murreyandblue

A great WordPress.com site

Archive for the tag “crown”

Down with Reggie Bray: hooray for Francis Lovell….!

Well, here are two stories from two English villages. Firstly, the present Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, will be at St Mary’s Parish Church at Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire, to mark its 800th anniversary. Unfortunately, the Bray part of the village’s name comes from Reggie Bray, upon whose memory we, er, frown. Reggie, of course, is one of a number of men at Bosworth Field who laid claim to having found the crown of Richard III and placed it on Henry Tudor’s undeserving, usurping head. If all these men were telling the truth, I think there must have been a very undignified scrum to grab the crown, which hitherto had graced the brow of the true King of England. However, methinks some porkies were told…it was probably Tudor himself who scrambled around on hands and knees, looking for the crown to which he he had no honourable right whatsoever.

To read about the royal visit to Eaton Bray, please  click here.

However, there is also news about a much more agreeable gentleman from the past, Francis Lovell, whose family name attaches to an Oxfordshire village, Minster Lovell. Unlike Bray, he was true to Richard III throughout, and now there is a new book out about him:-

“….’Dynasty and Disappearance: Francis Lovell, Richard III and The Tudors’ takes place at the Old Swan hotel in Minster Lovell on Saturday from 10am to 4pm.

“….Author Steve David will launch his first ever book published on Francis Lovell, an ally of Richard III in the War of the Roses, and part of the family that gave the village its name.

“….The book argues that Mr Lovell returned to his ancestral home in the village and hid from Henry VII after the Battle of Stoke in 1487.”

I’m not sure Viscount Sir Francis would have appreciated being demoted to mere gentleman! However, it’s always hooray for him, and bah, humbug, to Reggie Bray!

To read more about the new book, please go to this article.

Advertisements

SIR WILLIAM STANLEY – TURNCOAT OR LOYALIST

3e7bec6ec74358833e324e5360bd92dc-1

It is well documented how, through the treasonable and treacherous actions of Sir William Stanley at Bosworth, Richard lost his crown and his life. He was hacked to death after Stanley, who brought 3000 men with him, intervened at the crucial point when Richard, with his household cavalry in a heroic charge, came within a hair’s breadth of reaching Tudor and despatching him.  There is a story that after Richard’s crown was found under a hawthorn bush, it was Stanley who crowned him.

Sir William seems to have been one of those people who can run with the hounds and play with the foxes, doing well under Edward IV, who made him Chamberlain of Chester and, interestingly, Steward of the Prince of Wales’ Household(1).  Later Richard made Stanley Chief Justice of North Wales and finally Tudor made him Lord Chamberlain and Knight of the Garter.  It is said that Stanley – step-uncle to Tudor and brother-in-law to Margaret Beaufort – was one of the richest men in England.  Bacon estimated his income at 3000 pounds a year.  Stanley was also step-father to Francis Lovell, having married Lovell’s mother, Joan Beaumont,  widow of John Lovell, 8th Baron Lovell, but I digress!

Fast forward 10 years and it all ended ignominiously at Tower Hill, where Stanley was beheaded on 16 February 1495 for the treasonable act of communicating with Perkin Warbeck.  Stanley was accused of telling Robert Clifford, who informed on him, that if he was sure Perkin was indeed Edward’s son ‘he would never take up arms against him’.

The question I am raising here is not so much about Stanley’s interminable fence-sitting, which is common knowledge  – and a penchant he shared with his brother Thomas – but rather, did Sir William, an apparent dyed-in-the-wool turncoat, capable of the greatest untrustworthiness, actually possess a latent streak of honour, perhaps dating from the time when he was Steward to the Princes of Wales’ Household?  Did his time there give birth to a fierce loyalty to Edward’s sons, that later emerged with such a passion that he risked all, absolutely all,  when he joined the Perkin Warbeck plot?  Did he grow fond of young Edward, later focusing this affection on Edward’s brother, Richard of Shrewsbury, whom Warbeck purported to be?  OR, was he, as the historian Gairdner (2) suggested, merely attempting to secure his position in the event of an invasion?

(1)  Ramsay, Lancaster and York, ii 482

(2) W A J Archbold ‘Sir William Stanley and Perkin Warbeck’ English Historical Review 14( 1899) pp 529-534. ‘On 14 March (year unknown) Gairdner suggested in a note to Archbold that Stanley may ‘simply have wanted to secure his position with both sides in case of an invasion’.  I am grateful for this information which I have gleaned from Helen Maurer’s ‘Whodunit – The Suspects in the Case’.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: