the mercy  of all those who love me, who trust in me

who still fight on my side, the ones I chose for my rebirth.

The White Rose of the Boar will blossom once again for them.

the-rose-of-york.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Written passing by Bosworth by Maria Grazia L. Leotta

Bah! Henry “Tudor” was not Earl of Richmond, and certainly not DUKE….!

private lives of the tudorsI have just made the mistake of watching The Private Lives of the Tudors, which is based on the book of the same name by Tracy Borman. It’s bad enough that Henry Tudor is first referred to as the Earl of Richmond, but then Dr Susan Doran INSISTS upon referring to him as the DUKE of Richmond! The what? He was denied that earldom when Edward IV took it into Royal hands*, and at that time there was no such thing as a Duke of Richmond. Yet the odious and presumptuous Tudor fellow is elevated twice in about one minute! One day they’ll get it right…erm, and the Titanic will make it safely to New York, of course.

* by an attainder passed in 1471 (Complete Peerage)

 

 

PS Thanks to EM:

It was tomorrow, August 22nd, in 1485, that Richard III was defeated at the Battle of Bosworth, but Henry Tudor, in his first parliament as King Henry VII, in an early example of “fake news,” made the claim that he was really already king on August 21st. This meant that he could declare anyone who fought with King Richard to be a traitor, execute them, and seize their lands. English documents, however, are often dated by regnal year (i.e, “the sixth day of May in the tenth year of the reign of Edward the Fourth”), where each regnal year begins on what everyone agrees is the anniversary of the first day of the king’s reign. For 500 years, record keepers and historians have maintained that the regnal years of Henry VII all started on August 22nd, the day of the battle. But here Sir Laurence Reynforth dates his last will and testament on August 21st, giving the year as both Anno Domini 1490, and as the sixth year of the reign of Henry VII, in what I think may be the only example showing that Henry Tudor’s fake news of 1485 was imposed year after year on that most pedestrian of matters, the date.

The Shrewsbury house “graced” by Henry Tudor on his way to Bosworth….

 

Shrewsbury - house where HT stayed on way to Bosworth

According to this source, this old house in Wyle Cop, Shrewsbury, with its…

“…blackened timbers and pretty traceried window adorned by coats of arms, has an added interest from the fact that it is ‘ Ye auncient house in which King Henry the VII loged, when he went to Bosworth Field, Augst 1485.’ So at least the panel beneath the window has it, though Henry, of course, was but Harry of Richmond until that fateful battle had won for him the crown…”

Hmm, pity it didn’t fall down around his unworthy ears, but it was hardy enough to still be there now!

Shrewsbury - house in Wyle Cop where HT stayed in 1483

(I’m pleased that the choccie shop couldn’t have been there in 1483! It would have been awful if Tudor had enjoyed THAT as well as the throne he was to steal!)

Another myth about men “not breaking oaths to Richard”. . . .

Henry's route through Wales in 1485

Well, I’ve heard the tale of Sir Rhys ap Thomas hiding under a bridge for Henry to march over him on the way to Bosworth, thus not breaking Sir Rhys’s oath of loyalty to Richard, but this is a new one on me!

Rhys ap Thomas under the bridge

Now we have this new variation, from  http://tudortimes.co.uk/military-warfare/1485-battle-of-bosworth/henrys-march :-

“. . .when Henry, now strengthened by Sir Rhys ap Thomas, and a contingent of men from North Wales, reached the town of Shrewsbury, to cross the Severn into England, the town gates were closed against him and the town bailiff, Thomas Mitton, announced that, as he had sworn allegiance to Richard, he could not allow Richmond to pass.

“The closure of the town of Gloucester to the Lancastrians in 1471, preventing the crossing of the Severn, had proved disastrous for them – would the same be the case for Henry at Shrewsbury? Henry assured the bailiff that he and his men would do no damage and that they would not interfere with his oath, but Mitton was adamant.

“The next morning however, there was a change of heart. . .due to the intervention of Sir William Stanley.

“Henry and his men passed through – apparently with Henry stepping his horse carefully over Mitton’s body, to preserve the word of the man’s oath – although the same story is told in other circumstances of other men, so may be apocryphal. Impressed by Henry, or perhaps cowed by Sir William, the town then paid £4 4s 10d for soldiers for him. . .”

shrewsbury_traitors_gate_640

               Traitors’ Gate, Shrewsbury town wall. Let’s hope it was the one Henry passed beneath!

But the above site is not the original source for this story. There is an earlier one.

“An interesting anecdote of Thomas Mytton is related in the following extract from Owen and Blakeway’s History of Shrewsbury, vol. i, p. 245, describing the incidents of the Earl of Richmond’s (Henry VII) march through Shropshire to Bosworth Field:- “He delayed his march to Shrewsbury till he was master of Forton and Montford Bridge, two points of main importance to his designs, as he was thus provided with a passage into the midland counties, even though this town should shut her gates upon him. Having secured that bridge, which, if the Salopians had been hearty in the cause of Richard, they would have broken down, his army encamped upon Forton Heath, and he despatched messengers to Shrewsbury to summon the town. When they arrived at the foot of the Welsh bridge, they found the place in a posture of defence; the gates shut, the portcullis let down, and the bailiffs within ready to give their answer. “The senior of these magistrates for that year was Thomas Mytton, Esq., whom we have lately seen as Sheriff of the county, engaged in the arrest of the Duke of Buckingham. He is described in an old chronicle as ‘ a stout wise gentleman’, and made answer that he knew the Earl for no King, but ‘ only Kynge Rychard, whose lyffetenants he and hys fellowe weare, and before he shoulde enter there, he should goe over hys belly’, meaninge thereby, continues our authority, ‘ that he would be slayne to the grounde and so to (be) roon over (by) him before he entryd; and that he protested vehemently upon the othe he dad taken.’

“Much conversaton, we may suppose, ensued, but Mr. Mytton continuing resolute, the Earl ‘ retornyd’, says our chronicle, ‘ wyth hys companye backe agayn to Forton . . . .’ On the following morning the negotiation with the Bailiffs of Shrewsbury was renewed, and the Earl assured the magistrates that he did not mean to hurt the town or any of its inhabitants, but only desired to pass on to try his right to the Crown. We are told that Mr. Mytton began to yeald to these suggestions, but that on account of the oath he had so lately taken to oppose the entrance of Richmond into Shrewbury, he adopted the ingenious expedient of lying down on the ground and permitting the Earl to step over him. Thereupon the portcullis was drawn up, and the Earl and his retinue admitted within the gates, to the general joy of the inhabitants, and received, we are assured, ‘ with an Ave chaire (Xaipe), and God speede the wel! the streets being strowed with hearbes and flowers, and their doores adorned with greene boughs, in testimony of a true hartie reception.'”

Well, Henry was still some way from Bosworth, so I imagine there are a few more such myths waiting in the wings. They’ll be throwing their cloaks over puddles next! Or dropping their garters!

 

Richard Victorious!

Photo of Richard III statue

This is how the Richard III Society Facebook page described the forthcoming Bosworth Mediaeval Festival/re-enactment weekend (18-19th August 2018):

“BOSWORTH MEDIEVAL FESTIVAL TO STAGE ALTERNATIVE ‘WHAT IF RICHARD WON?’ BATTLE.

This year’s Bosworth Medieval Festival is set to present a twist on the history changing Battle of Bosworth – by exploring what would have happened if the outcome had been different and King Richard III had won the day.

The Festival takes place this year on Saturday 18 and Sunday 19 August with lots of activities for all ages.

Both days of the Bosworth Medieval Festival end with a minute’s silence, followed by a full re-enactment of the famous battle of 22 August 1485, complete with massed infantry, archers, cannon cavalry and commentary, to commemorate those who fought and died in 1485.

Photo of Bosworth reenactment

In the re-enactment – as in reality – Richard III dies fighting surrounded by his enemies and Henry Tudor, with help from the Stanleys, wins the day and the crown of England.

This year there will also be an alternative look at the battle at 11am on both mornings. The Wars of the Roses Federation, in conjunction with Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre, will explore what led to King Richard III’s defeat by presenting an alternative Battle of Bosworth, in which the Plantagenet monarch manages to win the day and successfully defends his crown.

Photo of Richard III standard

The true outcome of Bosworth was a turning point in English, European and international history, but in a special interactive 30-minute debate session on each day, the audience will be led in a discussion about what might be different today if Richard had been the victor on 22 August 1485. These debates will be at 10.15am on Saturday and 3pm on Sunday and are available to Medieval Festival ticket holders at an extra cost of £3.”

Let’s all go along and cheer for our king! (And leave before the ‘real’ battle is re-enacted – then maybe they’ll change history, permanently!)  🙂

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: