SIR ROBERT BRACKENBURY ‘…gentle Brakenbery…’*

The last charge of King Richard III. It is possible that it was during this charge that Sir Robert Brackenbury fell, alongside his king. Painting by artist Graham Turner

**********

‘Of all Richard III’s Northern Lieutenants few were more closely
associated with the defence of his crown and his realm than was Robert
Brakenbury. None rose from more modest beginnings — and none has come
down to us with a name less tarnished’. So wrote the late historian, W E Hampton, in his article for the Ricardian Bulletin.

The name Robert Brackenbury of Selaby (b? – d.1485) is well known to those familiar with the times known to us as the Wars of the Roses but unfortunately not for the right reason. He is one of the individuals that Sir Thomas More mentioned in his History of Richard III – a scurrilous and damaging attack on the king – which frankly bears similarities to a daft novelette with Richard emerging as something akin to a Pantomime baddie but nevertheless not to be missed if you are in need of a laugh or two. Compared to others Sir Robert escaped More’s malignant and spiteful pen rather lightly. According to More, he, as Constable of the Tower, refused to obey the order of the murderous king to exterminate his two nephews, Edward V and Richard Duke of York, at that time, to all intents and purposes, still living at the Tower. He was merely accused of supplying the priest that, alone and unaided, dug up and removed the corpses of the murdered boys from deep in the ground beneath a great heap of stones to somewhere else more appropriate – a place that was conveniently forgotten when the priest promptly expired – probably from exhaustion. More had at that point already lost any vestige of credibility he may have had due to his over the top vitrolic descriptions of Richard beginning with his birth. which he described as difficult, being born ‘feet forward – as men be borne out of it – and ‘fully toothed‘ and causing his poor mother ‘much ado’ blah blah. Richard was also at birth ‘ever froward‘ later developing a crook back, was malicious, wrathful, envious, cruel and would not hesitate to kiss those he was planning to kill! More obviously never warmed to Richard. But onwards and to return to the dastardly plot which involved our Sir Robert. While the newly crowned Richard was at Gloucester he sent one John Green to London with the letter and credentials, as mentioned above, to be delivered to Sir Robert instructing him to eliminate the two young sons of Edward IV. Green interrupted Sir Robert while he was kneeling at prayer ‘before our Lady in the Tower‘ to deliver the king’s letter, surely the most inappropriate setting for the deliverance of a death warrant of young children. More loved to add these little snippets – earlier he had Richard, then duke of Gloucester, wittering on about strawberries – possibly believing they added credibility to a story so full of holes and absurdities it led Horace Walpole (1717-1797) to note in his Historic Doubts that ‘It is difficult to crowd more improbabilities and lies together than are comprehended in this short narrative’ (1). The upshot was, according to More, Brackenbury stoutly refusing to do any such thing ‘though he should die therfor‘ (2) Richard, More gratuitously informs us, heard the news of Sir Robert’s refusal to exterminate the two boys while sitting in a domus necessary – i.e. a privy – yes I know! you really couldn’t make it up only in this case the sainted More did. Strangely it didn’t occur to Richard, who was obviously highly miffed at the refusal, to then exterminate Sir Robert, who was now in on the dangerous secret that the king was actively seeking to murder the two sons of the late Edward IV! Which seems strange. Even stranger still was the fact that in August 1485 Sir Robert was amongst those who answered Richard’s call and made his way to Bosworth to fight for his king and in Sir Robert’s case, die for him. I will return to Bosworth later.

What do we know about Sir Robert? He came from a high status family who were known in the Durham area as early as the 12th century. He was the younger son of Thomas Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, although his date of birth is unknown. Rosemary Horrox suggests that he entered the service of Richard Duke of Gloucester c.1477 and by 1479 he was the Treasurer of Gloucester’s household and one of his feoffees. Later his ‘prospects were transformed by Gloucester’s accession in 1483′ (3). Although Sir Robert does not appear to have attended Richard’s coronation very soon after he was awarded the position of Constable of the Tower for life as well as that of ‘master of the mint and keeper of the king’s exchange in the Tower—one of relatively few northerners to receive major office in the south so early in the reign’ (4). This position – which but a short time earlier had been held by the executed Lord Hastings – would have proved highly lucrative for Sir Robert bringing with it the sum of £100 per annum. Alongside it he was given ‘the keping of the lyons in the said Towre of Londone for terme of his lif with the wages of xij d. by the day for himself and for the mete of every lyone and leopard vj d. by the day’. A slew of other appointments followed including the keeping and stewardship of all the king’s Forests in Essex and Constable of Tunbridge castle (5). In modern parlance, Sir Robert was on a roll. The power and privilege did not go to his head and change him as it does some men and he has come down through the centuries as being a thoroughly good egg. Richard also gave several Kentish manors including the glorious Ightham Mote – then known simply as the Mote – to Sir Robert after it was removed from Richard Haute following his attainment for his involvement in the 1483 rebellion (6).

Lovely Ightham Mote, Kent. Gifted to Sir Robert Brackenbury by Richard III. Photo with thanks to Katie Chan. wikipedia.org.

Thus it can be demonstrated that far from being a stranger to the king he was at that point already held in high regard and trusted and one would think that Richard would have been fully aware as to how he would react to an order to murder children. More failed to give us the source of his information although we can hazard a guess.

Recently Philippa Langley has pointed out in her book The Princes in the Tower that it’s highly plausible that Sir Robert accompanied one of the princes to Calais in November 1484. In the Canterbury City Archives there are references in November 1484 for payments for an allowance for wine and leavened bread for ‘the Lord Bastard riding to Calais‘ followed by an entry for a pike and wine for ‘Master Brakynbury Constable of the Tower of London’ on his return from Calais at about that time ‘from the Lord Bastard’ (7). This is intriguing because of Sir Robert’s close interaction with both the princes during their stay at the Tower. It has been suggested that the Lord Bastard was Richard’s illegitimate son, John of Pontefract/Gloucester, but that is debatable. John was never a lord and indeed Richard referred to him in a grant as ‘our dear bastard son, John of Gloucester’. Also Sir Robert’s familiarity with the princes would make it highly likely he would be thought a suitable chaperone for one of them rather than as a chaperone for John of Gloucester.

BOSWORTH

‘Also by often messengers and letters (Richard) commandyd Robert
Brakenbury, lyuetennant of the towr of London, to coome to him in all haste,
and to bring with him, as felows in warr, Thomas Burshere and Gwalter Hungerfurd whom he had in suspicion They, perceiving that King Richard had
them in jelosy, because they wold not be brought to their enemy agaynst ther
willes, forsaking Robert Brakenbury a lyttle beyond Stony Stratford, went away
to therle Henry in the night season’… Thus wrote Polydore Virgil in his English History (8). At Stony Stratford, while en route to Bosworth, close to the Woodville stronghold at Grafton Regis and just 50 miles away from Leicester, Sir Robert was deserted by some of his companions including Walter Hungerford – who had been heavily implicated in the Buckingham plot but pardoned by Richard – and Thomas Bourchier (9). He too could have joined them but remained steadfast and true. According to the Great Chronicle of London ‘that nygth Kyng Rychard lost much of his people for many Gentylmen that had good Countenaunce with Mastyr Brawyhyngury, than Lyeutenaunt of the Towyr, and hadd ffor many of theym doon Rygth keyndly, took thyr leve of hym ln guyvyng to hym thanks ffor his keendnesse beffore shewid, and exortid hym to goo wyth theym. ffor they fferid not to shewe unto hym that they wold goo unto that othyr party, an 500 departid levyng hym almoost aloon’ (10).

As a ful welbeloved Squier for oure body, later Knight for the Body, Hampton suggests that Sir Robert’s place would have been at Richard’s side and thus he may have been in the king’s last heroic charge. According to C Markham it was one of those that had deserted Sir Robert at Stony Stratford – Walter Hungerford – who dealt the blow that killed him – ‘the traitor . . . who slew the grey-headed old warrior‘ – and who was later knighted after the battle (11).

Following swiftly on from his death Sir Robert was attainted and his land forfeited in the first parliament of Henry Tudor. This attainder was reversed in 1488 in favour of his two daughters, Elizabeth and Anne while ‘the Bastard Sonne of Sir Robert‘ would only inherit if in the event of the deaths of the two legitimate daughters they left no legally begotten heirs. Little is known about this son but it’s likely he was the Robert Brakenberie of Langton – which was nearby to Selaby, one of Sir Robert’s properties – who died in 1548. In his will Brakenberie requested that his ‘writched and sinfull bodie to be buried within the parish churce of Gainforthe besides my father‘. Katherine Brackenbury, sister of our Sir Robert who had died on the 25 July 1485, had been buried at Gainford and this may indicate that this too was the burial place of her brother which was alluded to be the case by the Reverend Prebendary Trollope, writing in 1870 (12). Certainly other later Brackenburys chose to be buried there instead of, as was usual, at Denton. It would be comforting to think that after his death at Bosworth the Brackenbury family had succeeded in recovering Sir Robert’s body and laid him to rest with care, respect and love. Bravo Sir Robert!

*Chronicle of Calais (Camden Society I846). Richard Turpyn.

Richard III The Great Debate p.90. Editor Paul Murray Kendall .
Ibid p.102
ODNB. Brackenbury, Sir Robert (d.1485) knight. Rosemary Horrox.
ibid.
p.p.166.210.250. vol.1 Harleian Manuscript 433
Harleian Manuscript 433 p.166. Edited by Rosemary Horrox and P W Hammond. See also Historic Canterbury. Ightham Mote, Sevenoaks. T.Machado 2007.
The Princes in the Tower p.81. Philippa Langley. Source Peter Hammond and Anne F Sutton. Research Notes and Queries. Richardian Vol.5.no.72 march 1981. p.319: Chamberlain Accounts City of Canterbury, Michaelmas 1484.
Polydore Vergil. English History (Camden Society, 1844), pp. 219-220.
Richard III p.382. Paul Murray Kendall
W E Hampton
C. Markham, Richard III (1906), p. 156.
Memorials of the Wars of the Roses p.50. W E Hampton.