Was He A Usurper? King Richard III. Conclusion

Tags

Earl of Richmond, Edward IV of England, Elizabeth Woodville, Henry Tudor, King Richard III of England, King Richard III Society, Lady Eleanor Butler Talbot, Titulus Regius

From The Emperor’s Desk: Prior to the Coronation of King Charles III of the United Kingdom I had been working on my series “Are They A Usurper?” aand my topic had been King Richard III of England. I would like to conclude my evaluation of King Richard III.

My verdict, quite simply, is yes I believe King Richard III usurped the throne from his nephew, and the rightful King, Edward V.

As previously mentioned the case hinged on the legality of the marriage of King Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville. It is alleged that Edward IV had a pre-contracted betrothal to Lady Eleanor Butler. There is no evidence of such a pre-contract.

The Richard III Society has an excellent article online addressing this topic.

“The fact of the pre-contract cannot now be proved, although it could have been known to many persons in 1483, but there is no doubt that Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth was clandestine.”

The author of the article admits that there is no historical evidence that the pre-contract existed. The author of the article even states the pre-contract “could have been known to many persons in 1483” with emphasis on the words “could have” which demonstrates that there was no evidence in 1483 for the pre-contract. The article goes on to justify Richard III taking the throne based on the clandestine nature of Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville.

Another point is the entire questioning of Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville suddenly after all these years. It’s too convenient: we have the young under aged and helpless Edward V, with Richard, Duke of Gloucester in control – who had a long history of tension and animosity toward Elizabeth Woodville, and suddenly along comes information that makes Richard the rightful king. As I said there had not been a sniff of this before. Sorry, it’s just too easy.

In conclusion. Although I do see Richard III as a usurper I don’t go as far to demonize him and to suggest that he was a bad King. As I mentioned at the beginning of the series on Richard III, I was not going to address whether or not he was the one who had his nephews, the Princess in the Tower, murdered. If they were even murdered at all. Those are topics for another day.

There was a lot of Tudor propaganda aimed to demonize Richard III. That’s understandable given that Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, defeated King Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field to take the throne.

I think we need to see Richard III in light of his contemporaries and the times in which he lived. From the Wars of the Roses to his defeat at Bosworth Field, the fact that Richard may have been ambitious and power-hungry towards the throne does not make him unique to the times whatsoever. History of the era shows that lusting for power and lusting for the throne was pretty common place.

Also, his short rain and defeat and with the possible association with the mysterious disappearance of the Princes in the Tower, overshadow the fact that while he was king, Richard III did do some good.

I will examine the reign of Richard III more closely.

August 22, 1485: The Battle of Bosworth Field

Tags

Battle of Bosworth Field, Earl of Richmond, Henry Tudor, House of Lancaster, House of Plantagenet, House of York, King Henry VII of England, King Richard III of England, Wars of the Roses

The Battle of Bosworth or Bosworth Field was the last significant battle of the Wars of the Roses, the civil war between the Houses of Lancaster and York that extended across England in the latter half of the 15th century. Fought on Monday August 22, 1485, the battle was won by an alliance of Lancastrians and disaffected Yorkists.

Their leader Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, became the first English monarch, Henry VII, of the Tudor dynasty by his victory and subsequent marriage to a Yorkist princess, Elizabeth of York the daughter of King Edward IV.

His opponent Richard III, the last king of the House of York, was killed during the battle, the last English monarch to die in combat. Historians consider Bosworth Field to mark the end of the Plantagenet dynasty, making it one of the defining moments of English history.

King Richard III of England at the Battle of Bosworth Field

Richard’s reign began in 1483 when he seized the throne from his twelve-year-old nephew Edward V. The boy and his younger brother Richard soon disappeared, to the consternation of many, and Richard’s support was further eroded by unfounded rumours of his involvement in the death of his wife.

Across the English Channel Henry Tudor, a descendant of the greatly diminished House of Lancaster, seized on Richard’s difficulties and laid claim to the throne. Henry’s first attempt to invade England in 1483 foundered in a storm, but his second arrived unopposed on August 7, 1485 on the southwest coast of Wales. Marching inland, Henry gathered support as he made for London. Richard hurriedly mustered his troops and intercepted Henry’s army near Ambion Hill, south of the town of Market Bosworth in Leicestershire.

Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley also brought a force to the battlefield, but held back while they decided which side it would be most advantageous to support, initially lending only four knights to Henry’s cause, these were; Sir Robert Tunstall, Sir John Savage (nephew of Lord Stanley), Sir Hugh Persall and Sir Humphrey Stanley. Sir John Savage was placed in command of the left flank of Henry’s army.

Henry Tudor is crowned King of England after the Battle of Bosworth Field

Richard divided his army, which outnumbered Henry’s, into three groups (or “battles”). One was assigned to the Duke of Norfolk and another to the Earl of Northumberland. Henry kept most of his force together and placed it under the command of the experienced Earl of Oxford. Richard’s vanguard, commanded by Norfolk, attacked but struggled against Oxford’s men, and some of Norfolk’s troops fled the field.

Northumberland took no action when signalled to assist his king, so Richard gambled everything on a charge across the battlefield to kill Henry and end the fight. Seeing the king’s knights separated from his army, the Stanleys intervened; Sir William led his men to Henry’s aid, surrounding and killing Richard. After the battle, Henry was crowned king.

Henry hired chroniclers to portray his reign favourably; the Battle of Bosworth Field was popularised to represent his Tudor dynasty as the start of a new age, marking the end of the Middle Ages for England. From the 15th to the 18th centuries the battle was glamourised as a victory of good over evil, and features as the climax of William Shakespeare’s play Richard III. The exact site of the battle is disputed because of the lack of conclusive data, and memorials have been erected at different locations.

The Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre was built in 1974, on a site that has since been challenged by several scholars and historians. In October 2009, a team of researchers who had performed geological surveys and archaeological digs in the area since 2003 suggested a location two miles (3.2 km) southwest of Ambion Hill.

Lady Margaret Beaufort. Part III

Tags

Anne Neville, Earl of Richmond, Edward V of England, Henry Tudor, Lady Margaret Beaufort, Princes in the Tower, Richard III of England, Tower of London

Following Edward IV’s death in April 1483 and the seizure of the throne in June by Richard, Duke of Gloucester from Edward V, Margaret was soon back at court serving the new queen, Anne Neville. Margaret carried Anne’s train at the coronation. Seeking her son’s return to England, Margaret appears to have negotiated with Richard.

Despite what these negotiations may suggest, Lady Margaret is known to have conspired with Elizabeth Woodville, mother of the two York princes whom Richard confined to the Tower of London, after rumours spread of the boys’ murder. It was at this point, according to Polydore Vergil, that Beaufort “began to hope well of her son’s fortune”.

Beaufort is believed to have initiated discussions with Woodville, via mutual physician, Lewis Caerleon, who conveyed secret correspondences between the two women. Together they conspired to supplant King Richard and by joint force replace him with Margaret’s son, Henry Tudor. Their solidified alliance further secured the subsequent dynasty by the agreed betrothal of Henry to Elizabeth of York. They hoped this proposal would attract both Yorkist and Lancastrian support.

As to the fate of the princes, it is widely held that Richard III ordered the death of his two nephews to secure his own reign. Gristwood, however, suggests that another was responsible; Henry Tudor’s path to the throne was certainly expedited by their disappearance, perhaps motive enough for his mother—his “highly able and totally committed representative”— to give the order.

Despite this suggestion, no contemporary sources corroborate the implication, whilst most contemporary accounts outline “her outstanding qualities, her courage, presence of mind, family loyalty, and a deeply felt awareness of the spiritual responsibilities of high office,” as clarified by Jones and Underwood. Before Jones and Underwood, there was no consensus within the scholarly community regarding Margaret’s role or character: historiographical opinions ranged from celebrating her to demonizing her.

It was not until the 17th century that religious retrospective speculations began to criticize Lady Margaret, but even then only as a “politic and contriving woman,” and never anything beyond shrewd or calculating. All things considered, the words of her own contemporaries, such as Tudor historian Polydore Vergil, continue to extol Lady Margaret’s noble virtues as “the most pious woman,” further removing her from accusations of wickedness.

Erasmus, in writing about his friend the Bishop, Saint John Fisher, praised Margaret’s support of religious institutions and the Bishop, further attesting the simultaneously pragmatic and charitable nature testified in the funerary sermon dedicated by the Bishop himself, as laid out in a following section.

In 1483 Margaret was certainly involved in—if not the mastermind behind—Buckingham’s rebellion. Indeed, in his biography of Richard III, historian Paul Murray Kendall describes Beaufort as the “Athena of the rebellion”. Perhaps with duplicitous motives (as he may have been desirous of the crown for himself), Buckingham conspired with Beaufort and Woodville to dethrone Richard. Margaret’s son was to sail from Brittany to join forces with him, but he arrived too late.

In October, Beaufort’s scheme proved unsuccessful; the Duke was executed and Tudor was forced back across the English Channel. Beaufort appears to have played a large role in financing the insurrection. In response to her betrayal, Richard passed an act of Parliament stripping Margaret of all her titles and estates, declaring her guilty of the following:

“Forasmoch as Margaret Countesse of Richmond, Mother to the Kyngs greate Rebell and Traytour, Herry Erle of Richemond, hath of late conspired, consedered, and comitted high Treason ayenst oure Soveraigne Lorde the King Richard the Third, in dyvers and sundry wyses, and in especiall in sendyng messages, writyngs and tokens to the said Henry… Also the said Countesse made chevisancez of greate somes of Money… and also the said Countesse conspired, consedered, and imagyned the destruction of oure said Soveraign Lorde…”

Richard did, however, stop short of a full attainder by transferring Margaret’s property to her husband, Lord Stanley. He also effectively imprisoned Margaret in her husband’s home with the hope of preventing any further correspondence with her son. However, her husband failed to stop Margaret’s continued communication with her son. When the time came for Henry to press his claim, he relied heavily on his mother to raise support for him in England.

Lady Margaret Beaufort. Part II.

Tags

1st Duke of Buckingham, Edward IV of England, Elizabeth Woodville, Henry Tudor, Humphrey Stafford, Jasper Tudor, Lady Margaret Beaufort

While in the care of her brother-in-law Jasper Tudor, on 28 January 1457, the Countess gave birth to a son, Henry Tudor, at Pembroke Castle. She was thirteen years old at the time and not yet physically mature, so the birth was extremely difficult. In a sermon delivered after her death, Margaret’s confessor, John Fisher, deemed it a miracle that a baby could be born “of so little a personage”. Her son’s birth may have done permanent physical injury to Margaret; despite two later marriages, she never had another child. Years later, she enumerated a set of proper procedures concerning the delivery of potential heirs, perhaps informed by the difficulty of her own experience.

Shortly after her re-entry into society after the birth, Jasper helped arrange another marriage for her to ensure her son’s security. She married Sir Henry Stafford (c. 1425–1471), the second son of Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham, on 3 January 1458, at the age of fourteen. A dispensation for the marriage was necessary because Margaret and Stafford were second cousins; it was granted on 6 April 1457.

They enjoyed a fairly long and harmonious marital relationship and were given Woking Palace, to which Margaret sometimes retreated and which she restored. Margaret and her husband were given 400 marks’ worth of land by Buckingham, but her own estates were still their main source of income. For a time the Staffords were able to visit Margaret’s son, who had been entrusted to Jasper Tudor’s care at Pembroke Castle in Wales.

Years of York forces fighting Lancastrian for power culminated in the Battle of Towton in 1461, where the Yorkists were victorious. Edward IV was King of England. The fighting had taken the life of Margaret’s father-in-law and forced Jasper Tudor to flee to Scotland and France to muster support for the Lancastrian cause. Edward IV gave the lands belonging to Margaret’s son to his own brother, the Duke of Clarence. Henry became the ward of Sir William Herbert. Again, Beaufort was allowed some visits to her son.

In 1469 the discontented Duke of Clarence and Earl of Warwick incited a rebellion against Edward IV, capturing him after a defeat of his forces. Beaufort used this opportunity to attempt to negotiate with Clarence, hoping to regain custody of her son and his holdings. Soon, however, Edward was back in power.

Warwick’s continued insurrection resulted in the brief reinstallation of the Lancastrian Henry VI in 1470–71, which was effectively ended with the Yorkist victory at the Battle of Barnet. Faced with York rule once again, Margaret allegedly begged Jasper Tudor, forced to flee abroad once more, to take thirteen-year-old Henry with him. It would be fourteen years before Beaufort saw her son again.

In 1471, Margaret’s husband, Lord Stafford, died of wounds suffered at the Battle of Barnet, fighting for the Yorkists. At 28 years old, Margaret became a widow again.

The Countess always respected the name and memory of Edmund as the father of her only child. In 1472, sixteen years after his death, Margaret specified in her will that she wanted to be buried alongside Edmund, even though she had enjoyed a long, stable and close relationship with her third husband.

In June 1472, Margaret married Thomas Stanley, the Lord High Constable and King of the Isle of Mann.

Their marriage was primarily one of convenience; marrying Stanley enabled Margaret to return to the court of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville. Indeed, Gristwood speculates Beaufort organized the marriage with the sole aim of rehabilitating her image and securing herself a prime position from which to advocate for her son. Evidently her efforts were successful; Margaret was chosen by Queen Elizabeth to be godmother to one of her daughters.

Holinshed, a Tudor chronicler, claims King Edward IV later proposed a marriage between Beaufort’s son and his own daughter, Elizabeth of York, intending to force Henry Tudor out of his safe haven on the continent.

Poet Bernard Andre seems to corroborate this, writing of Tudor’s miraculous escape from the clutches of Edward’s envoys, allegedly warned of the deception by none other than his mother.

October 2, 1452: Birth of Richard III, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Tags

Battle of Bosworth Field, Earl of Richmond, Edward IV of England, Edward V of England, Henry Tudor, Henry VI of England, Princes in the Tower, Richard III of England, Richard III Society, Richard of Gloucester, Richard of York, Richard Plantagenet, Wars of the Roses

Richard III (October 2, 1452 – August 22, 1485) was King of England and Lord of Ireland from June 26, 1483 until his death in 1485. He was the last king of the House of York and the last of the Plantagenet dynasty. His defeat and death at the Battle of Bosworth Field, the last decisive battle of the Wars of the Roses, marked the end of the Middle Ages in England.

Richard was born on 2 October 1452, at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire, the eleventh of the twelve children of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York, and Cecily Neville, and the youngest to survive infancy. His childhood coincided with the beginning of what has traditionally been labelled the ‘Wars of the Roses’, a period of political instability and periodic open civil war in England during the second half of the fifteenth century, between the Yorkists, who supported Richard’s father (a potential claimant to the throne of King Henry VI from birth), and opposed the regime of Henry VI and his wife, Margaret of Anjou, and the Lancastrians, who were loyal to the crown.

Richard was created Duke of Gloucester in 1461 after the accession of his brother King Edward IV.

Following a decisive Yorkist victory over the Lancastrians at the Battle of Tewkesbury, Richard married Anne Neville on July 12, 1472. Anne Neville (June 11, 1456 – March 16, 1485) and she had a connection to the Royal Family as a descendant of King Edward III.

Anne Neville was the daughter of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (the “Kingmaker”) and Anne Beauchamp, 16th Countess of Warwick, (1426 – 1492). Anne Beauchamp was the daughter of Richard Beauchamp, 13th Earl of Warwick, and his second wife Isabel le Despenser, who was a daughter of Thomas le Despenser and Constance of York.

Constance of York, Countess of Gloucester (c. 1375 – 1416) was the only daughter of Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York, and his wife Infanta Isabella of Castile, daughter of King Pedro of Castile and his favourite mistress, María de Padilla.

Constance of York’s father, Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York, KG (5 June 1341 – 1 August 1402) was the fourth surviving son of King Edward III of England and Philippa of Hainault.

Anne of Warwick had previously been wedded to Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales only son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, the second eldest daughter of René, King of Naples, and Isabella, Duchess of Lorraine.

Richard’s marriage plans brought him into conflict with his brother George. John Paston’s letter of February 17, 1472 makes it clear that George was not happy about the marriage but grudgingly accepted it on the basis that “he may well have my Lady his sister-in-law, but they shall part no livelihood”. The reason was the inheritance Anne shared with her elder sister Isabel, whom George had married in 1469. It was not only the earldom that was at stake; Richard Neville had inherited it as a result of his marriage to Anne Beauchamp, 16th Countess of Warwick.

The Countess, who was still alive, was technically the owner of the substantial Beauchamp estates, her father having left no male heirs. The Croyland Chronicle records that Richard agreed to a prenuptial contract in the following terms: “the marriage of the Duke of Gloucester with Anne before-named was to take place, and he was to have such and so much of the earl’s lands as should be agreed upon between them through the mediation of arbitrators; while all the rest were to remain in the possession of the Duke of Clarence”.

The date of Paston’s letter suggests the marriage was still being negotiated in February 1472. In order to win George’s final consent to the marriage, Richard renounced most of the Earl of Warwick’s land and property including the earldoms of Warwick (which the Kingmaker had held in his wife’s right) and Salisbury and surrendered to George the office of Great Chamberlain of England. Richard retained Neville’s forfeit estates he had already been granted in the summer of 1471: Penrith, Sheriff Hutton and Middleham, where he later established his marital household.

The requisite papal dispensation was obtained dated April 22, 1472. Michael Hicks has suggested that the terms of the dispensation deliberately understated the degrees of consanguinity between the couple, and the marriage was therefore illegal on the ground of first degree consanguinity following George’s marriage to Anne’s sister Isabel.

There would have been first-degree consanguinity if Richard had sought to marry Isabel (in case of widowhood) after she had married his brother George, but no such consanguinity applied for Anne and Richard. Richard’s marriage to Anne was never declared null, and it was public to everyone including secular and canon lawyers for 13 years.

In June 1473, Richard persuaded his mother-in-law to leave the sanctuary and come to live under his protection at Middleham. Later in the year, under the terms of the 1473 Act of Resumption, George lost some of the property he held under royal grant and made no secret of his displeasure. John Paston’s letter of November 1473 says that King Edward IV planned to put both his younger brothers in their place by acting as “a stifler atween them”.

Early in 1474, Parliament assembled and Edward attempted to reconcile his brothers by stating that both men, and their wives, would enjoy the Warwick inheritance just as if the Countess of Warwick “was naturally dead”. The doubts cast by George on the validity of Richard and Anne’s marriage were addressed by a clause protecting their rights in the event they were divorced (i.e. of their marriage being declared null and void by the Church) and then legally remarried to each other, and also protected Richard’s rights while waiting for such a valid second marriage with Anne.

The following year, Richard was rewarded with all the Neville lands in the north of England, at the expense of Anne’s cousin, George Neville, 1st Duke of Bedford. From this point, George seems to have fallen steadily out of King Edward’s favour, his discontent coming to a head in 1477 when, following Isabel’s death, he was denied the opportunity to marry Mary of Burgundy, the stepdaughter of his sister Margaret, even though Margaret approved the proposed match. There is no evidence of Richard’s involvement in George’s subsequent conviction and execution on a charge of treason.

Richard governed northern England during Edward IV’s reign, and played a role in the invasion of Scotland in 1482. When Edward IV died in April 1483, Richard was named Lord Protector of the realm for Edward’s eldest son and successor, the 12-year-old King Edward V. Arrangements were made for Edward V’s coronation on June 22, 1483.

Before the young king could be crowned, the marriage of his parents was declared bigamous and therefore invalid. Now officially illegitimate, their children, the young King Edward V and his brother Richard, of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, were barred from inheriting the throne.

On June 25, an assembly of lords and commoners endorsed a declaration to this effect, and proclaimed Richard, Duke of Gloucester, as the rightful king. He was crowned on July 6, 1483. Edward V and his younger brother Richard, Duke of York, called the “Princes in the Tower”, were not seen in public after August, and accusations circulated that they had been murdered on King Richard’s orders.

There were two major rebellions against Richard III during his reign. In October 1483, an unsuccessful revolt was led by staunch allies of Edward IV and Richard’s former ally, Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham. It is possible that they planned to depose Richard III and place Edward V back on the throne, and when rumours arose that Edward and his brother were dead, Buckingham proposed that Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, should return from exile, take the throne and marry Elizabeth of York, eldest daughter of Edward IV. However, it has also been pointed out that as this narrative stems from Richard’s own parliament of 1484, it should probably be treated “with caution”.

Then, in August 1485, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond and his uncle, Jasper Tudor, landed in southern Wales with a contingent of French troops, and marched through Pembrokeshire, recruiting soldiers. Henry’s forces defeated Richard’s army near the Leicestershire town of Market Bosworth. Richard was slain, making him the last English king to die in battle. Henry Tudor then ascended the throne as Henry VII.

Richard’s corpse was taken to the nearby town of Leicester and buried without ceremony. His original tomb monument is believed to have been removed during the English Reformation, and his remains were wrongly thought to have been thrown into the River Soar.

In 2012, an archaeological excavation was commissioned by the Richard III Society on the site previously occupied by Grey Friars Priory. The University of Leicester identified the skeleton found in the excavation as that of Richard III as a result of radiocarbon dating, comparison with contemporary reports of his appearance, and comparison of his mitochondrial DNA with that of two matrilineal descendants of his sister Anne. He was reburied in Leicester Cathedral on March 26, 2015.

September 30, 1399: Henry Bolingbroke is declared King of England and Lord of Ireland as Henry IV.

Tags

Duke of Lancaster, Earl of Richmond, Henry Bolingbroke, Henry IV, Henry Tudor, Joan of Kent, John of Gaunt, Katherine Swynford, King Richard II of England, Lords Appellant, Usurper

Henry IV (April 1367 – 20 March 1413) was King of England from 1399 to 1413. He asserted the claim of his grandfather King Edward III, a maternal grandson of Philippe IV of France, to the Kingdom of France. Henry was the first English ruler since the Norman Conquest, over three hundred years prior, whose mother tongue was English rather than French. He was known as Henry Bolingbroke before ascending to the throne.

Family Connections

Henry was the son of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, and his first wife Blanche. Gaunt was the third son of King Edward III. Blanche was the daughter of the wealthy royal politician and nobleman Henry of Grosmont, Duke of Lancaster.

Henry of Grosmont was the only son of Henry, 3rd Earl of Lancaster (c. 1281–1345); who in turn was the younger brother and heir of Thomas, 2nd Earl of Lancaster (c. 1278–1322). They were sons of Edmund Crouchback, 1st Earl of Lancaster (1245–1296); the second son of King Henry III (ruled 1216–1272) and younger brother of King Edward I of England (ruled 1272–1307). Henry of Grosmont was thus a first cousin once removed of King Edward II and a second cousin of King Edward III (ruled 1327–1377). His mother was Maud de Chaworth (1282–1322). On his paternal grandmother’s side, Henry of Grosmont was also the great-great-grandson of Louis VIII of France.

Henry Bolingbroke’s elder sisters were Philippa, Queen of Portugal, as the wife of King João I of Portugal, and Elizabeth of Lancaster, Duchess of Exeter.

Elizabeth of Lancaster was the third wife of John Holland, 1st Duke of Exeter, the third son of Thomas Holland by his wife Joan of Kent, “The Fair Maid of Kent”. Joan was the daughter of Edmund of Woodstock, 1st Earl of Kent, a son of King Edward I (1272–1307), and Thomas would be made Earl of Kent, in what is considered a new creation, as husband of Joan, in whom the former Earldom was vested as eventual heiress of Edmund of Woodstock. Joan later married Edward, the Black Prince, the eldest son and heir apparent of her first cousin King Edward III, by whom she had a son, King Richard II, who was thus a half-brother of John Holland.

Henry Bolingbroke’s younger half-sister, the daughter of his father’s second wife, Constance of Castile, was Katherine, Queen of Castile, the wife of King Enrique IV of Castile. The later King’s of Spain descend from this union and therefore, technically speaking, they had a better hereditary claim to the English throne than the Tudor monarchs.

Henry Bolingbroke also had four natural half-siblings born of Katherine Swynford, originally his sisters’ governess, then his father’s longstanding mistress and later third wife. These illegitimate children were given the surname Beaufort from their birthplace at the Château de Beaufort in Champagne, France.

Henry’s relationship with his stepmother, Katherine Swynford, was a positive one, but his relationship with the Beauforts varied. In youth he seems to have been close to all of them, but rivalries with Henry and Thomas Beaufort proved problematic after 1406. Although the Beauforts were later legitimized they were legitimized without succession rights. Despite that sticky technicality it was from this line descended Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, who became King Henry VII of England in 1485.

Ralph Neville, 4th Baron Neville, married Henry’s half-sister Joan Beaufort. Neville remained one of his strongest supporters, and so did his eldest half-brother John Beaufort, even though Henry revoked Richard II’s grant to John of a marquessate. Thomas Swynford, a son from Katherine’s first marriage, was another loyal companion. Thomas was Constable of Pontefract Castle, where Richard II is said to have died. Henry’s half-sister Joan was the mother of Cecily Neville. Cecily married Richard, 3rd Duke of York, and had several offspring, including Edward IV and Richard III, making Joan the grandmother of two Yorkist kings of England.

Accession to the Throne

Bolingbroke’s father, John of Gaunt enjoyed a position of considerable influence during much of the reign of his own nephew, King Richard II. Henry Bolingbroke was involved in the revolt of the Lords Appellant against Richard in 1388.

In 1398, a remark by Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk, regarding Richard II’s rule was interpreted as treason by Henry Bolingbroke and he reported it to the king. The two dukes agreed to undergo a duel of honour (called by Richard II) at Gosford Green near Caludon Castle, Mowbray’s home in Coventry. Yet before the duel could take place, King Richard II decided to banish Henry from the kingdom (with the approval of Henry’s father, John of Gaunt) to avoid further bloodshed. Mowbray himself was exiled for life.

John of Gaunt died in February 1399 and without explanation, Richard II cancelled the legal documents that would have allowed Henry to inherit John of Gaunt’s land and titles utomatically. Instead, Henry would be required to ask for the lands and titles directly from Richard. After some hesitation, Henry met the exiled Thomas Arundel, former archbishop of Canterbury, who had lost his position because of his involvement with the Lords Appellant.

Henry and Arundel returned to England while Richard was on a military campaign in Ireland. With Arundel as his advisor, Henry began a military campaign, confiscating land from those who opposed him and ordering his soldiers to destroy much of Cheshire. Henry initially announced that his intention was to reclaim his rights as Duke of Lancaster, though he quickly gained enough power and support to have himself declared King Henry IV of England, Lord of Ireland on September 30, 1399. Henry had King Richard II imprisoned (who died in prison under mysterious circumstances) and bypassed Richard’s 7-year-old heir-presumptive, Edmund de Mortimer, 5th Earl of March.

Henry’s coronation, on 13 October 1399 at Westminster Abbey, may have marked the first time since the Norman Conquest when the monarch made an address in English.

Henry procured an Act of Parliament to ordain that the Duchy of Lancaster would remain in the personal possession of the reigning monarch. The barony of Halton was vested in that dukedom. This is why the present monarch, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is also the Duke of Lancaster.

Royal Ancestry of King Henry VII of England. Conclusion

Tags

Catherine of Valois, Charlemagne, Henry Tudor, Henry VII of England, Holy Roman Emperor, Holy Roman Empire, House of Tudor, Hugh Capet, Kings and Queens of England, Kings of france

The Tudor name

Before I continue to discuss the Royal Ancestry of Henry VII of England I’d like to delve into some history of the Tudor name itsel and it’s usage.

The name Tewdur or Tudor is derived from the words tud “territory” and rhi “king”. Owen Tudor took it as a surname on being knighted. It is doubtful whether the Tudor kings used the name on the throne. Kings and princes were not seen as needing a name, and a ‘Tudor’ name for the royal family was hardly known in the sixteenth century. The royal surname was never used in official publications, and hardly in ‘histories’ of various sorts before 1584.

Henry VII, King of England and Lord of Ireland

Monarchs were not anxious to publicize their descent in the paternal line from a Welsh adventurer, stressing instead continuity with the historic English and French royal families. Their subjects did not think of them as ‘Tudors’, or of themselves as ‘Tudor people’”. Princes and Princesses would have been known as “of England”. The medieval practice of colloquially calling princes after their place birth (e.g. Henry of Bolingbroke for Henry IV or Henry of Monmouth for Henry V) was not followed. Henry VII was likely known as “Henry of Richmond” before his taking of the throne and not Henry Tudor.

In my posts about the Maternal Ancestry of Henry VII we saw that he descended from both the Kings of England and the Kings of France many times over. In this post I’d like to focus on Catherine of Valois, Henry’s maternal grandmother.

Catherine of Valois

Henry V of England died on August 31, 1422, leaving his wife, Queen Catherine of Valois, widowed. The Queen initially lived with her infant son, King Henry VI, before moving to Wallingford Castle early in his reign. In 1427, it is believed that Catherine began an affair with Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset. The evidence of this affair is questionable; however the liaison prompted a parliamentary statute regulating the remarriage of queens of England. The historian G. L. Harris suggested that it was possible that the affair resulted in the birth of Edmund Tudor. Harriss wrote: “By its very nature the evidence for Edmund ‘Tudor’s’ parentage is less than conclusive, but such facts as can be assembled permit the agreeable possibility that Edmund ‘Tudor’ and Margaret Beaufort were first cousins and that the royal house of ‘Tudor’ sprang in fact from Beauforts on both sides.”Despite the statute it is accepted that Catherine married Owen at some unknown later date.

Catherine lived in the king’s household, presumably so she could care for her young son, but the arrangement also enabled the councillors to watch over the queen dowager herself. Nevertheless, Catherine entered into a sexual relationship with Welshman Owen ap Maredudd ap Tudor, who, in 1421, in France, had been in the service of Henry V’s steward Sir Walter Hungerford. Tudor was probably appointed keeper of Catherine’s household or wardrobe. The relationship began when Catherine lived at Windsor Castle, and she became pregnant with their first child there. At some point, she stopped living in the King’s household and in May 1432 Parliament granted Owen the rights of an Englishman. This was important because of Henry IV’s laws limiting the rights of Welshmen.

Catherine of Valois’s arms as queen consort

There is no clear evidence that Catherine of Valois and Owen Tudor actually were married. No documentation of such a marriage exists. Moreover, even if they had been married, the question arises whether the marriage would have been lawful, given the Act of 1428. At the same time, there is no contemporaneous evidence that the validity of the marriage and the legitimacy of her children were questioned in secular or canon law. From the relationship of Owen Tudor and Queen Catherine descended the Tudor dynasty of England, starting with King Henry VII. Tudor historians asserted that Owen and Catherine had been married, for their lawful marriage would add respectability and stronger royal ties to the claims of the Tudor dynasty.

Owen and Catherine had at least six children. Edmund, Jasper and Owen were all born away from court. They had one daughter, Margaret, who became a nun and died young.

When discussing the maternal ancestry of King Henry VII of England I didn’t mention several times that Henry was descended from the kings of France. I was reserving the discussion about Catherine of Valois to cite some of the prominent royals from France that Henry is a descendant. I will begin with the founder of the French House of Capet, Hugh Capet. Keep in mind as I discuss the ancestry of Hugh Capet, these are also ancestors of Henry VII.

Hugh Capet, King of the Franks

Hugh Capet (c. 939 – October 24, 996) was the King of the Franks from 987 to 996. He is the founder and first king from the House of Capet. He was elected as the successor of the last Carolingian king, Louis V. Hugh was a descendant in the illegitimate line from Charlemagne, King of the Franks and Emperor of the Romans.

Descent and inheritance

The son of Hugh the Great, Duke of the Franks, and Hedwige of Saxony, daughter of the German king Heinrch I the Fowler, Hugh was born sometime between 938 and 941. He was born into a well-connected and powerful family with many ties to the royal houses of France and Germany.

Through his mother, Hugh was the nephew of Otto I the Great, Holy Roman Emperor; Heinrich I, Duke of Bavaria; Bruno the Great, Archbishop of Cologne; and finally, Gerberga of Saxony, Queen of the Franks. Gerberga was wife of Louis IV, King of the Franks and mother of Lothair of France and Charles, Duke of Lower Lorraine.

His paternal family, the Robertians, were powerful landowners in the Île-de-France. His grandfather had been King Robert I. King Odo was his granduncle and King Rudolph was his uncle by affinity. Hugh’s paternal grandmother was a legitimate descendant of Charlemagne.

From Hugh descends many Kings of France and Kings and Queens of England.

Charlemange, King of the Franks and Emperor of the Romans.

For a little fun I want to end this series demonstrating how Henry VII of England is a descendant of Heinrich VII, Holy Roman Emperor.

Heinrich VII (c. 1275 – August 24, 1313) was the King of Germany (or Rex Romanorum) from 1308 and Holy Roman Emperor from 1312. He was the first emperor of the House of Luxembourg. During his brief career he reinvigorated the imperial cause in Italy, which was racked with the partisan struggles between the divided Guelf and Ghibelline factions, and inspired the praise of Dino Compagni and Dante Alighieri. He was the first emperor since the death of Friedrich II in 1250, ending the great interregnum of the Holy Roman Empire; however, his premature death threatened to undo his life’s work. His son, Johann of Bohemia, failed to be elected as his successor. Heinrich VII was married to Margaret of Brabant (4 October 1276 – 14 December 1311), She was the daughter of Jean I, Duke of Brabant and Margaret of Flanders.

Johann of Bohemia (August 10, 1296 – August 26, 1346) was the Count of Luxembourg from 1313 and King of Bohemia from 1310 and titular King of Poland. He was the eldest son of the Holy Roman Emperor Heinrich VII and his wife Margaret of Brabant. He is well known for having died while fighting in the Battle of Crécy at age 50, after having been blind for a decade. Jean of Bohemia was married to Elizabeth of Bohemia (1292–1330) a princess of the Bohemian Přemyslid dynasty who became queen consort of Bohemia as the first wife of King John the Blind. She was the mother of Emperor Charles IV, King of Bohemia. She was the daughter of Wenceslaus II of Bohemia and Judith of Habsburg (Judith 1271 – 21 May 1297, also named Guta (Czech: Guta Habsburská), was a member of the House of Habsburg, was the youngest daughter of King Rudolf I of Germany and his wife Gertrude of Hohenburg.

Bonne of Luxemburg or Jutta of Luxemburg (May 20, 1315 – September 11, 1349), was born Jutta (Judith), the second daughter of Johann the Blind, king of Bohemia, and his first wife, Elisabeth of Bohemia. She was the first wife of King Jean II of France; however, as she died a year prior to his accession, she was never a French queen. Jutta was referred to in French historiography as Bonne de Luxembourg. She was a member of the House of Luxembourg. Among her children were Charles V of France, Philippe II, Duke of Burgundy, and Joan, Queen of Navarre.

Charles V, King of France

Charles V (21 January 1338 – 16 September 1380), called “the Wise” was King of France from 1364 to his death, the third from the House of Valois. His reign marked a high point for France during the Hundred Years’ War, with his armies recovering much of the territory held by the English, and successfully reversed the military losses of his predecessors. On April 8, 1350 Charles V was married to Joanna of Bourbon (3 February 1338 – 4 February 1378). She was born in the Château de Vincennes, a daughter of Peter I, Duke of Bourbon, and Isabella of Valois, a half-sister of Philippe VI of France.

Charles VI (3 December 1368 – 21 October 1422), called the Beloved and the Mad was King of France for 42 years from 1380 to his death in 1422, the fourth from the House of Valois. Charles VI married Isabeau of Bavaria (ca. 1371 – 24 September 1435) on 17 July 1385. She was born into the House of Wittelsbach as the eldest daughter of Duke Stephen III of Bavaria-Ingolstadt and Taddea Visconti of Milan. She gave birth to 12 children: Among them was Catherine of Valois who first married Henry VI, King of England and secondly to Owen Tudor and through her second marriage she was the Paternal grandmother of Henry VII of England. This concludes Henry VII’s descent from Holy Roman Emperor Heinrich VII.

Speaking of conclusions, this concludes my series on the Royal Ancestry of King Henry VII of England. Although he won the throne by conquest and his hereditary right was pretty week, he did have many royal ancestors from many of the prominent royal houses of Europe.

Royal Ancestry of Henry VII of England. Part II

Tags

Earl of Richmond, Henry Tudor, Henry VII of England, Isabella of of France, Kings and Queens of England, Kings of france, Philip III of France, Philip IV of France, Philippa of Hainault

Henry VII, King of England and Lord of Ireland.

In our first look at the royal ancestry of Henry VII we’ll examine the maternal line starting with His mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort May 31, 1441 or 1443 – June 29, 1509. She had been an essential figure in the Wars of the Roses and an influential matriarch of the House of Tudor. She was the daughter and sole heiress of John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset (1404–1444), who was a great-grandson of King Edward III through his third surviving son, John of Gaunt by Katherine Swynford. It was Margaret’s descent from John of Gaunt that gave Henry Tudor, 2nd Earl of Richmond a slight claim to the English throne. Henry VII’s descent from Edward III also establishes Henry’s first link to royal ancestry.

Lady Margaret Beaufor, Countess of Richmond.

Though noted last week, just because Henry had royal ancestry doesn’t conclude his claim to the throne was strong. At first the children of John of Gaunt by Katherine Swynford were illegitimate, however, Letters Patent in 1397 by Richard II and a subsequent Papal Bull issued by the Pope Eugene IV, legitimized the adult children of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford with full rights to the throne. However, an Act of Parliament in the reign of Henry IV confirmed their legitimacy but barred the children from having succession rights to the throne.

Also, as stated in my original post, that Henry VII’s royal ancestry was not just from the English Royal Family, he descended from other royal houses that English royalty married into, such as the royal houses of France and Spain. For the rest of this post as I examine the royal descent of Henry VII, I’ll examine the ancestry of the spouses of the English kings from which he descends.

The ancestry I’ll examine next is Philippe of Hainaut, spouse of Edward III who were Henry VII’s closest royal ancestors. Philippa was born June 24, c.1310/15 in Valenciennes in the County of Hainaut in the Low Countries, a daughter of William I, Count of Hainaut, and Joan of Valois, Countess of Hainaut, a granddaughter of Philippe III of France. She was one of eight children and the second of five daughters. Her eldest sister Margaret married the Holy Roman Emperor Ludwig IV in 1324. Edward promised in 1326 to marry her within the following two years. She was married to Edward, first by proxy, when Edward dispatched the Bishop of Coventry “to marry her in his name” in Valenciennes (second city in importance of the county of Hainaut) in October 1327. The marriage was celebrated formally in York Minster on 24 January 1328, some months after Edward’s accession to the throne of England.

Philippe IV, King of France

With Philippa being a great-granddaughter of Philippe III of France, her royal ancestry does reconnect back to the English Royal Family. Philippe III himself was a great-great-grandson of Henry II of England via his daughter Eleanor who married Alfonso VIII of Castile. Their daughter Blanche of Castile married Louis VIII of France and their son was Louis IX of France the father of Philippe III. Philippa and Edward III were second cousins via their descent from Philippe III.

Next royal ancestry we’ll examine is Isabella of France (1295 – 22 August 1358), sometimes described as the She-Wolf of France. She was Queen of England as the wife of Edward II, and regent of England from 1326 until 1330. She was the youngest surviving child and only surviving daughter of Philippe IV of France and Joan I of Navarre. Queen Isabella was notable at the time for her beauty, diplomatic skills, and intelligence.

Isabella is descended from Gytha of Wessex through King Andrew II of Hungary and thus brought the bloodline of the last Anglo-Saxon King of England, Harold II Godwinson, back into the English Royal family.

As said, Isabella was married to Edward II of England and her first cousin, Joan of Valois, was the daughter of Charles of Valois (himself a brother of Philippe IV of France, the father of Isabella) and Joan married William I, Count of Hainaut and their daughter, Philippa of Hainaut, was the wife Edward III son of Edward II and Isabella!

Arms of the Kings of France

If you can follow that, it simply means that Philippa and Edward III were second cousins via their descent from Philippe III. This further exemplifies the fact that these cousin relationships increased the number of times Henry VII descended from the royal families of France, Castile and even England.

To keep this post at a digestible level I’ll stop here.

Legal Succession: Henry VII part 2

Tags

Battle of Bosworth Field, Duke of Lancaster, Earl of Richmond, England, Henry IV, Henry Tudor, Henry VII of England, House of Lancaster, House of York, John of Gaunt, Kings and Queens of England, Richard II, War of the Roses

As we saw in the last installment Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, had a tenuous claim to the English throne. As descendents of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster (son of Edward III) via a third marriage which later legitimized his children, Henry Tudor’s line once had succession rights but those rights were then legally removed. As I mentioned before, the victors  get to rewrite the rules and this is evident in the rise to the throne of Henry VII.

With the death of Henry VI and the death of his son, Edward, Prince of Wales, the collateral branch of the Plantagenet, known as the House of Lancaster had come to an end. However, there were other descendants of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster to take up the Lancastrian claims. The Beaufort House, from John of Gaunt’s third marriage, were given the title Duke of Somerset and after the extinction of the male line only the female line remained, represented by Lady Margaret Beaufort and her son Henry Tudor. The year after the Battle of Tewkesbury Lady Margaret married Lord Stanley, who had been a devoted supported of King Edward IV. Stanley did not support Richard III and instrumental in putting Henry Tudor on the throne.

It was the defeat of Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field in August of 1485 that placed the new Tudor Dynasty on the throne. Ever since Henry IV usurped the throne from Richard II in 1399 the legality of all the subsequent kings has been a pretty messy situation. Although Henry had a slim blood claim to the throne his legal standing was even weaker given that his line had lost its succession rights. Therefore, his succession to the throne was more of a conquest than a usurpation.

One of the things the new Henry VII did was to unite the warring factions while also strengthening his position on the throne. To do that he desired to marry Elizabeth of York, daughter of King Edward IV. This would unite both the houses of York and Lancaster. However there was some resistance to that. Those that were against the union claimed that Richard III’s Act of Parliament, Titulus Regius, that had declared the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville invalid and the children illegitimate still stood as law. Henry VII disagreed with that position and had the act repealed. When he was crowned Henry VII took the throne not as a conqueror but as a legitimate descendant of John of Gaunt.

Henry and Elizabeth married on January 18, 1486. Their first son, Arthur, born on September 20, 1486 had a strong blood and legal claim to the throne. He was a descendant of the now legal King Henry VII of England and he was a multiple descendant of Edward III and heir to both the houses of York and Lancaster.

As we shall see in the next section of this series Arthur never lived to become king and the throne passed to his brother who became King Henry VIII of England. Although the succession of Henry VII and his marriage to Elizabeth of York ended the Dynastic Wars struggles for the throne would also plague the Tudor Dynasty.

The Princes in the Tower

Tags

Charles II of England, Duke of Buckingham, Henry Stafford, Henry Tudor, Lady Margaret Beaufort, Richard Duke of York, Richard III, The Princes in the Tower

This is one of the great mysteries of history. Many people know the story, even those who may not follow royalty or even history in general. It is a classic tale of tragedy. Two young boys, one the age of 12, and a King, the other 10, his brother a royal duke,  are sent to the Tower of London by their uncle who usurps the throne. Then the Princes were never heard from again. What happened to them? Were they killed? Did they get taken away to live their lives in obscurity? Nobody knows.

After Richard III took the throne in June of 1483 the two princes were seen less and less within the Tower, and by the end of the summer of they had disappeared from public view altogether. The consensus among historians is that the princes were murdered.

Here are the five major suspects:

1. King Richard III

2. Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham; friend and Ally of Richard III

3. James Tyrrell, servant of King Richard III

4. Lady Margaret Beaufort;

5. Henry Tudor,son of Lady Margaret and later King Henry VII.

When I look at the list I question some of them. Let’s take Richard III himself. Legend has it that the two princes were smothered to death with their pillows. This was first mentioned in the writings by Sir Thomas Moore. Moore has Tyrell doing the killings. I have a hard time thinking that Richard III did the dirty deed himself and it seems that other historians who are evaluating him agree on that point.

I often thought that Henry Tudor would also be a logical choice. After taking the throne from Richard III he did do away with some of the Plantagenet heirs that had a better claim to the throne than he. Most notable was Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick who was the a potential claimant to the English throne during the reigns of both Richard III and Henry VII.* From the time Henry VII took the throne the Earl of Warwick was also imprisoned within the Tower of London where he remained a constant threat to Henry’s claim on the throne.

In 1499 a man named Perkin Warbeck pretended to be Prince Richard, Duke of York one of the young Princes in the Tower. He conspired with the Earl of Warwick to escape from the Tower. Many historians claim that the real motive for the execution was the upcoming marriage of Henry VII’s eldest son, Arthur, Prince of Wales, who was about to marry Infanta Catherine of Aragon. It seems that her parents, King Fernando II-V and Isabel I of Spain did not want the marriage to go through while there remained a threat to Henry’s throne.

I write of this to show that there is historical precedence of Henry VII killing those who had a better blood claim to the throne that he. The problem with this theory is that it is well-known that the two princes disappeared by the end of the summer and this was a couple of years prior to Henry Tudor becoming King of England. So unless they princes were housed someplace else after being held in the Tower I do not see how Henry Tudor can be guilty of their death.

In 1674 during the reign of King Charles II of England and Scotland bones were discovered in by workmen rebuilding a stairway in the Tower. They were presumed to the the bones of the young princes and they were ceremoniously interred in Westminster Abbey, in an urn bearing the names of Edward and Richard. It has never been proven that those bones belonged to the young princes. Since DNA testing has been done to the bones of Richard III, I think now is the right time to perform DNA testing on the bones discovered in 1674.

If the bone are that of the two young princes, then the mystery of their whereabouts will be answered. If, however, they prove to not be the bones of the young princes the mystery will remain. How they were killed and who killed them will always be a mystery.