November 28, 1499: Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick is Beheaded

Tags

17th Earl of Warwick, Duke of Clarence, Edward Plantagenet, George Plantagenet, King Edward IV of England, King Henry VII of England, King Richard III of England, Lady Isabel Neville, Richard Neville

Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick (February 25, 1475 – November 28, 1499) was the son of George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence and Isabel Neville and a potential claimant to the English throne during the reigns of both his uncle, Richard III (1483–1485), and Richard’s successor, Henry VII (1485–1509). He was also a younger brother of Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury. Edward was tried and executed for treason in 1499.

Life

Edward Plantagenet was the son of George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence and Isabel Neville.

George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence (1449 – 1478), was the 6th son of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York, and Cecily Neville, and the brother of English kings Edward IV and Richard III.

His mother was Lady Isabel Neville (1451 – 1476) was the elder daughter and co-heiress of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (the Kingmaker of the Wars of the Roses), and Anne de Beauchamp, suo jure 16th Countess of Warwick.

She was also the elder sister of Anne Neville, who was Princess of Wales as the wife of Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, the only son and heir apparent of King Henry VI. Through her second marriage she was Queen of England as the wife of King Richard III.

Edward was born on February 25, 1475 at Warwick, the family home of his mother. At his christening, his uncle King Edward IV stood as godfather. He was styled as Earl of Warwick from birth, but was not officially granted the title until after his father’s death in 1478.

Edward’s potential claim to the throne following the deposition of his cousin Edward V in 1483 was overlooked because of the argument that the attainder of his father barred Warwick from the succession (although that could have been reversed by an Act of Parliament). Despite this, he was knighted at York by Richard III in September 1483.

In 1480, Edward was made a ward of King Edward IV’s stepson, Thomas Grey, 1st Marquess of Dorset, who as his guardian had the power to decide whom he would marry. Clements Markham, writing in 1906, claimed that Richard III had “liberated” Edward from the Tower of London, where Dorset had placed him; however, there are no contemporary sources for this claim, although Dorset was Constable of the Tower.

Dominic Mancini wrote that Richard, on becoming king, “gave orders that the son of the duke of Clarence, his other brother, then a boy of ten years old, should come to the city: and commanded that the lad should be kept in confinement in the household of his wife”.

John Rous (died 1492) wrote that after the death of Richard III’s only legitimate son, Edward of Middleham, Richard III named Edward Earl of Warwick as heir to the throne; however, there is no other evidence for this, and historians have pointed out that it would be illogical for Richard to claim that Clarence’s attainder barred Warwick from the throne while at the same time naming him as his heir.

However, in 1485, upon the death of Richard’s queen, Anne, Edward was created Earl of Salisbury by right of his mother, who was a co-heiress with Anne to the earldom.

Imprisonment and execution

After King Richard III’s death in 1485, Edward, Earl of Warwick, only ten years old, was kept as prisoner in the Tower of London by Henry VII. His claim to the English throne, albeit tarnished, remained a potential threat to Henry VII, particularly after the appearance of the pretender Lambert Simnel in 1487.

In 1490, he was confirmed in his title of Earl of Warwick despite his father’s attainder (his claim to the earldom of Warwick being through his mother). But he remained a prisoner until 1499, when he became involved (willingly or unwillingly) in a plot to escape with Perkin Warbeck.

On November 21, 1499, Edward, Earl of Warwick appeared at Westminster for a trial before his peers, presided over by John de Vere, 13th Earl of Oxford. A week later, Edward, Earl of Warwick was beheaded for treason on Tower Hill.

Henry VII paid for his body and head to be taken to Bisham Abbey in Berkshire for burial. It was thought at the time that the Earl of Warwick was executed in response to pressure from Fernando II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, whose daughter, Catherine of Aragon, was to marry Henry VII’s heir, Arthur. Catherine was said to feel very guilty about Warwick’s death, and believed that her trials in later life were punishment for it.

A number of historians have claimed that Warwick had a mental disability. This conclusion appears entirely based on the chronicler Edward Hall’s contention that Warwick’s lengthy imprisonment from a young age had left him “out of all company of men, and sight of beasts, in so much that he could not discern a goose from a capon.”

Upon Warwick’s death, the House of Plantagenet became extinct in the legitimate male line. However, the surviving sons of his aunt Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, continued to claim the throne for the Yorkist line.

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. Conclusion

Tags

Catherine of Aragon, Elizabeth of York, Elizabeth Woodville, House of Tudor, King Henry VII of England, King Henry VIII of England, Lady Margaret Beaufort, Prince Arthur

After her son’s victory at the Battle of Bosworth Field, the Countess was referred to in court of Henry VII as “My Lady the King’s Mother”. Her son’s first Parliament reversed the attainder against her and declared her a feme sole. This status granted Beaufort considerable legal and social independence from men. She was allowed to own property separately from her husband (as though she were unmarried) and sue in court – two rights denied her contemporary married women.

As arranged by their mothers, Henry VII married Elizabeth of York the daughter of Edward IV. The Countess was reluctant to accept a lower status than the dowager Queen Elizabeth (Woodville) or even her daughter-in-law, Elizabeth of York the Queen Consort.

She wore robes of the same quality as the queen consort and walked only half a pace behind her. Elizabeth’s biographer, Amy Licence, states that this “would have been the correct courtly protocol”, adding that “only one person knew how Elizabeth really felt about Margaret and she did not commit it to paper.”

Margaret had written her signature as M. Richmond for years, since the 1460s. In 1499, she changed her signature to Margaret R., perhaps to signify her royal authority (R standing either for regina – queen in Latin as customarily employed by female monarchs – or for Richmond). Furthermore, she included the Tudor crown and the caption et mater Henrici septimi regis Angliæ et Hiberniæ (“and mother of Henry VII, King of England and Lord of Ireland”).

Many historians believe the departure from court of Dowager Queen Elizabeth Woodville in 1487 was partly at the behest of Henry’s influential mother, though this is uncertain.

Beaufort exerted considerable political influence within the Tudor court. The power she exercised was evidently obvious; a report from Spanish envoy Pedro de Ayala dating to 1498 claimed Henry VII was “much influenced by his mother and his followers in affairs or personal interest and in others.” In the earlier years of her son’s reign, records indicate Margaret usually accompanied the royal couple when they traveled.

While Margaret’s position in the royal court was, to some extent, an expression of gratitude by her son, she was likely far less the passive recipient of Henry’s favor one might expect.

Later in her marriage, the Countess preferred living alone. In 1499, with her husband’s permission, she took a vow of chastity in the presence of Richard FitzJames, Bishop of London. Taking a vow of chastity while being married was unusual but not unprecedented.

The Countess moved away from her husband and lived alone at Collyweston, Northamptonshire (near Stamford). She was regularly visited by her husband, who had rooms reserved for him. Margaret renewed her vows in 1504. From her principal residence at Collyweston she was given a special commission to administer justice over the Midlands and the North.

Margaret was also actively involved in the domestic life of the royal family. She created a proper protocol regarding the birth and upbringing of royal heirs. Though their relationship is often portrayed as antagonistic, Margaret and her daughter-in-law Elizabeth worked together when planning the marriages of the royal children.

They wrote jointly of the necessary instruction for Catherine of Aragon, who was to marry Elizabeth’s son Prince Arthur. Both women also conspired to prevent Elizabeth and Henry’s daughter Margaret from being married to the Scottish king, James IV, at too young an age; in this matter, Gristwood writes, Margaret was undoubtedly resolved that her granddaughter “should not share her fate”.

Henry VII, King of England and Lord of Ireland

After Queen Elizabeth’s death in 1503, Margaret became the principal female presence at court. When Prince Arthur died, Margaret played a part in ensuring her grandson Prince Henry, Duke of York, the new heir apparent, was raised appropriately by selecting some members of his new household.

The Countess was known for her education and her piety. Biographers Jones and Underwood claim the entirety of Beaufort’s life can be understood in the context of her “deeply-felt love and loyalty to her son”. Henry is said to have been likewise devoted.

Henry VII died on April 21, 1509, aged 52, having designated his mother chief executrix of his will. For two days after the death of her son, Margaret scrambled to secure the smooth succession of her grandson, Henry VIII. She arranged her son’s funeral and her grandson’s coronation. At her son’s funeral she was given precedence over all the other women of the royal family.

Before her death Margaret also left her mark on the early reign of Henry VIII; when her eighteen-year-old grandson chose members of his privy council, it was Margaret’s suggestions he took.

Death

The Countess Margaret died in the Deanery of Westminster Abbey on June 29, 1509, (probably aged 66). This was the day after her grandson Henry VIII’s 18th birthday, 5 days after his coronation and just over two months after the death of her son Henry VII. She is buried in the Henry VII Chapel of the Abbey. Her tomb is now situated between the later graves of William III and Mary II and the tomb of her great-great-granddaughter Mary I, Queen of Scots.

July 19, 1553 – Lady Jane Grey is replaced by Mary I of England as Queen of England. Part I.

Tags

1st Duke of Suffolk, Charles Brandon, King Edward VI of England, King Henry VII of England, Kings and Queens of England, Lady Frances Brandon, Lady Jane Grey, Lord Gilford Dudley, Princess Elizabeth of York, Privy Council, The Third Succession Act of 1544

Lady Jane Grey (c. 1537 – February 12, 1554), also known as Lady Jane Dudley (after her marriage) and as “the Nine Days’ Queen”, was an English noblewoman and de facto Queen of England and Ireland from 10 July until 19 July 1553.

Lady Jane Grey was the eldest daughter of Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, and his wife, Lady Frances Brandon, the second child and eldest daughter Princess Mary, and Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk. Princess Mary was the daughter of King Henry VII of England and Princess Elizabeth of York. This meant that Princess Mary was King Henry VIII’s younger sister.

Lady Jane Grey

The traditional view is that she was born at Bradgate Park in Leicestershire in October 1537, while more recent research indicates that she was born somewhat earlier, possibly in London, in late 1536 or in the spring of 1537. Jane had two younger sisters: Lady Katherine and Lady Mary. Through their mother, the three sisters were great-granddaughters of Henry VII; grandnieces of Henry VIII; and first cousins once removed of Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I.

Jane had an excellent humanist education and a reputation as one of the most learned young women of her day.

Contracts for marriage

Lady Jane acted as chief mourner at Catherine Parr’s funeral (the sixth and final wife of Henry VIII); Thomas Seymour showed continued interest to keep her in his household, and she returned there for about two months before he was arrested at the end of 1548. Seymour’s brother, the Lord Protector, Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, felt threatened by Thomas’ popularity with the young King Edward. Among other things, Thomas Seymour was charged with proposing Jane as a bride for the king.

In the course of Thomas Seymour’s following attainder and execution, Jane’s father was lucky to stay largely out of trouble. After his fourth interrogation by the King’s Council, he proposed his daughter Jane as a bride for the Protector’s eldest son, Lord Hertford. Nothing came of this, however, and Jane was not engaged until the spring of 1553, her bridegroom being Lord Guildford Dudley, a younger son of John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland.

Edward VI, King of England and Ireland.

The Duke, Lord President of the King’s Council from late 1549, was then the most powerful man in the country. On May 25, 1553, the couple were married at Durham House in a triple wedding, in which Jane’s sister Catherine was matched with the heir of the Earl of Pembroke, Lord Herbert, and another Katherine, Lord Guildford’s sister, with Henry Hastings, the Earl of Huntingdon’s heir.

The Third Succession Act of 1544 restored Henry VIII’s daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, to the line of succession, although they were still regarded as illegitimate. Furthermore, this Act authorised Henry VIII to alter the succession by his will. Henry’s will reinforced the succession of his three children, and then declared that, should none of them leave descendants, the throne would pass to heirs of his younger sister, Mary, which included Jane. For unknown reasons, Henry excluded Jane’s mother, Frances Grey, from the succession, and also bypassed the claims of the descendants of his elder sister, Margaret, who had married into the Scottish royal house and nobility.

When the 15-year-old Edward VI lay dying in the early summer of 1553, his Catholic half-sister Mary was still his heir presumptive. However, Edward, in a draft will (“My devise for the Succession”) composed earlier in 1553, had first restricted the succession to (non-existent) male descendants of Frances Brandon and her daughters, before he named his Protestant cousin “Lady Jane and her heirs male” as his successors, probably in June 1553; the intent was to ensure his Protestant legacy, thereby bypassing Mary, who was a Roman Catholic. Edward’s decision to name Jane Grey herself was possibly instigated by Northumberland.

Edward VI personally supervised the copying of his will which was finally issued as letters patent on June 21 and signed by 102 notables, among them the whole Privy Council, peers, bishops, judges, and London aldermen. Edward also announced to have his “declaration” passed in parliament in September, and the necessary writs were prepared. The King died on July 6, 1553, but his death was not announced until four days later.

On July 9, Jane was informed that she was now queen, and according to her own later claims, accepted the crown only with reluctance. On July 10, she was officially proclaimed Queen of England, France and Ireland after she had taken up secure residence in the Tower of London, where English monarchs customarily resided from the time of accession until coronation. Jane refused to name her husband Dudley as king, because that would require an Act of Parliament. She would agree only to make him Duke of Clarence.

François II, Duke of Brittany, and the English Royal Family.

Tags

Duchy of Brittany, Earl of Richmond, Francis II of Brittany, House of Lancaster, House of York, King Edward IV of England, King Henry VI of England, King Henry VII of England, Kingdom of England, Wars of the Roses

On June 30th I did a post on King Charles VIII of France who married Anne of Brittany. In my research I discovered that her father, François II, Duke of Brittany, had a strong connection to the English Royal Family.

François II of Brittany

François II of Brittany (June 23, 1433 – September 9, 1488) was Duke of Brittany from 1458 to his death. He was the grandson of Jean IV, Duke of Brittany.

François II was born to Richard of Brittany, Count of Étampes (1395–1438) and his wife, Margaret of Orléans, Countess of Vertus (1406–1466), the daughter of Louis I, Duke of Orléans, and Valentina Visconti. Richard of Brittany was the youngest son of Duke Jean IV of Brittany. Richard’s older brothers, Jean V and Arthur III, both succeeded their father as duke, but upon Arthur’s death in 1458 (Jean V’s sons François I and Peter II died in 1450 and 1457 respectively, without sons), the only legitimate male heir was his nephew François II.

Relationship with English royalty

Coat of Arms of King Henry VI of England

Protector of the House of Lancaster

Duke François II unexpectedly became the protector of England’s House of Lancaster in exile from 1471–1484.

During the latter half of the 15th century, civil war existed in England (Known as the Wars of the Roses) as the House of York and House of Lancaster fought each other for the English throne. In 1471, the Yorkists defeated their rivals in the battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury. The Lancastrian king, Henry VI of England and his only son, Edward of Westminster, died in the aftermath of the Battle of Tewkesbury.

Their deaths left the House of Lancaster with no direct claimants to the throne. Subsequently, the Yorkist king, Edward IV of England, was in complete control of England. He attainted those who refused to submit to his rule, such as Jasper Tudor and his nephew Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond (later King Henry VII of England), naming them as traitors and confiscating their lands.

The Tudors tried to flee to France but strong winds in the English Channel forced them to land at Le Conquet in Brittany, where they were taken into the custody of Duke François II. Henry Tudor, the only remaining Lancastrian noble with a trace of royal bloodline, had a weak claim to the throne, and King Edward IV regarded him as “a nobody”. However, François II viewed Henry as a valuable tool to bargain for England’s aid, when in conflicts with France, and therefore kept the Tudors under his protection.

François II housed Jasper Tudor, Henry Tudor, and the core of their group of exiled Lancastrians at the Château de Suscinio in Sarzeau, where they remained for 11 years. There, François II generously supported this group of exiled Englishmen against all the Plantagenet demands that he should surrender them.
In October 1483, Henry Tudor launched a failed invasion of England from Brittany. Duke François II supported this invasion by providing 40,000 gold crowns, 15,000 soldiers, and a fleet of transport ships. Henry’s fleet of 15 chartered vessels was scattered by a storm, and his ship reached the coast of England in company with only one other vessel.

Arms of Duke François II of Brittany

Henry realized that the soldiers on shore were the men of the new Yorkist king, Richard III of England, and so he decided to abandon the invasion and return to Brittany. As for Henry’s main conspirator in England, Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, he was convicted of treason and beheaded on November 2, 1483, way before Henry’s ships landed in England. For Henry’s conspiracy against King Richard III had been unravelled, and without the Duke of Buckingham or Henry Tudor, the rebellion was easily crushed.

Survivors of the failed uprising then fled to Brittany, where they openly supported Henry Tudor’s claim to the throne. On Christmas Day in 1483 at the Rennes Cathedral, Henry swore an oath to marry King Edward IV’s daughter, Elizabeth of York, and thus unite the warring houses of York and Lancaster. Henry’s rising prominence made him a great threat to King Richard III, and the Yorkist king made several overtures to Duke Francis II to surrender the young Lancastrian.

François II refused, holding out for the possibility of better terms from the King. In mid-1484, François was incapacitated by one of his periods of illness, and while recuperating, his treasurer, Pierre Landais, took over the reins of government. Landais reached an agreement with King Richard III to send Henry and his uncle Jasper back to England in exchange for a pledge of 3,000 English archers to defend Brittany against a threatened French attack.

John Morton, a bishop of Flanders, learned of the scheme and warned the Tudors in time. The Tudors then managed to separately escape, hours ahead of Landais’ soldiers, across the nearby border into France. They were received at the court of King Charles VIII of France, who allowed them to stay and provided them with resources. Shortly afterwards, when François II had recovered, he offered the 400 remaining Lancastrians, still at and around the Château de Suscinio, safe-conduct into France and even paid for their expenses. For the French, the Tudors were useful pawns to ensure that King Richard III did not interfere with French plans to acquire Brittany. Thus, the loss of the Lancastrians seriously played against the interests of Francis II.

Titular Earl of Richmond

Circa 1136, King Stephen of England named Alan of Penthièvre of Brittany (also known as Alan the Black) the 1st Earl of Richmond. After Alan, the title and its possessions (the Honour of Richmond) were typically bestowed upon the Dukes of Brittany, with a few interruptions, through the ducal reign of Jean IV, which ended in 1399. After Jean IV, the English kings would bestow the title Earl of Richmond on nobles other than the Dukes of Brittany, including Edmund Tudor, Henry Tudor’s father. However the dukes of Brittany from Jean V through François II would continue to use the titulary Earl of Richmond.

It is possible that François willed whatever remained of his claims to the earldom and the Honour of Richmond to Henry Tudor. On successfully gaining the English crown after the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, Henry VII merged the earldom and its possessions into the crown.

Life of Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham.

Tags

2nd Duke of Buckingham, Duke of York, Henry Stafford, House of Plantagenet, House of Stafford, King Edward III of England, King Edward V of England, King Henry VII of England, King Richard III of England, Richard Duke of York, Wars of the Roses

Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, (September 4, 1455 – November 2, 1483) was an English nobleman known as the namesake of Buckingham’s rebellion, a failed but significant collection of uprisings in England and parts of Wales against Richard III of England in October 1483. He is also one of the primary suspects in the disappearance (and presumed murder) of the Princes in the Tower.

Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham

Henry Stafford was the only son of Humphrey Stafford, Earl of Stafford, and Anne Neville (d.1480) was a daughter of Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmorland, and his second wife Lady Joan Beaufort, the legitimised daughter of John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, the third surviving son of King Edward III of England. His first wife, Blanche of Lancaster, was also his third cousin; both were great-great-grandchildren of King Henry III.

Henry Stafford became Earl of Stafford when he was three years old in 1458 upon his father’s death, and was made a ward of King Edward IV of England. He became the 2nd Duke of Buckingham at age 4 in 1460 following the death of his grandfather Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham, at the Battle of Northampton.

Catherine Woodville, Duchess of Buckingham

In February 1466, at age 10, Henry was married to Catherine Woodville, the daughter of Richard Woodville, 1st Earl Rivers, and Jacquetta of Luxembourg, the eldest daughter of Peter I of Luxembourg, Count of Saint-Pol, Conversano and Brienne, and his wife Margaret of Baux. Catherine Woodville was sister of Edward IV’s queen, Elizabeth Woodville.

The Duke of Buckingham and Catherine Woodville had four children:
* Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham (February 3, 1478 – May 17, 1521)
* Elizabeth Stafford, Countess of Sussex (c. 1479 – 11 May 1532)
* Henry Stafford, 3rd Earl of Wiltshire (c. 1479 – April 6, 1523)
* Anne Stafford, Countess of Huntingdon (c. 1483 – 1544)

Upon the death of Edward IV in 1483, the Duke of Buckingham allied himself to the king’s younger brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester, helping him succeed to the throne as Richard III in lieu of Edward’s living sons.

Buckingham’s rebellion of 1483

In 1483, a conspiracy arose among a number of disaffected gentry, many of whom had been supporters of Edward IV and the “whole Yorkist establishment”. The conspiracy was nominally led by Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, who was Richard III’s former ally and first cousin once removed.

Richard III, King of England, Lord of Ireland

Although it had begun as a Woodville-Beaufort conspiracy (being “well underway” by the time of the duke’s involvement). Indeed, it has suggested that it was “only the subsequent parliamentary attainder that placed Buckingham at the centre of events”, in order to blame a single disaffected magnate motivated by greed, rather than “the embarrassing truth” that those opposing Richard were actually “overwhelmingly Edwardian loyalists”.

It is possible that they planned to depose Richard III and place Edward V back on the throne, and that when rumours arose that the young King Edward V and his brother, Richard, Duke of York, were dead, Buckingham proposed that Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, should return from exile, take the throne and marry Elizabeth of York, elder sister of the Tower Princes.

However, it has also been pointed out that as this narrative stems from Richard III’s own parliament of 1484, it should probably be treated “with caution”. For his part, Buckingham raised a substantial force from his estates in Wales and the Marches. Henry, Earl of Richmond, in exile in Brittany, enjoyed the support of the Breton treasurer Pierre Landais, who hoped Buckingham’s victory would cement an alliance between Brittany and England.

Henry VII, King of England, Lord of Ireland (Formerly The Earl of Richmond)

As Richard III’s ally, the plausibility of Buckingham being a suspect in the murder of the Princes in the Tower depends on the princes having already been dead by the time the Duke of Buckingham was executed in November 1483. It has been suggested that Buckingham had several potential motives.

As a descendant of Edward III, through two of his sons, John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster and Thomas of Woodstock, 1st Duke of Gloucester on his father’s side, as well as through John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster through John Beaufort, son of John of Gaunt on his mother’s side, Buckingham may have hoped to accede to the throne himself in due course; alternatively, he may have been acting on behalf of a third party.

Some, notably Paul Murray Kendall, regard Buckingham as the likeliest suspect: his execution, after he had rebelled against Richard III in October 1483, might signify that he and the king had fallen out; Alison Weir takes this as a sign that Richard had murdered the princes without Buckingham’s knowledge and Buckingham had been shocked by it.

A contemporary Portuguese document suggests Buckingham as the guilty party, stating “…and after the passing away of King Edward V in the year of 83, another one of his brothers, the Duke of Gloucester, had in his power the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, the young sons of the said king his brother, and turned them to the Duke of Buckingham, under whose custody the said Princes were starved to death.”

A document dated some decades after the disappearance was found within the archives of the College of Arms in London in 1980; this stated that the murder “be the vise of the Duke of Buckingham”. This led for some historians to suggest that possibly some of Richard’s prominent supporters, including Buckingham and Tyrell, murdered the princes on their own initiative without waiting for Richard’s orders.

It is noted In the document “After the King’s departure Buckingham was in effective command in the capital, and it is known that when the two men met a month later there was an unholy row between them.” This supports theory that a rift between Buckingham and Richard III after the king learned of Buckingham’s involvement in the murders of his nephews.

Buckingham is the only person to be named as responsible in a contemporary chronicle other than Richard himself. However, for two reasons he is unlikely to have acted alone. First of all, if he were guilty of acting without Richard’s orders it is extremely surprising that Richard did not lay the blame for the princes’ murder on Buckingham after Buckingham was disgraced and executed, especially as Richard could potentially have cleared his own name by doing so.

Secondly, it is likely he would have required Richard’s help to gain access to the princes, under close guard in the Tower of London, although Kendall argued as Constable of England, he might have been exempt from this ruling. As a result, although it is extremely possible that he was implicated in the decision to murder them, the hypothesis that he acted without Richard’s knowledge is not widely accepted by historians.

While Jeremy Potter suggested that Richard would have kept silent had Buckingham been guilty because nobody would have believed Richard was not party to the crime, he further notes that “Historians are agreed that Buckingham would never have dared to act without Richard’s complicity, or at least, connivance”. However, Potter also hypothesised that perhaps Buckingham was fantasising about seizing the crown himself at this point and saw the murder of the princes as a first step to achieving this goal.

For his participation in the rebellion against the King, Henry Stanford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham was executed for treason by Richard III on November 2, 1483: he was beheaded in the courtyard between the Blue Boar Inn and the Saracen’s Head Inn (both demolished in the 18th century) in Salisbury market-place. He is believed to have been buried in St Peter’s Church in Britford in Wiltshire.

After the execution of the 2nd Duke of Buckingham, his widow, Catherine Woodville, married Jasper Tudor, second son of Owen Tudor and King Henry V’s widow, Catherine of Valois. After Jasper Tudor’s death on December 21, 1495, Catherine Woodville married Sir Richard Wingfield (d. July 22, 1525). Catherine Woodville died 18 May 1497.

April 21,1509: Death of Henry VII and his claim to the throne.

Tags

Battle of Bosworth Field, Claim to the English throne, Earl of Richmond, Elizabeth of York, House of Tudor, Isabella I of Castile, John II of Portugal, King Edward IV of England, King Henry VII of England, Richard III of England, Wars of the Roses

Today is the Anniversary of the death of King Henry VII of England, Lord of Ireland. Today I am examining Henry’s claims to the English throne.

Henry VII (January 28, 1457 – April 21, 1509) was the King of England and Lord of Ireland from his seizure of the crown on August 22, 1485 to his death. He was the first monarch of the House of Tudor.

Henry attained the throne when his forces defeated King Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field, the culmination of the Wars of the Roses. He was the last king of England to win his throne on the field of battle. He cemented his claim by marrying Elizabeth of York, daughter of Richard’s brother Edward IV.

Henry’s main claim to the English throne derived from his mother through the House of Beaufort. Henry’s mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort, was a great-granddaughter of John of Gaunt, the Duke of Lancaster and fourth son of Edward III, and his third wife Katherine Swynford. Katherine was Gaunt’s mistress for about 25 years. When they married in 1396 they already had four children, including Henry’s great-grandfather John Beaufort. Thus, Henry’s claim was somewhat tenuous; it was from a woman, and by illegitimate descent.

In theory, the Portuguese and Castilian royal families had a better claim as descendants of Catherine of Lancaster, the daughter of John of Gaunt and his second wife Constance of Castile.

At the time of the Battle of Bosworth Field King João II of Portugal (1455-1495) a great-great grandson of John of Gaunt and his marriage to Constance of Castile had a better hereditary claim to the throne. Another descendant of the marriage John of Gaunt and Constance of Castile that had a better hereditary claim to the throne was Queen Isabella I of Castile (1451-1504).

Incidentally, and Ironically, her daughter, Catherine of Aragon had a better hereditary claim to the English throne than her husband, King Henry VIII!

John of Gaunt’s nephew King Richard II legitimised Gaunt’s children by Katherine Swynford by Letters Patent in 1397. In 1407, Henry IV, John of Gaunt’s son by his first wife, issued new Letters Patent confirming the legitimacy of his half-siblings, but also declaring them ineligible for the throne. Henry IV’s action was of doubtful legality, as the Beauforts were previously legitimised by an Act of Parliament, but it further weakened Henry’s claim.

Nonetheless, by 1483 Henry was the senior male Lancastrian claimant remaining after the deaths in battle, by murder or execution of Henry VI, his son Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, and the other Beaufort line of descent through Lady Margaret’s uncle, the 2nd Duke of Somerset.

Also by 1483, Henry’s mother was actively promoting him as an alternative to Richard III, despite her being married to Lord Stanley, a Yorkist. At Rennes Cathedral on Christmas Day 1483, Henry pledged to marry Elizabeth of York, the eldest daughter of Edward IV, who was also Edward’s heir since the presumed death of her brothers, the Princes in the Tower, King Edward V and his brother Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York.

Henry devised a plan to seize the throne by engaging Richard quickly because Richard had reinforcements in Nottingham and Leicester. Though outnumbered, Henry’s Lancastrian forces decisively defeated Richard’s Yorkist army at the Battle of Bosworth Field on August 22, 1485. Several of Richard’s key allies, such as the Earl of Northumberland and William and Thomas Stanley, crucially switched sides or left the battlefield. Richard III’s death at Bosworth Field effectively ended the Wars of the Roses.

To secure his hold on the throne, Henry declared himself king by right of conquest retroactively from August 21, 1485, the day before Bosworth Field. Thus, anyone who had fought for Richard against him would be guilty of treason and Henry could legally confiscate the lands and property of Richard III, while restoring his own.

Elizabeth of York

Henry spared Richard’s nephew and designated heir, John de la Pole, 1st Earl of Lincoln, and made Margaret Plantagenet, a Yorkist heiress, Countess of Salisbury suo jure. He took care not to address the baronage or summon Parliament until after his coronation, which took place in Westminster Abbey on October 30, 1485. After his coronation Henry issued an edict that any gentleman who swore fealty to him would, notwithstanding any previous attainder, be secure in his property and person.

Henry honoured his pledge of December 1483 to marry Elizabeth of York. They were third cousins, as both were great-great-grandchildren of John of Gaunt. Henry and Elizabeth were married on January 18, 1486 at Westminster Abbey. The marriage unified the warring houses and gave his children a strong claim to the throne. The unification of the houses of York and Lancaster by this marriage is symbolised by the heraldic emblem of the Tudor rose, a combination of the white rose of York and the red rose of Lancaster.

Henry VII had Parliament repeal Titulus Regius, the statute that declared Edward IV’s marriage invalid and his children illegitimate, thus legitimising his wife.

This date in History. October 2, 1452: Birth of Richard III, King of England and Lord of Ireland.

Tags

Battle of Bosworth Field, Bishop of Bath Titulus Regis, Duke of York, Edward V of England House of Tudor, House of Anjou, King Edward IV of England, King Henry VII of England, King Richard III of England, Kings and Queens of England, Plantagenet Dynasty, Wars of the Roses

Today is the anniversary of the birth of Richard III, King of England and Lord of Ireland. The focus today of this blog entry is whether or not he was a usurper.

Richard III (October 2, 1452 – August 22, 1485) was King of England and Lord of Ireland from 1483 until his death in 1485. Richard was born on October 2, 1452 at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire, the eleventh of the twelve children of Richard, Duke of York, and Cecily Neville, and the youngest to survive infancy. Richard III was the last king of the House of York and the last of the Plantagenet dynasty. For those keeping track, the House of Anjou, AKA the Plantagenet Dynasty, ruled England and Ireland for 330 years, 8 months, 3 days beginning with the accession of Henry II on December 19, 1154 and ending with the defeat and death of Richard III on August 22, 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth Field, the last decisive battle of the Wars of the Roses, marking the end of the Middle Ages in England.

When Richard, Duke of York, brother 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 Edward V. Arrangements were made for Edward’s coronation later that year on June 22, 1483.

Richard III, King of England and Lord of Ireland

However, before the king could be crowned, the marriage of King Edward V’s parents, Edward IV and Elisabeth Woodville was declared bigamous and therefore invalid. Therefore, now officially illegitimate, their children were barred from inheriting the throne. On June 25th, an assembly of lords and commoners endorsed a declaration to this effect and proclaimed Richard as the rightful king. He was crowned on July 6, 1483. The young princes, Edward and his younger brother Richard, Duke of York, were not seen in public after August and accusations circulated that they had been murdered on Richard’s orders.

When I began studying English Royalty I believed that the claim that Edward IV’s marriage was illegal was the rationalization by Richard III and his party in order for Richard to justify usurping the throne. Was there a basis for such a claim? Indeed there was a basis for his claim and it was taken seriously at the time.

The basis for this claim was the evidence that prior to Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, Edward was already pre-contracted to marry a wealthy widow by the name of Lady Eleanor Butler. Lady Butler had passed away by the time Richard claimed the throne and therefore couldn’t corroborate this claim. Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells, a stalwart supporter of Richard, was the chief witness to the pre-contract of marriage between Edward IV and Lady Butler. According to Roman Catholic Church Law at the time, a pre-contract was a solemn oath to marry in the presence of clerical witnesses and this pre-contract took precedence over any other form of marital arrangement. This contract was legal and binding and therefore had to be legally dismissed for the parties to be free to marry somebody else.

As stated elsewhere in this blog regarding the legality of the succession, no king, at least by this time period, could alter the succession to the crown by decree or declaration. Parliament was firmly the Legislative body of the Kingdom and all laws proposed needed to be passed by Parliament, even changes to the succession. View yesterday’s blog entry on the succession of Queen Mary I where her brother Edward IV tried to bypass his half-sisters but his Will was not approved by Parliament prior to his death, thus making an attempted alteration to the succession illegal.

Therefore in order to legally justify Richard III’s taking of the throne in June of 1483 an Act of Parliament was issued in January 1484 entitled “Titulus Regius (The Title of King)” The Act stated that Edward IV’s marriage had been bigamous and therefore invalid. In the nullification of the marriage it also rendered all the children of the marriage as illegitimate, namely the young King Edward V and his brother Richard, Duke of York.

An interesting note is that the Titulus Regius did not actually name Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath as the main clerical witness for the claim of the pre-marital contract of Edward IV and Lady Butler. Instead the Titulus Regius named a Burgundian chronicler, Phillipe de Commines, as the main witness to the contract. The source of Phillipe de Commines witnessing the event was written in his memoirs where he said he witnessed the signing of the pre-contract between Edward IV and Lady Butler.

Edward IV, King of England and Lord of Ireland

An another interesting point about the Act making Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville’s children illegitimate is that the taint of illegitimacy did not tarnish the desirability of their daughter Princess Elizabeth of York. In order to heal the rift in the family, and it seems to bolster Richard III’s hold up the throne, he sought the hand of his niece in marriage. Her mother, Queen Elizabeth (formerly Elizabeth Woodville) flatly refused his advances. Even after Richard was deposed the new king, Henry VII, successfully won the hand of Princess Elizabeth of York and United the warring branches of the English Royal Family. Elizabeth of York’s stain of illegitimacy didn’t bother Henry nor prevent her from becoming Queen Consort of England. She really had a better claim to be a Queen Regnant of England but that’s another story.

One of the first acts of Parliament convened by Henry VII after he became king was to repeal Titulus Regius. This restored the legitimacy of the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville, and the legitimacy of their children, including Elizabeth of York. Henry honoured his pledge of December 1483 to marry Elizabeth of York. They were third cousins, as both were great-great-grandchildren of John of Gaunt. Henry and Elizabeth were married on 18 January 1486 at Westminster Abbey.

Today the vast majority of historians view the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville as legally valid. That’s not to say the pre-contract between Edward IV and Lady Butler didn’t occur, it vary well may have, there just isn’t enough evidence to determine, either for away, if the pre-contract was made.