I’m beginning to convince myself that the Lambert Simnel Affair might have been an uprising in favour of Edward V, not Edward, Earl of Warwick….
I’m beginning to convince myself that the Lambert Simnel Affair might have been an uprising in favour of Edward V, not Edward, Earl of Warwick….
Because I had considerable trouble finally reading all of this article, I have taken the liberty of copying it all, word for word. So I do not claim anything that follows . It is all Nottinghamshire live:-
“It was the site of one of the most important battles in English history, a blood-soaked clash that finally brought an end to the infamous War of the Roses.
“Yet the Battle of Stoke Field, fought near Newark in June 1487, is overshadowed by events two years earlier at Bosworth when the death of Yorkist Richard III gave the throne to Henry VII.
“Nowadays Stoke Field Battlefield, outside Newark, is just an empty field but the scene of this bloody conflict, which cost around 7,000 lives and which rewrote the history books, is being brought back to life in a joint project between Nottinghamshire County Council and the Battlefields Trust.
“A new history trail, featuring five oak panels which describe the background to the battle, the bloody events of the day and the aftermath, will bring the fascinating untold story of this bloody battle to a new audience.
“Visitors will also be able to travel back in time by downloading videos, starring re-enactors in full historical costume, who tell the harrowing, first-hand accounts of the people who were actually there as the battle unfolded.
“On that June morning, Henry VII was about to enter a conflict which would decide the future of the great Tudor dynasty.
“Across the open fields of this picturesque corner of Notts, waiting to face him, was the young pretender Lambert Simnel with his army of between 6,000 and 10,000 men — for the most part, a poorly-trained force of Irish and German mercenaries.
“Raised in Ireland, the rebel army had crossed the sea and then marched over the Pennines before fording the Trent at Fiskerton.
“The King, boosted by a contingent of Derbyshire soldiers he had collected in Nottingham, had a similar number at his call.
“But these were professional soldiers of the crown, more disciplined and better equipped.
“The King delivered a rousing speech, exhorting his troops to fight with every sinew for God was on their side, their cause was just and, he pledged, they would be triumphant.
“Across the fields between the villages of Stoke and Thorpe, rebel leader the Earl of Lincoln gave a similar battle cry before unleashing his rag-tag army in a bid to capture the English throne.
“Preliminaries over, the two men led their followers into the Battle of Stoke Field, an engagement that historians now record as the most bloody ever fought on English soil.
“For more than three hours, axes and swords, spears and spikes, bows and cudgels, were wielded with merciless force.
“As cries of “King Henry” rent the air, heads were cleaved and limbs severed as the two mighty armies fought a vicious hand-to-hand conflict across the open Notts ground, rapidly stained crimson by blood.
“The battle ebbed and flowed but slowly the King’s men gained the upper hand.
“The Irish, fighting with characteristic passion and bravery, were “stricken down and slayne like dull and brutal beasts,” according to one historical account.
“A last desperate thrust against the King’s main force was repelled and the rebels took to their heels, pursued by troops intent on killing every last man.
“Down a gully leading to the Trent near Fiskerton ferry, a large body of the pretender’s men were trapped.
“Without mercy, they were put to the sword, the carnage earning the little valley the name Red Gutter. And when it was all over only the cries of the wounded and the dying could be heard across the battlefield strewn with the bodies of more than 6,000 combatants.
“Most of the leading rebels, men like Lord Lovell, the Earl of Lincoln and German mercenary chief Schwarz, fell that day. But Lambert Simnel was spared and put to work in the royal kitchens, living to the grand old age — for the times — of 50.
“The battle, bloodier than Bosworth Field, signalled the end of the Wars of the Roses which had been raging since 1455 between descendants of the sons of Edward III, the Duke of York and the Duke of Lancaster.
“It confirmed Henry VII as the first Tudor king and a new dynasty took the crown.
“There are few reminders at Stoke Field today of the violence that occurred more than five centuries ago. One or two names suggest the deeds that went on there — Red Gutter is one, Deadman’s Field another.
A stone monument which can be seen at the site of the Battle of Stoke Field
“A stone marker commemorating the battle can be found at Burrand Bush, where Henry is said to have placed his standard following his great victory. And Willow Rundle, at the side of Elston Lane, is said to mark the spot where Col Schwarz and the Earl of Lincoln fell, speared through the heart with willow stakes which then took root and sprouted.
“Councillor John Cottee, Chairman of Nottinghamshire County Council’s Communities and Place Committee, said: “We are delighted that this project will recognise our county’s only registered battlefield. Our heritage is important to us and our sense of place. The Battle of Stoke Field history trail project aligns perfectly with the county council’s aspirations to make more of Nottinghamshire’s heritage and tourism offer.
“Tourism is one of the fastest growing sectors and contributes £1.8 billion per year to our local economy. Visitors will be encouraged to visit our area, stay longer and enjoy our sites and scenery which all play a part in telling the story of who we are and the role Nottinghamshire has played in shaping the history of our nation.”
“Further information about the trail, including the videos, is available from www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/BattleofStokeField”
My comments: Henry Tudor didn’t give a rousing speech – he didn’t arrive on the scene until the battle was over. Francis Lovell escaped, it is thought by swimming his horse across the Trent. Schwarz’s German mercenaries, the landsknechte, were very highly trained indeed! Oh, and yes, ‘Boo!’ to Derbyshire!
Here, the American blogger Samantha Wilcoxson writes about Lord Richard’s life in
his capacity as the last free son of John, 2nd Duke of Suffolk, and as an exile from the England of the first two “Tudors”, before dying at Pavia and being buried in the Basilica of San Pietro in Ciel d’Oro there (right).
From Lord Richard’s Wikipedia page, it appears that someone else has noticed the coincidence between his early exile in Hungary and the Hungarian guests at Marguerite‘s 1539 marriage, so it possibly isn’t a coincidence. Marguerite’s fecundity and long life testify to her youth in that year, although they still don’t quite prove her paternity. Perhaps her mother has finally been identified?
For anyone interested in knowing what made slippery Lord Stanley tick, here is an excellent evaluation, save that Sir William was executed for refusing to oppose “Perkin”, not for supporting him. The man was a born opportunist and survivor. Full stop. Oh, and he had an evil beard!
…, who became Lord Chamberlain today in 1483 and carried the third sword of state at Richard’s coronation three weeks later has been featured in his own blog since February 2017, thanks to Michelle (and apologies for the missing accent). She also makes a great effort to determine his fate.
Am I alone in always having imagined that John de la Pole’s wife, Margaret Fitzalan, Countess of Lincoln, was a woman of childbearing age? Somehow I just took it as read, and thus that their apparent lack of heirs was a nasty trick of nature.
Chance caused me to check for more information about this daughter of Thomas Fitzalan, 12th/17th Earl of Arundel and his wife Margaret Woodville.
Given Lincoln’s staunch support of Richard III, I can’t help wondering how he felt about his wife’s strong Woodville connection. Oh, he probably didn’t care. After all, the prolific Woodvilles had managed to marry into half the noble families in the realm. In fact, we don’t know anything at all about Lincoln’s attitude to his marriage or his wife. He is Sir Enigmatic de la Pole when it comes to that.
What we know of Margaret is that her father bequeathed her a ‘great ring with a turquoise’, and that she died in 1493, apparently never having remarried. (Horrox in ODNB states that Margaret lived until 1524.) We also know, or it seems generally accepted, that she was born in 1475. Now then, if this last point is true, then she was still only 10 at the time of Bosworth, and 12 when Lincoln was killed at Stoke Field. Suddenly the barrenness of the marriage takes on a different hue. There were no children because the bride was too young to consummate the match, and her husband died before she was the accepted age for such to take place.
Now we come to the myths. Well, fake news, as the present saying goes. Maybe they’re not as important as the untruths attached to Richard III, but certainly they’re the sort of thing that worm their way into history as fact.
I will begin with the son that Lincoln and Margaret are supposed to have had, but who died very young. His name was Edward de la Pole, we’re told. Well, even if he had been born posthumously, I still cannot accept that it could have happened. Was Lincoln no better than King John, Henry IV and Edmund Tudor? Did he bed his little bride before she was fully developed? No, I do not think so. Richard III wouldn’t have had any of that! Even if Lincoln himself was ready to do it, which I doubt very much indeed. In fact, I do not think Lincoln and his wife would have seen anything much of each other until her sexual majority, by which time Lincoln was dead at the age of 25 maximum, probably only 23. She would still have been at home with her Fitzalan family. Perhaps at Arundel Castle itself.
As for the suggested son, the only Edward de la Pole I can find was Lincoln’s brother, who became Archdeacon of Richmond. He lived 1466–1485, so was born nine years before Margaret Fitzalan. A non-starter. He was Lincoln’s sibling, not offspring.
All of which makes the suggestion of Lincoln and Margaret having a daughter as well even less likely. The daughter was (we are told) another Margaret, who went on to marry Sir John Hardy, Senior, and had a son, John Hardy, Junior, who became Mayor of London. https://www.geni.com/people/Sir-John-Hardy-Jr-Lord-Mayor-of-London/6000000001444501215 I can’t say this site is gospel, of course. Anyway, this new Margaret is identified as the daughter of Lincoln and Margaret Fitzalan, and was (wait for it!) born in 1490. Really? Well, she might have been Margaret’s, because Margaret could indeed have lived on until 1524. But a child born in 1490 could not have been Lincoln’s because he definitely died in 1487.
Another curiosity that has crept into the records is that Lincoln himself married twice, his second bride being the daughter and heir of Sir John Golafre. Again, it’s impossible. Lincoln’s first wife lived for at least six years after his demise, so how he managed to take a second bride I do not know. There’s no record of an annulment or any such thing (that I can find), nor can I trace this new bride’s Christian name, or which Sir John Golafre it could possibly be, as the last one appears to have died in 1442! This would make any daughter of his a little too old to marry Lincoln and present him with children. She would have been at least 43 in 1485, and in those days surely coming to the end of her childbearing days.
This Sir John Golafre married a few times. One wife was Margaret, the daughter of Sir John Heveningham, and widow of Sir Walter de la Pole of Dernford in Sawston, Cambs. Another was Elizabeth Bruyn, the widowed cousin of Michael de la Pole, 2nd Earl of Suffolk. So there are definitely connections between the de la Poles and Golafres, but not with our Earl of Lincoln.
All of which makes me wonder and regret that Lincoln married Margaret. He was the son and heir of the 2nd Duke of Suffolk and Elizabeth of York (Richard’s sister), and most probably Richard’s intended heir as well, but with such a young bride, it was impossible for him to father legitimate children until she was old enough. We don’t know exactly when the marriage took place, but he was always heir to the dukedom of Suffolk, if not of Richard. Oh well, these political matches are a tangle, and presumably it was very advantageous indeed for Lincoln to be united with a daughter of the Earl of Arundel.
Whatever the reason/s, it resulted in Lincoln, like Richard himself, dying without legitimate issue.
Aha, but did it? Maybe all the above is wrong. There is an interesting article about Lincoln in Volume XIII (2003) of The Ricardian. It is by Wendy Moorhen, and considers the earl’s life and career in general, but also his marriage. She states that Margaret Fitzalan was indeed his wife, but makes no mention of Margaret’s youthfulness. She too mentions the great ring with a turquoise, which her father bequeathed to his daughter, Lady Lincoln, in 1524.
The thing of particular significance to me, with regard to my present article, is a suggestion that Lincoln’s youngest brother, Richard de la Pole, was in fact his son. The concealing of this fact was due, it is suggested to protect an infant or posthumous son of an attainted traitor. It would seem that Richard’s career tends to give credence to this tale. It would also raise the question about the mysterious son Edward, some sources claim was born to Lincoln and Margaret, but who died young. Perhaps he didn’t die at all, but merely had his name changed.
He was born in 1480, as far as I can discover, which means when Lincoln himself was somewhere between 14 and 16, depending on whether his year of birth was 1462 or 1464. This means that Margaret Fitzalan was only around five – totally ridiculous, of course. So if Richard de la Pole was Lincoln’s son, he was surely born on the wrong side of the blanket.
Yet Richard was to lay claim to the dukedom of Suffolk, become known as the White Rose, and be fêted by Louis XII as the king of England. This, in spite of older brothers still alive. This could be explained if he was indeed Lincoln’s son, and therefore of the senior line. But if he was illegitimate. . .? The French would enjoy mischief-making, of course, yet there was a very strong suggestion about Richard de la Pole’s true lineage being through the Earl of Lincoln, and therefore one generation removed from the 2nd Duke of Suffolk,.
But there is cause to wonder if Margaret Fitzalan wasn’t a mere five but 14 in 1480, when Richard de la Pole was born. It is possible. The 17th Earl of Arundel’s marriage to Margaret Woodville took place “shortly before 17th February 1466″, which means that the earliest a child could have been born to them was around November of that year. The earl’s successor, the 18th earl, was born in 1476. Apart from him and Margaret Fitzalan, there were another brother and sister, Edward and Joan, whose dates of birth I have not been able to ascertain. If Margaret was that first child, born around November 1466, she would of course, have been old enough to consummate her marriage to Lincoln, and bear him children. But the earlier date of 1475 seems fairly fixed in place for her.
Had she been 21 or so at the time of Lincoln’s death at East Stoke, everything would change of course. She might indeed have given birth to Richard de la Pole, who would thus be legitimate. There are so many mysteries surrounding the enigmatic Earl of Lincoln, who has left a tantalisingly brief trail through his short period of history. Brief, but filled with intriguing questions about his marriage and possible offspring.
Today, we interview Joan Szechtman, an American writer who has just published her third time-travel novel about King Richard the Third. Fans of Joan have read her books, THIS TIME, which was published in 2009 and LOYALTY BINDS ME which was published in 2011. Her third Richard the Third novel, STRANGE TIMES, has just been published and is available on Amazon.
Joan, to begin with, what made you interested in Richard the Third?
In 2004 I read Sharon Kay Penman’s THE SUNNE IN SPLENDOUR. It turned my perception of Richard III from Shakespeare’s arch-villain I loved to hate to a sympathetic character I had to learn about. From Penman’s book I found RICHARD THE THIRD by Paul Murray Kendall.
Those are two great sources to use when researching Richard the Third. Please tell us how you became involved with the Richard the Third Society? I believe you hold several key posts in the American branch.
As I continued my research, I realized I needed to find resources beyond my local library and found the UK and American Branch websites of the Richard III Society. In addition to joining the American Branch, I signed on to both branches email lists so that I could ask questions of other members who were far more knowledgeable than me.
At the time I joined the American Branch, the New England Chapter had just formed and they contacted me to see if I would be interested in participating. So, I joined them as well. A couple of years after joining the New England Chapter the first moderator resigned her position and I became the new moderator for the next two years.
In 2011, the American Branch needed a new editor and I was pressed into service. I’m still the branch’s editor. We have two semi-annual publications: The Ricardian Register and The Ricardian Chronicle. The Register is more academic oriented and features scholarly papers and book reviews and is published both in print and digital editions every March and September. The Chronicle is basically a newsletter, focusing on member events, Ricardian travels, and member interviews. It’s published digitally every June and December.
Amazing resources for the American students of Richard! Your new book “Strange Times” is now available on Amazon. Can you tell us something about it?
This is the third book of the trilogy about Richard III in the 21st century. While each book follows Richard today chronologically, the books are written so there are no cliff hangers and can be read in any order, though it’s best to read them sequentially. The book does contain a brief “previously on” for those who haven’t read the first two books or need a refresher.
What fascinates me about Strange Times is that it attempts to cover the fate of my favorite person in all of Richard the Third’s life: Viscount Francis Lovell, Richard’s closest friend.
STRANGE TIMES takes place in both the 15th and 21st century and investigates what might have happened to Francis Lovell, Richard’s loyal supporter. Currently, there is no definitive historical record of Lovell after the Battle of Stoke where Lovell fought on the losing side against Henry VII. Richard is haunted by one possible outcome that has Lovell starving to death locked in an underground chamber in Minster Lovell. The book follows Richard using the time travel device to “see” what happened to Lovell after Stoke. Then everything goes pear-shaped.
The trilogy is available on most online book sellers, including Amazon and Barnes & Noble for both print and digital editions, and digitally on iTunes, Kobo, Sony, etc.
I know you have a science background which has influenced your books, so can you give us some background information? And why combine that interest with Richard the Third and the time travel books?
While I do have an engineering background, having spent most of that career working on computer science and data communication, I believe my main reason stems from my love of science fiction and time travel stories. When I began my research on the real Richard III, I dreamt of having dinner with him. Since that was impossible, I decided to write him into the 21st century. I based his character on my research.
One of the things that nagged at me was Richard III was quite young when he died—32. I felt there was more to his story than his short life revealed. I wanted to examine his character in a modern setting, without imposing our modern sensibilities on his 15th century actions. By bringing him into the future, I could challenge him in ways that I couldn’t in his own time.
A primary goal in all my books about Richard III is to get the known history right. For that which is not known, I felt free to speculate as long as it was plausible. For example, there is no extant documentation as to what happened to Edward IV’s eldest sons—Edward, putative heir to the throne until parliament declared him illegitimate due to Edward IV’s bigamous marriage, and Richard of York, next in line until declared illegitimate. I developed a plausible theory that Richard hid them in other countries, such as Spain, and they survived Richard.
In STRANGE TIMES, I have Richard learn what happened to his nephews after he had “died” and solve the mystery surrounding Lovell after the Battle of Stoke.
Good for you! It is so frustrating to try to make people understand that there is no evidence that Richard the Third murdered his nephews. People have this need to cling to myths.
STRANGE TIMES came to my attention because you received a “Discovering Diamonds” review. Please tell me something about “Discovering Diamonds” and the review.
Rather than paraphrase what Helen Hollick’s blog is about, I will let “Discovering Diamonds” speak for itself:
“Our aim is to showcase well-written historical fiction for readers to enjoy. We welcome indie-published writers because indie writers do not have the marketing backup of the big publishing houses, but if traditionally published novels come our way we’ll be happy to read and review them! Our intention is to have a good mix of good historical fiction to share with you, a reader.
“However, we are fussy: we only publish reviews of the best books, so we also take note of correct presentation and formatting as well as the quality of writing – and when space and time are limited we may only select a few books a month to review. …”
Getting reviews is important for any author, and can be a struggle for indie authors, of which I am one. I am therefore pleased to share the link to my “Discovering Diamonds” review:
Thanks for talking to the Murrey & Blue blog.
Murrey-and-Blue by The Legendary Ten Seconds to be released on 1st November 2017 which is the anniversary of when Richard, later Richard III, was created the Duke of Gloucester in 1461.
A concept album of songs by The Legendary Ten Seconds about the Wars of the Roses and England in the late fifteenth century.
Featuring the following songs:-
inspired after reading a book of the same name by John Ashdown-Hill.
originally featured on the Tant le desiree album which features a mix of new recordings and also old recordings of the original version of this popular song.
Album artwork painted by G Harman of Red fox illustrations.
Ian Churchward vocals, guitars and mandola.
Lord Zarquon keyboards, bass and drums.
Rob Bright guitar on John Judde, John Nesfield’s Retinue and The Seventh of August.
Pippa West vocals on The Boars Head, The Medieval Free Company, Francis Cranley and The Month of May.
Elaine Churchward vocals on The Seventh of August.
Camilla Joyce vocals on the 2017 versions of Court of King Richard III and White Surrey.
John Bessant lap steel guitar on The Dublin King and Lambeth MS 474.
All songs written by Ian Churchward except Shining Knight written by Riikka Katajisto and Ian Churchward.
All songs arranged by Lord Zarquon.
Recorded in Torbay at Rock Lee and Rainbow Starshine studios for Richard The Third Records.
THE MONTH OF MAY (1483)
Dearly beloved I greet you this day
So much has happened in the month of May
The stench from the street assaults my nose
How I do long for the scent of a rose
The news of the queen is very disturbing
Remaining in sanctuary so we are learning
The date of the coronation is set
One Sunday in June it’s not happened yet
Dearly beloved I greet you good day
So much has happened since the month of May
Of true honesty there’s nought to be had
And the stench from the Thames it is terribly bad
The news of Lord Hastings is very disturbing
Of his execution this we are learning
The date of the coronation draws near
Of its cancellation I really do fear