A MEDIEVAL POTPOURRI

Kirby Muxloe Castle at sunset.  Unfinished – the builders laid their tools down on hearing about the execution of William, Lord Hastings.   Photo with thanks to crazyaboutcastles.com

Kirby Muxloe Castle lies in a ruinous state in the Leicestershire countryside, the unfinished project of William, Lord Hastings (c.1430-1483).  Hastings was the epitome of a successful and powerful  15th century lord but as with other nobles of those turbulent times, success run cheek by jowl with downfall, dishonour, betrayal and death.  Hastings interesting life is well documented elsewhere and I want to concentrate more upon Kirby Muxloe Castle.  However to tell the story of the castle it’s necessary for a brief summary of Hastings life to be told too.

Hastings had been raised within a staunch Yorkist family, his father, Sir Leonard Hastings (d.1455), having been a retainer of Richard, duke of York (1411-1460) father of Edward IV and Richard III.  He first begun his rapid ascendancy to power and fortune after the Battle of Towton, fought on the  29 March 1461, where he was knighted on the field.  Soon after as a mark of the closeness between him and Edward VI he was made Chamberlain of the royal household and in 1462 he was further rewarded with the granting of ‘full power to receive persons into the king’s grace at his discretion‘.  Grants and lands removed from defeated and disenfranchised Lancastrians enabling him to support  his new status were swiftly bestowed upon him.

Stall plate of William Hastings, St Georges Chapel Windsor. Drawn by the late Geoffrey Wheeler

Manticore badge of William Hastings c.1470

He seems to have been blessed with the trait of being able to run with the hounds and play with the foxes as he managed to stay on friendly terms with his brother-in-law,  the great Richard Neville,  earl of Warwick,  known later as the Kingmaker, after Warwick become disenchanted with Edward IV.  Rosemary Horrox suggests that Warwick  may have seen Hastings as ‘the acceptable face of Edward’s court circle, but it is certainly not evidence that Hastings had supported the earl’ (1).  Indeed when Edward went into exile in the Low Countries Hastings accompanied him, thus strengthening even more the bond between them.  Hastings extraordinary power and privilege stemmed from this closeness to the king and was known and commented upon at the time,  a servant of the Pastons observing ‘what my seyd lord Chamberleyn may do wyth the Kyng and wyth all the lordys of Inglond I trowe it be not unknowyn to yow, most of eny on man alyve’ (2).

No doubt this may have added to the tensions between Hastings and the Queen, Elizabeth Wydeville, and especially  her elder son, Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset,  who was married to Hastings step-daughter, Cicely Bonville.    Edward would later, on his deathbed and aware death was fast approaching, plead with his bosom pal Hastings and stepson, Grey,  to put their differences behind them and work together for the benefit of Edward’s young son Edward jnr who was on the cusp of becoming the next king albeit still underaged and vulnerable.  Edward died comparatively young aged 42,  his death appearing to come out of the blue for some and the cause of which is still a mystery.   Mancini said that it was Hastings, no doubt alarmed at the appalling thought of his enemies, the upstart and voracious Wydevilles getting it all,  who was said to have ‘reported‘ via letters and messengers to Edward’s brother, Richard Duke of Gloucester, warning him of their shenanigans and urging him to make haste to London and to ‘exact retribution’.     Gloucester,  having been warned,  took swift control of the situation and with a minimum of bloodshed took up his role of Lord Protector as set out in the late king’s will.   Croyland Chronicler reports Hastings ‘as bursting with joy over this new world‘ (3)   The rest is history and the mystery of why Richard had Hastings removed from a council meeting at the Tower of London and beheaded on the 13th June 1483 remains unclear and can only be speculated upon.  After Hastings death Richard dealt kindly with his widow, Katherine Hastings nee Neville,  sister to the Kingmaker and thus Queen Anne Neville’s aunt, allowing her the custody of her deceased husband’s land and heir (4).    He waived the customary Act of Attainder promising to be a ‘a good and gracious soverain lord‘ and not ‘suffering theim (Hastings family) to be wronged ne entreated contrary to our lawes” (5).   He also granted permission for Katherine’s husband to be buried close to his late friend and king in St Georges Chapel, Windsor,  as requested in Edward’s will.  She would later request to be buried in the lady chapel of St Helen’s church at Ashby de la Zouch.

The Western Tower with the Gate House to the left,  With thanks to Bobrad @flikr for photo.

But to get to Kirby Muxloe. On the 17th April 1474 Edward IV had granted Hastings, by then a very wealthy man,  licence  to fortify with walls and battlements four of his properties plus enclose large areas of land to create hunting parks around them, one of these properties being Kirby Muxloe (6).  An earlier medieval manor house had already stood on the site but I have been unable to ascertain what condition it was in when building  of the castle commenced.  It’s most likely that whatever the condition the intention would have been to demolish it at some stage as completion of the castle neared its end.  Indeed its known that some repair work was carried out on the old house while building of the new castle was taking place.   The foundations of this earlier house can still be seen today.  It’s an indication of Hastings fabulous wealth that he had not completed Ashby de la Zouch, intended to be his main seat, before work commenced on Kirby Muxloe in 1480.  The plans were for a rectangle courtyard surrounded by a moat  with a tower at each of the four  corners.   The gatehouse and one tower were nearing completion when news reached the builders of Hastings execution.    This must have thrown the workmen and craftsmen into disarray and some of their number immediately downed tools at that point although Hasting’s widow  Katherine doggedly continued the work on a much smaller scale until finally giving up altogether the following summer.

Hastings had employed master mason John Cowper who trained as an apprentice in the building of Eton College.  It is from Eton that Cowper would have come across the  method of bricklaying known as ‘diaper work’ – patterns made from dark bricks built into lighter brickwork – and used it in the design of the walls at Kirby Muxloe.  The initials WH (although not the initials of his wife – really Sir William!) the maunce, or  sleeve,  from his coat of arms, a ship and a jug are among designs incorporated into the diaper work.   Cowper was  also familiar with Tattershall Castle and may have based the gate house at Kirby on Tattershall’s great tower.  All that now remains of what would have been a massive gatehouse is its base.  The remains of a wooden bridge that led to the gatehouse and drawbridge were discovered in 1911 and are now preserved in the  moat.   On entering through the gate  two rooms are to be found, both with fireplaces, one of them likely intended as a porters lodge.     Two spiral staircases, both made of brick lead to the first floor with rooms containing  fireplaces, latrines and windows.  The floors above were never completed.

Example of the diaper work at Kirby Muxloe.  

Six towers were intended, four at each corner and two midway in the perimeter walls.  The surviving foundations of these towers can still be seen.  The West Tower is the only complete tower to survive, square in shape and comprising of three floors, a spiral staircase and latrines.

Luckily the building accounts for the castle have  survived.  They were written in a mixture of Latin, French and English by Hastings’ steward Roger Bowlett.  So we know that a Flemish man called Antony Yzebrond in charge of the manufacturing of the huge amounts of bricks required was paid 10d a week, a man called John Powell was paid for redirecting a brook to feed the moat, another man, Hugh Geffrey, was employed building a cart track for the carriage of stone while John Peyntour was sent to gather crab apple trees to be used as grafting stock.  Whether these gentlemen were present when the shocking news arrived of the demise of their master we will disappointingly never know.    After Katherine gave up her valiant attempt to complete the building work, Kirby Muxloe was abandoned the following year, used as farm buildings for a  while before being finally given up to the elements.

Gatehouse with replacement wooden bridge…

It is interesting to compare the metaphoric rise and sudden cataclysmic fall of Hastings to that of the subsequent fate of Kirby Muxloe.    It’s still unclear as to what exactly led to the execution of Hastings.   Did he betray Richard?  If so who in turn betrayed him?   Catesby perhaps?  Was he perhaps bitter that he was not given the awards he had hoped for by Richard –  an entirely different kettle of fish to his brother Edward –  as he observed instead of his own, the rise and rise of the astonishingly inadequate Buckingham?  Or was it that Richard blamed him for keeping the precontract between Edward and Eleanor Butler nee Talbot a secret from him – a secret that was the catalyst for the fall of the House of York?   Nevertheless it’s sad to reflect that if Hastings had but survived those initial tricky days his presence at Bosworth alongside Richard III may well have led to a completely different outcome.

William Hastings, first Baron Hastings signature..

Intriguing doorway in the gatehouse leading to what was possibly intended to be a porters lodge.

I give a massive thank you to John Goodall and his most informative Guidebook on Ashby de la Zouch and Kirby Muxloe.  Also to Rosemary Horrox for her article Hastings, William, first Baron Hastings to be found on the Oxford DNB.

1. Hastings, William, first Baron Hastings Rosemary Horrox Oxford DNB
2. Paston Letters 1.581
3. Croyland Chronicle Continuations
4. Hastings, William, First Baron Hastings (c.1430-1483).  ODNB September 2004.  Rosemary Horrox.
5. The Kingmaker’s Sisters – Six Powerful Women in the Wars of the Roses p.112. David Baldwin.
6. License to crenellate: ‘Although never mandated by the monarchy nor a common practice until after 1200, applying for a license to erect a castle or to fortify a standing residence indicated not only that the applicant had the self-confidence to approach the king, but also demonstrated that he possessed the financial and personal status that came with the ability to build a castle. For many lords, receiving the license to crenellate was accomplishment enough, so they felt no urgency to complete the process with an outlandish expenditure of money that could result in bankruptcy. Just having the royal license proved they were qualified to move in the circles of the rich and famous and that the monarch recognized their social status’. Lise Hull Kirby Muxloe Castle – Quadrangular Glory in Brick and Water.

If you enjoyed this post you might also like:

WILLIAM CATESBY, GOOD GUY, BAD GUY, TRAITOR? CLUES IN HIS WILL

MINSTER LOVELL HALL, HOME TO FRANCIS LOVELL VISCOUNT LOVELL

SIR WILLIAM STANLEY – TURNCOAT OR LOYALIST?

The Priory of St John at Clerkenwell and a visit by Richard III

Ashby de la Zouch Castle – Home to William Lord Hastings

Arms of Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset (c.1455-1501). Wikipdia.

Well, well, well.  What can I say about Thomas Grey Marquess of Dorset (c. 1455–1501)?  A member of the voracious Wydeville/Woodville family he lived through the tumult of the Wars of the Roses, at one time ending up in a bit of a pickle after managing to irk a  suspicious Henry VII and for which he spent some time in Tower of London but with remarkably good luck managing to die in his bed in 1501.  Husband to the extremely wealthy Cecilia Bonville,  (c.1460-1529) suo jure Baroness Bonville and Harrington, with whom he had a massive brood of children.  I will return to this marriage below. My favourite portrayal of him was in the mavellous 1972 BBC broadcast  ‘Shadow of the Tower ‘in which he was portrayed as a peevish, whinging and truculent medieval Billy Bunter.  But what was he really like? Has he been dealt with unkindly by history while actually possessing a capacity for bravery or was he just basically inept? And was the family motto a ma puissance (according to my power) appropriate in his case or perhaps a tad ambitious? Or was he merely multifaceted as so many people were and still are? 

He was the elder of the two sons that Elizabeth Wydeville (c.1437-1492) had with her first husband Sir John Grey (c.1432-1461).  Sir John would die fighting for Lancaster at the second battle of St Albans on 17 February 1461.    With his mother’s amazingly fortuitous second marriage to Edward IV, Thomas and his brother Richard would eventually gain a large brood of half brothers and sisters the most famous of which were, of course,  Edward V and  Elizabeth of York.   His grandmother Jacquetta of Luxembourg (b.1415-1472) was from high status noble stock – being the daughter of Pierre, Comte de St. Pol  She had been married at 16 to the much older, extremely rich and powerful John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford, a brother to Henry V.  Her husband dying quite soon after their childless marriage she promptly married Richard Wydeville,  clearly a love match with him being a mere knight and  way below her social status.  The couple married without permission from Henry VI,  for which they would later be issued with a massive fine.  Some sources say this fine was later rescinded but presumably if it was ever paid it would have been done so by Jacquetta as she was the one with the dosh.  Richard, with his new wife,  returned to England to live  – probably at Grafton –  ancestral home of the Wydevilles.  There they raised their children including the daughter who had the luck of turning the head of a young testosterone loaded Edward IV who would please himself as to whom he would marry , unwisely as it transpired,  for the marriage turned out to to be the rock that the House of York foundered upon. But back to Thomas…..

PERSONAL LIFE

Astley Castle, Warwickshire.  Marital home to Sir John Grey and Elizabeth Wydeville later Queen of England, parents to Thomas Grey.  It’s unclear whether Thomas Grey was born at Astley but he would most certainly have spent much of his childhood there. Photo Astley Parish Council.

Thomas’ place of birth is unknown.  John Ashdown-Hill suggested it was somewhere in London although it also seems likely it may have at Astley Castle, Warwickshire –  think more fortified manor house than ragged castle – ancestral home to the Grey family.  He has been described by the historian T B Hugh as a man of ‘mediocre abilities as well as ‘shifty‘ who managed to attain his position solely through his mother marrying a king rather than via pluck or ability although it is true he had a vague connection to Edward I (1).  It should however in all fairness be remembered that Vergil, writing c.1513, described him as vir bonus et prudens (good and foreseeing) although it should also be remembered that Vergil was prone to sometimes speaking a load of old cobblers  – well quite frequently to be honest (2) .  Now while I have no wish to cast aspersions on the integrity of Polydore Vergil it would serve us well to remember that history is written/dictated by the victors – in this case Henry VII’s fan club i.e. Morton, Foxe, Bray and Urswick and thus Vergil’s account should be viewed with some caution. For those who wish to read more about Vergil’s reliability click here. and here.

Once Elizabeth Wydville had become queen she sought to make advantageous marriages for her children and for her eldest man cub she succeeded in doing so in 1466 when Thomas married Anne Holland (c.1455-c.1474),  the daughter and heiress of Henry Holland,  duke of Exeter and whose mother was Edward IV’s sister,  Anne of York (1439-1476 ).  It has been said that this marriage, which took place in October 1466,  exacerbated the already simmering fury of Richard Neville, later known as ‘The Kingmaker’,  after a proposed marriage between his then infant nephew and male heir, George Neville (I465-83) and Anne Holland was scuppered in order for her to marry Thomas (3). 

Shortly prior to this Richard Neville had already been outraged over the clandestine marriage of the king and Elizabeth Wydeville,  the ensuing secrecy of which had left him looking foolish as he had,  oblivious to the true situation,  carried on in his negotiations for a French bride of suitable rank for Edward.  Warwick would get his revenge in 1469 when he managed to execute a couple of Wydevilles, Thomas’ grandfather and uncle,  Richard and John Wydeville.  

Sadly Anne was to die aged 18 and childless.  Nothing daunted another marriage and another great heiress soon loomed on the horizon and in 1474 Thomas, aged 19 married 13 year old Cecilia Bonville.whose stepfather was none other than William Hastings, first Baron Hastings (c. 1430–1483).

It was through Cecilia that Thomas would gain the vast estates that had come to her via her grandfather William, Lord Bonville (c.1392-1461) as well as the Harrington barony.  Didn’t he do well?  And no doubt stepfather – Edward IV –   breathed a massive sigh of relief as his stepson became self sufficient.  However the Bonville marriage would bring Thomas head on in collision with Cecilia’s stepfather, the formidable William Hastings, first Baron Hastings (c.1430-1483) who had risen to dazzling heights because of his close friendship with Edward IV.  Possibly this caused a few headaches for Cecilia who may have felt as if she was stuck between a rock and a hard place.   Nevertheless Cecilia’s and Thomas’ marriage would prove to endure successfully if the number of children the couple produced is anything to go by.  Casting that aside though it has to be said that Thomas was far from a faithful husband and it’s recorded that one of the reasons he fell out with Hastings was over a mistress/mistresses, which I will return to later.

There is also some reason to believe that he had an affair with Lady Anne Stonor nee Neville, wife to Sir John Stonor and daughter of John Neville, Marquess of Montague – brother to Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick.  Perhaps fortunately for him both Neville brothers were dead at this time haven fallen at Barnet in 1471.   The newly wed Anne Stonor’s behaviour does seem rather strange when she hastened to Thomas’ home,  Taunton Castle, immediately after her marriage in late 1481 to Stoner,  where she remained for several months, presenting her husband with a son nine months later (4).   Furthermore it would seem that Thomas had taken a shine to yet another of Montague’s daughters because there is also the intriguing bequest made in the will of his daughter Elizabeth, Lady Scrope of Masham (d.c.1518) when she bequeathed a bed to an illegitimate daughter of Thomas:   ‘Mary, daughter in base unto Thomas Grey Marquess of Dorset my bed that my Lord Marquess was wont to lie in….’ (5).  Now far be it for me – as I’ve said before – to cast aspersions – but it does indeed sound a tad dodgy.  Anyway onwards….

Besides rumours of possible liaisons with Montague’s daughters there are also statements by the chroniclers of the times that both Thomas and his stepfather-in-law, Hastings,  shared the same mistress i.e. Elizabeth/Jane Shore née Lambert.   Following the coronation of Richard III in 1483 the Great Chronicle of London recorded that ‘Shortly afftyr (Richard’s coronation) was a woman namyd Shoore that before days, after common fame, the Lord Chambyrlayn (Hastings) held, contrary to his honour, called to a reconnyng ffor part of his goodys & othyr thyngys…and she lastly as a common harlot put to opyn penaunce’.   Following on from this on the 23 October 1483,  in a public proclamation issued by Richard III,  Thomas was denounced in the following words:  ‘Thomas Grey, late Marquess of Dorset, not fearing God, nor regarding the peril of his soul, hath devoured, and deflowered many maidens, widows and wives, and holding the unshameful and mischievous woman Shore’s wife in adultery. ‘ (6). 

 POLITICAL AND MARTIAL LIFE

Thomas fought – for York obviously – at the battle of Tewkesbury in May 1471 where it has been suggested by some sources he was in suspiciously close proximity to Prince Edward of Lancaster when he met his demise.  He was soon after  ‘created earl of Huntingdon on 14 August 1471, a dignity which he subsequently resigned before he became a marquess’ (7).  He was also present on Edward IV’s French expedition in the autumn of 1475.  He  would also later benefit from the death/judical murder of George, duke of Clarence in 1478 and it has been said that he treated George’s son, the young tragic Edward Earl of Warwick,  with undue harshness during the period he was his ward.

Nowhere did the differences between Thomas and Hasting become more apparent than in the aftermath of Edward IV’s unexpected death in April 1483.   These differences according to Mancini had arisen on account of the mistresses they had abducted or seduced from each other besides of which, in any case,  Hastings loathed the entire (Wydeville) family on account of the marquess (8).  Whether this is the entire crux of the matter or just part of it is now lost to us.   According to Mancini the dying king had sought to reconcile the pair of them, both of whom were dear to him.  It’s easy to imagine the rising panic the king may have felt as he realised his death was imminent and he was leaving his kingdom to a young and extremely vulnerable heir,  the 13 year old Edward,  who would need all the support he could get –  not two snarling egotistical nobles at each others throats.

Immediately following Edward’s death the Wydevilles, galvanised into action, sought to gain control of the person of the new king, Edward jnr,  who was living at Ludlow Castle, then in the Welsh Marches but now in Shropshire.   As mentioned above according to Mancini, Hastings already detested the Wydevilles and it has been suggested that it was he, now thoroughly alarmed at the direction things were heading,  and in an attempt to put a brake on their schemes,  who wrote to Richard, duke of Gloucester,  to warn him of their shenanigans.   Perhaps he even  repeated the utterance of Thomas, his dangerously deluded son-in-law,  who perhaps lacking the ability to read a room, announced to a probably stunned Council that they –  the Wydevilles –  were ‘so important that even without the king’s uncle, we can make and force these decisions..’ (9).   Oh dear. ….   Unfortunately for Thomas and his mother, Gloucester deftly managed the situation and after arresting Anthony Wydeville, earl Rivers, now the male head of the Wydeville family and his nephew, Richard Grey,  at Stony Stratford,  proceeded to London with the young king under his care.   When news of Gloucester’s impending arrival reached London,  Thomas, abandoned the Tower of London,  of which he held the control of, but not before secretly removing ‘great quantities of the (late) king’s treasure out of it‘ (10).  He joined his mother, her youngest son Richard of Shrewsbury and several daughters when they scurried out of Westminster Palace and over the road into sanctuary at Cheyneygates, the Abbot’s house in the precincts of Westminster Abbey.   Cheyneygates far from being the hell on earth described by Virgil, as per usual over egging the pudding,  as an ‘asylum‘ and ‘this earth’s sole refuge for the poor, for bankrupts, and for rascals‘  would have actually been the height of luxury.   If we look into the future we will see that in 1487 Elizabeth would take a 40 year lease on Cheyneygates something she would have hardly have done if it was the awful dump as described by Virgil.

 Artist’s impression of the Abbot’s house known as Cheneygates, in the precincts of Westminster Abbey.  It was here that Thomas Grey joined his mother and half siblings in sanctuary.  

But I’ve gone off on a tangent here and back to the story…. Once more Elizabeth Wydeville found herself in sanctuary and this time through her own ill thought out plots.  We will never know how different things would have turned out if she had but remained openly at Westminster to greet her son Edward V and his uncle Richard Duke of Gloucester upon their arrival.   What had she to fear?  Richard is well known for his kind treatment of women, including the wives of traitors such as Katherine, Lady Hastings as well as Henry Tudor’s mother, Margaret Beaufort,  whose plotting was a major contributing factor to his later downfall and death in 1485.  Unfortunately for many of the participants in this story the Wydeville family, described by Thomas More as the proud and haughty kindred of the Queen chose the warlike route which led to ruination and death for so many including Thomas’ nemesis, William Lord Hastings and a bloody and dreadful day at Stoke where the York dynasty was extinguished forever.

Elizabeth Wydeville  whose first husband was Sir John Grey, father to Thomas and his brother Richard Grey.    Spent her last years in Bermondsey Abbey after one plot too many…..’Royal Window’ North Transcept, Canterbury Cathedral.

Edward IV.  Indulgent stepfather to Thomas Grey.  In a deadly complication, Thomas and  Edward’s closest friend, William Hastings, stepfather in law to Thomas would fall badly fall out  with fatal results. ‘Royal Window’ North Transcept, Canterbury Cathedral.

Thomas did not remain for long in sanctuary and it has to be one of the high points in his life – where he most certainly earned a couple of kudos – when he managed to make his escape after thwarting the guards set up around the precincts of the Abbey.  Mancini describes the search made on the orders of Gloucester when it was discovered Thomas had made his escape:  ‘On the supposition he was hiding in the near vicinity, he (Gloucester) set armed men with dogs to surround the mature crops, as well as the newly planted and woodland areas, seeking him out by the most closely hemmed in encirclement in the manner of huntsman, but nowhere was he discovered (II).  A letter written by Simon Stallworth describes how the goods of Thomas were taken wherever they were found: Wher so evyr kanne be founde any godyse of my lorde Markues it is tayne (12).   Dangerous times for Thomas who then recklessly joined the Buckingham rebellion.

 Henry Stafford duke of Buckingham.  For reasons unclear rebelled against Richard III with fatal results – for himself.  Thomas Grey unwisely joined Buckingham’s rebellion although he escaped and survived.  Buckingham – quelle surprise  – got the chop. A rather ridiculous creature – whom Richard III shocked at his duplicity named him the ‘most untrue creature living’.  An 18th century etching.  Possibly from a lost original?

Following the collapse of the rebellion he made his way to Brittany to join forces with Henry Tudor.  Croyland Chronicle described how in the immediate aftermath of the failure of the rebellion,  King Richard proceeded with the whole army towards the western part of the kingdom where all his enemies had taken up their positions.  Overcome by fear at this terrible arrival, the Bishop of Exeter, Peter Courtney, as well as Thomas Marquis, of Dorset, and various other nobles of neighbouring districts, who had conspired in the rebellion, or as many of them as could find shops in readiness, took to the sea, and finally landed on the desired shores of Brittany.     Lucky Henry! Upon reaching Brittany it appears Thomas got a bit lost  – if Virgil’s narrative can be trusted –  as Henry,  possibly initially pleased to hear of his arrival – obviously he had never met him –  sent some of his followers to guide Thomas to him.

Of course we know that the coronation of Edward V never took place.  The story is well known of how it was revealed that his father, Edward IV,  prior to ‘marrying’ Elizabeth Wydeville had been married to another woman, Lady Eleanor Butler/Boteler née Talbot daughter to John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury (c. 1387–1453) also known as the Great Talbot.  Thus according to the canon law of the times, his marriage to Elizabeth Wydville was invalid as needless to say,  no-one, not even a king,  could be married to two women at the same time.  Whether this came as a shock to Thomas we will never know.  Had there been a point earlier where Elizabeth Wydeville felt it prudent and necessary to enlighten Thomas upon the truth of the matter which was that the ‘marriage’ between her and the late king had never actually existed?  Or was it unnecessary for her to spill the beans as Hastings, his hostile stepfather-in-law – had already spitefully informed him – perhaps in a moment of pique – as you do? It surely has to be very likely that Hastings was aware of the dangerous truth considering his close friendship with best buddy Edward IV.  Anyway the cat was well and truly out of the bag and the crown was offered to Gloucester by the Three Estates which he duly accepted becoming King Richard III.  The situation with Elizabeth Wydeville remaining in the sanctuary of Cheyneygates remained unchanged for some months until in early March 1484 she finally made her peace with Richard III.  This led not only to her departure from sanctuary but also writing to Thomas, who was then in Paris,  advising him to return home and that Richard would treat him well.  An indication  of Richard’s goodwill and genuine willingness to reconcile with Thomas was his name being omitted from the proclamation against the rebels made in June 1485 despite being formerly attainted by Parliament in 1474. This extraordinary volte-face by the ex-Queen was conveniently explained away by Vergil,  who as already mentioned had a strong propensity for waffling,  as being a consequence of her being a woman: for thus her sex is a changeable animal’.    Ah…silly me.  There was I thinking Elizabeth’s actions were due to her knowing that one or even both of her princelings were still alive.  However, Thomas must have thought it a brilliant idea as Vergil described how he left Paris furtively by night, and hastened to Flanders. As soon as the earl (Henry Tudor) and the other English nobles found this out, they were deeply disturbed and requested (King) Charles’ permission to retrieve this man from wherever he was, because he was party to their plans. This they were readily granted, and they began to scour all the highways. But Humphrey Cheney was best at scenting the trail of this runaway, and followed the marquis straight to the town of Compiègne, and was so successful at persuading him that a little he returned to his comrades’

Whether Thomas’ return was the result of gentle persuasion, more forceful means i.e. dragged by his ankles or entirely of his own free we will never know.  Tellingly when Henry Tudor departed France to invade England Thomas was one of those chosen to be left behind in Paris as surety for the repayment of  a loan made to Henry by the French Government in order to finance his invasion.  Only when Henry was firmly ensconced on the throne-  albeit now and again troubled by various pretenders  – was Thomas ‘redeemed’ and  finally able to return home in November 1485.  Once home his attainder was reversed and much of the properties confiscated by a hacked off Richard III were returned to him but although he regained his wealth the same could not be said of the political power he had enjoyed under Edward IV.   I will return to this later.

KING HENRY VII.  Not someone it was wise to get on the wrong side of.  Nevertheless historian T B Pugh was of the opinion that Henry treated Thomas Grey with ‘wisdom and restraint’.  Unknown Netherlandish artist c.1505.  National Portrait Gallery.

Sources say that after a council meeting at Sheen in February 1487 where the Yorkist rebellion of that year was being discussed things took a serious and dramatic down turn for both Thomas and his mother.  In an attempt at appearing loyal to Henry, Thomas attempted to bring his forces to join those of Henry in East Anglia.   But Henry had learned a useful lesson at Bosworth when he had such a narrow escape after nervously watching Sir William Stanley sitting upon the fence prevaricating until the very last minute.  Henry ordered the Earl of Oxford to arrest Thomas and clap him in the Tower of London until the rebellion was over and it was considered safe for him to be allowed wander around freely.  His protestations of innocence were batted aside and he was advised, as Vergil puts it, that if he were a friend (as in truth he was) he would scarcely take amiss this small indignity for the sake of his own safety.  Perhaps Henry, a wily man, had not been able to get to the bottom of Thomas’ plotting.  However he saw no need to delay punishing Elizabeth Wydeville who was promptly sent to live out the rest of her days in Bermondsey Abbey.  after being, as Vergil would put it ‘mulcted of all her possessions.‘ It seems Thomas was never able to gain the trust of Henry again as can be seen by him having to take an oath in 1492 before Henry’s French expedition that he would not commit treason, or conceal acts of treason of which others were guilty. This seems rather odd that as late as 1492 Henry felt it necessary to warn Thomas to behave and not get embroiled in treasonable acts or with anyone else involved with them.    Was this because they both knew about the man known as John Evans who was living at one of Thomas’ properties,  Coldridge, Devon, and is now being speculated as being the very much still alive adult Edward V living there incognito? Was Edward sent to live at out of the way Coldridge with an agreement reached by Richard III and his mother and had she managed to enlighten Thomas to this fact and that is why he made a brave attempt to return home to England? And did they both wait until the time was ripe to incite a rebellion whereby Henry Tudor would be turfed off the throne and a young Plantagenet put back on it?  Of course at Stoke all would go pear shaped and their venture failed.   But here’s the thing!  Because should these speculations hit the nail on the head, then far from being a dolt, did Thomas manage to pull off one of the biggest hoodwinks in history.  The successful secreting away of one of Edward IV’s missing sons enabling him to live out his life in peaceful incognito –  a secret that has sustained up until this very day.

Pugh opines that Henry  showed wisdom and restraint in his treatment of Thomas and possibly indeed to his half brother Edward V if he did indeed live out his life as John Evans.  Did he maybe actually like Thomas who was after all his brother-in-law?  Just a teeny bit? He did, after all kindly allow him to take part in the crushing of the Cornish uprising in 1497. 

LIKENESSES

Likenesses are few and far between of Thomas.   In fact I could find none. However here, and in the interest of having a little fun, are some stills from The Shadow of the Tower broadcast by the BBC in 1973.  The late marvellous James Maxwell played Henry Tudor while Leonard Gregory played Thomas.   The pained face of Henry, as Thomas declares he is innocent, completely innocent! says it all really. I do like to think that the BBC casting department got it absolutely spot on in this instance:

Henry Tudor – “What does the idiot want? ….”

Thomas – “I’m badly used Your Grace and I’m innocent…”

Thomas “I have done nothing – nothing  – for what cause have I done to offend the king?”

Thomas “I am Your Grace’s brother…..!”

Henry “Take him to the Tower…you’ll be safer there Thomas and I’ll know where to find you when rumour makes up its mind…’

Thomas ” Nooooooooooo! not the tower….urgh! ‘

Priceless.  However back to reality….

CONCLUSIONS

Thomas died at his London home on the 30 August 1501.    I have been unable to ascertain where this house stood which is strange because it must have been a significant building.  Perhaps Cecilia was with him as he breathed his last.  He was one of the fortunates of the time who having been deeply involved with the often horrific and bloody occurrences of the Wars of the Roses still managed  to die in their beds.  His will requested that he be buried in his chapel at Astley Church, Leicestershire.  Which was what happened.  His grave and monument are lost today although Cecilia’s monument has survived although not in its original position.

‘My body to be buried in my College of Astley, in the County of Warwick, before the image of the blessed Trinity, in the midst of my closet in the said College.  I will that my executors shall cause one hundred masses to be said for my soul in every of the four Orders of Friars in London, and that at the time of my burial c marks to be distributed in alms to poor people.’

He also requests prayers for his dead parents, stepfather – to whom he owed so much – and touchingly for his first wife, the young Anne Holland who had died so many years previously at just 18 years old:

‘Also I will that the hospital of Lutterworth, in the county of Leicester,  of my patronage,  be appropriated to the Dean of my College of Astley, to the intent they, the  said Dean  and his brethren shall, specially pray for the souls of King Edward the fourth,  Queen Elizabeth, his wife, my mother, as  likewise for the souls of my father,  and of my wife, my own soul, and for all Christian souls‘ (13).

So what should we make of Thomas?  A sometime hero? Or vain and untrustworthy? Perhaps none of these or a combination?  I will leave that to you Dear Reader to draw your own conclusions…..

1. .Oxford Dictionery of National Biography. Grey, Thomas, first marquess of Dorset T B Pugh.

2.  Anglica historia. Polydore Vergil

3. What might have been: GeorgeNeville,Duke of Bedford1465-83— his identity and significance.  M. A. Hicks.

4. Memorials of the Wars of the Roses p.  W E Hampton.  See also relevant letters in the Stonor Papers relevant to the stay of Anne at Taunton.

5. Testamenta Vetusta Vol.2. p.p.587.588.  Ed.Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas. See also Memorials of     the Wars of the Roses. W E Hampton. 

6.  I have taken this from the late Arthur Kinkaid’s wonderful edition of The History of King Richard the Third.  It is also contained in the Cal.Pat.Rolls 1476-85 p. 371. Foedera Vol.XII,p.204. Richard III p.503. Paul Murry Kendall.

7. .Oxford Dictionery of National Biography. Grey, Thomas, first marquess of Dorset T B Pugh.

8. Mancini. Translation by Annette Carson p.51.

9. The History of King Richard III. Buck. p.247.  Arthur Kinkaid edition.

10. Mancini.  Translation Annette Carson.

11. Ibid..

12. The Stonor Letters and Papers p.159.  Ed.Christine Carpenter.  Letter from Simon Stallworth to Sir William Stonor dated 9 June 1483. 

13.Testamenta Vetusta Vol.2. p.442.

Wythin thys Chappell lyethe beryed Anne Duchess of Exetur suster unto the noble kyng Edward the forte. And also the body of syr Thomas Sellynger knyght her husband which hathe funde within thys College a Chauntre with too prestys sy’gyng for eu’more. On whose soule god haue mercy. The wych Anne duchess dyed in the yere of oure lorde M Thowsande CCCCl xxv. 

Anne Duchess of Exeter and Sir Thomas St Ledger.  Etching of the memorial brass in the Rutland Chapel, St George’s Chapel.  Wenceslaus Holler 1667. National Portrait Gallery.

Anne of York (1439-1476) was born at Fotheringhay Castle on the 10 August 1439, the first born child of her parents,  Richard Duke of York and Cicely Neville after what one chronicler described as a ‘tyme of longe bareyness’. (1).  However from then on the York family nursery  would go on to burgeon and she would eventually have eleven siblings, six of which, plus  herself,  would make it to adulthood.  These siblings would eventually go on to become two kings, one earl, one duke and various duchesses.  The various histories of these siblings have been described elsewhere and I won’t go into them here except a mention of Anne’s pivotal role, with other female members of her family,  to bring George Duke of Clarence back into the fold after he had rebelled against his brother Edward IV in 1471. 

‘By right covert wayes and meanes were goode mediators, and mediatricis, the highe and myghty princis my Lady, theyr mothar; my lady of Exceter, my lady of Southfolke, theyre systars; my Lord Cardinall of Cantorbery; my Lord of Bathe; my Lord of Essex; and moste specially, my Lady of Bourgoigne…’ (2).  

The ties that bind were clearly at play here.

But we have come too far here and must backtrack to the 30 January 1446 when Anne then aged six would marry the fifteen year old Henry Holland (1430 -1475) in the Bishop of Ely’s Chapel in Hertfordshire (3).   Henry was born in the Tower of London on the 27th June 1430… ah the irony.  As was customary the small bride then moved into the household of the groom’s parents.  Thus John Holland,  Duke of Exeter (1395-1447) became Anne’s guardian.  It was probably an indication of the esteem that John Holland was held in that persuaded Richard Duke of York to pay 4500 marks for the marriage although of course Henry’s close connections to the House of Lancaster – a very close relative to Henry VI who was later to dangerously wander in and out of severe mental illness –  would also have been another strong motive.    Whatever the reasoning Richard coughed up 1500 marks on the wedding day followed by 1000 marks annually thereafter.  Henry’s wedding clothes were financed by his father but the rest of the costs of the wedding were covered by the bride’s father.  However John Holland was to maintain the couple until Henry’s 20th birthday.  These plans went awry upon Exeter’s death the following year whereupon the king granted York  ‘the keeping of Henry, son and heir of John, duke of Exeter, from the said John’s death’ (4).   It’s therefore fairly safe to assume that both Henry and Anne – now Duke and Duchess of Exeter –  from then on lived with her parents or in one of their households until they were both deemed old enough to have their own.  This should not lead us to conclude that Henry and his father-in-law would go on to enjoy a warm and convivial relationship.  Indeed it is difficult to see how Richard of York could warm to a son-in-law whose own father found untrustworthy.   Not only did John Holland have concerns regarding his son’s uncertain temper and conduct but there was also the fear that he might attempt to contravene his will (5).  It’s likely that Anne found herself between a rock and a hard place as no doubt she tried, with little success,  to play the part of peacemaker between her husband and her father. 

Anne’s father Richard Duke of York. Contemporary image from stained glass window at Trinity College, Cambridge.

Anne’s mother – Cicely Neville from the Luton Guild Book.

They would have one daughter, Anne Holland (c.1455-1474) who would be contracted to marry George Neville, infant son of John Neville, Earl of Northumberland, and who was male hair to Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick later known as the Kingmaker.  However the Duchess was persuaded by Queen Elizabeth Wydeville to renege on that agreement and instead consent to her young daughter marrying Thomas Grey later Marquis of Dorset,  the Queen’s son by her first marriage.  This marriage ,which would be childless,  took place in October 1466 but sadly Anne Holland was dead by February 1474.

Long before the death of their daughter Anne and Henry –  their marriage broken down –   had been living separately although the date of separation is unknown.  Indeed after the Lancastrian defeat at Towton on the 29 March 1461 Henry had exited England and joined Margaret of Anjou first in Scotland and later in France.  He was, of course,  attainted and Anne, by 1462,  was granted her husband’s goods and his ‘whole Exeter inheritance for life, Rochford and lands in Exeter, Hadleigh and Essex with a regrant of August 1467 giving the remainder to their daughter Anne Holland’ (here becomes clear Elizabeth Wydeville’s eagerness to gain the young Anne Holland for her son).   Anne initiated divorce proceedings on the 18 January 1471  when her husband was exiled and out of the country.  In his thesis on the Holland family Dr Michael Stansfield writes   ‘she may well have been fearful of her husband’s imminent return and his repossession of his estates; divorced, he would have no automatic hold over them. She was reafferming her Yorkist loyalties and her abhorrence of the Lancastrian cause her husband so fervently represented. A personal reversion to such an unamiable character as Henry must however also have been a major factor in Anne’s attempts to avoid being reunited with her husband (6). 

THE ‘DIVORCE’

As a result of the Canon Laws of the times Medieval divorce was only allowed in very rare circumstances and even then not as we know it today.   For example getting a divorce  did not allow the divorced couple to make second marriages.  So how did Anne manage to divorce her husband – no mean feat in those times? She went down the road of consanguinity which meant the marriage was annulled rather than a divorce taking place.  In other words the marriage had never existed.    As historian J L Laynesmith explains Anne’s ‘divorce’ from Essex ‘hinged on the absence of adequate papal dispensation as was usually the case in noble divorce suits.  Unsurprisingly it was eventually accepted that the dispensation provided at the time only covered her kinship to Henry Holland through her father. The couple were, of course, even more closely related through Cecily, since both were descended from John of Gaunt, and on these grounds Anne’s marriage was deemed never to have been valid (7). 

Dr Stansfield describes the process of this annulment in great detail: ‘After the initial appointment of proctors in the duke of Clarence’s London house, little progress was made in the divorce whilst Edward IV regained his kingdom. June 1471 saw the case begin in earnest, with Henry Holland now a prisoner in the Tower. Despite the impotence of his position, the case was to be no formality. Henry was summoned to appear at Lambeth on 19 June, where he found his old associate Hugn Payn amongst those present. The grounds for divorce were consanguinity in the fourth and fifth degrees, which required positive confirmation by several witnesses. Nine,eight men and one woman, were examined on behalf of Anne.  Each witness was asked the same set of questions to find out how long they had known the two parties, The examination of Anne’s witnesses had begun in July, with a break for August and September, and was completed in October.

Perhaps the crux of the matter was that she was basically Yorkist and he Lancastrian which were quite large hurdles to circumnavigate.  Casting that aside it must have been extremely difficult to feel warm and fuzzy towards the man who had played a role in the death of your father and younger brother which is indeed what took place at the battle of Wakefield on the 30 December 1460 where Anne’s father Richard of York and brother Edmund, Earl of Rutland,  were both slain.  Henry has beed described as ‘among those who had most vigorously resisted her rebel family’.  He appears to have been a disagreeable character prone to acting with  ‘unreasoning impetuosity’,  untrusted by his peers and  ‘even in such a violent age, his violence was ill-timed and excessive’ and whose actions ‘have left historians barely able to consider him as a serious political figure’.  I could go on but you get my drift?….

The reverse can be said of Anne who has been described ‘as having a careful apolitical approach like her mothers which similarly allowed her to weather the immediate storms’   Thus In June 1460 when a group of Lancastrians,  including Thomas Lord Scales,  took refuge in the Tower of London, where her husband was Constable,  she was able to provide a refuge for them from her brother, Edward without any consequences (9). 

After the shenanigans of the divorce had died down Henry still remained in the Tower until c. May 1475 when somehow or other we find him serving on Edward IV’s 1475 expedition to France.  It has been suggested that he had ‘volunteered’.   Unfortunately for him – still considered a major Lancastrian threat – this involved a journey by sea.  When you read this you immediately know ’tis not going to end well.  It was on the return journey that Henry ‘fell’ overboard and drowned.  Perhaps accidentally on purpose as they say.  The chronicler Fabyan opined superfluously  ‘but how he drowned, the certainty is not known‘ (10).  His body was discovered on a beach near Dover or in the sea between Dover and Calais depending on what version of events you are reading.   Rumour on the Continent had it that the sailors on board his ship had been given express orders by the king to chuck him into the briny.  Well it made a change from the barrel of Malmsey I suppose.  The Duchess of Exeter sadly only survived her ex-husband by a year.

Here we again need to backtrack here a little….   Not surprisingly,  due to the length of the separation between the warring couple,  Anne may have found love and support elsewhere – drumroll  –  step up Sir Thomas Leger!   Possibly the relationship between Anne and Thomas  (c.1444-1483) had begun prior to the annulment of her marriage.   Thomas seems to have been of a rumbustious nature – or perhaps he was just having a bad day – getting himself into hot water when in 1465  he had a punch-up within the precincts of Westminster Palace.  Punching someone’s lights out in the vicinity of the monarch was, obviously,  a grave breach of etiquette and seriously frowned upon.   John Tiptoft, Constable of England, not a man whose wrong side you wanted to get on having the patience of a bull elephant,  sentenced him to having a hand struck off – Yikes! Fortunately  the king pardoned his future brother in law.  And so, Dear Reader,  they were indeed married, at a date unknown to us, but sadly any happiness would be short lived when Anne died on 12 January 1476 at Ulcombe, Kent, a St Leger property, through complications in giving birth to their daughter, Anne St Leger  –  no doubt named after her mother –  who then became the Exeter heir.   Thomas never married again and after his wife’s death he would found a beautiful chantry chapel for her then known as the St Leger Chapel but now the Rutland Chapel in St George’s Chapel, Windsor.

The end for Thomas would follow shortly after the death of Edward IV in April 1483.  Besides becoming entrenched in Wydville plots – always a bad idea – he planned to marry his daughter, Anne St Leger,  to the son of Richard Grey, Elizabeth Wydevilles younger son by Sir John Grey (11).   He was captured at Exeter and although ransoms were offered,  Richard III was not in a benevolent frame of mind that day,  and perhaps particularly miffed by the disloyalty of a troublesome brother in law,  saw no reason to issue a pardon on his behalf.  Thomas was well and truly hoisted by his own petard and beheaded on or about the 8th November, another victim of the madness of the times later known as the Wars of the Roses. Following on from his execution and attainment and in one of the reversals which so often occurred with the swings and roundabouts of those tumultuous times,  his marriage to Anne was denounced in Parliament in 1484.    It was said to  have been ‘made by sedicious means’ her husband then beyng on lyve’. (12).   However both Thomas and Anne were beyond hurt by then and I think it is fitting they should be remembered by their marriage, which although short lived, was probably the happiest of times for both of them.  Certainly Thomas did not marry again and in founding a most beautiful Chantry Chapel dedicated to his late wife with  ‘too prestys sy’gyng for eu’more ‘ he ensured that she would long remain in peoples remembrance. 

THE EXETER INHERITANCE

If you have managed to stay with me up until this point you may be wondering what happened to the Exeter inheritance.  Following the deaths of both Anne and her Holland daughter as well as her husband the inheritance was eventually left for Edward IV to dispose off.  Of course there was a Wydeville at the receiving end – this goes without saying.  Acting in his usual arbitrarily fashion where inheritances were concerned – remember the Mowbray inheritance – Henry Holland’s nearest living relative, Ralph Neville,  nephew and heir to the second earl of Westmorland, and Henry’s nephew – was ‘blatantly ignored’.    The inheritance was handed to Edward’s younger stepson, Richard Grey and the heir of his elder stepson Thomas Grey.  However this injustice was put right when the Greys lost all after their reckless attempt to overthrow Richard III failed miserably and a chunk of the inheritance was given as reward to the Stanleys.  After the death of Richard in 1485, Henry VII would give the most of what was left of it to his mother, Margaret Beaufort.   And thus ended the once powerful Holland family and inheritance.  

Anne and Thomas’ daughter,  Anne St Leger would eventually  marry George Manners, Lord de Ros of Helmsley.  Together they would have a large brood of children…. but that is another story….

St George’s Chapel,  Windsor. Burial place of Edward IV, his sister Anne of York, Duchess of Essex and her husband Sir Thomas St Leger.

 1. The Dialogue at the Grave of Dame, Joan of Acre:  A poem written by one of the Austin Friars at Clare in Suffolk.  With thanks to the late John Ashdown-Hill for this information. 

2. The Historie of the Arrival of King Edward IV A.D 1471 p.10.  Editor John Bruce. 8 May 1838. 3. Cecily Duchess of York p.49. J L Laynesmith.

4. The Hollands, Dukes of Exeter, Earls of Kent and Huntingdon, 1352-1475  Dr Michael M.N. Stansfield. Corpus Christi College Oxford. Hilary 1987

4.  ibid.

5.  ibid.

6. ibid.

7. Cecily Duchess of York p.143. J L Laynesmith.

8. The Hollands, Dukes of Exeter, Earls of Kent and Huntingdon, 1352-1475  Dr Michael M.N. Stansfield. Corpus Christi College Oxford. Hilary 1987

9.  Cecily Duchess of York p.143. J L Laynesmith

10. Robert Fabyan. The new chronicles of England and France, in two parts, p. 66 

11. Richard III p.280. Paul Murray Kendall

13. Memorials of the Wars of the Roses p.18. W E Hampton.

If you enjoyed this post you might also like:

Marriage in Medieval London And Extricating Oneself Only You Couldnt;

The Sisters Neville & Isobel, Duchess of Clarence and Queen Anne Neville, Daughters to the Kingmaker.

THE SIX SISTERS OF WARWICK THE KINGMAKER

ANNE MOWBRAY DUCHESS OF NORFOLK. CHILD BRIDE OF RICHARD OF SHREWSBURY; ONE OF THE PRINCES IN THE TOWER & HER REBURIAL IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY.

CECILIA BONVILLE, MARCHIONESS OF DORSET c.1460-1529; AN INTERESTING LIFE

CICELY PLANTAGENET; NOT SO FORTUNATE AS FAIR.

Could these images in Coldridge Church be of the same man? A young Edward V, an adult man whose face appears to show injury/disfigurement around the mouth/chin area and the face of the John Evans effigy which also seems to have a scarred chin? Photo thanks to John Dike, leader of the Missing Princes Project, Devon.

It was way back in 2020 that I was first alerted to what I now call the Coldridge Theory  by an article on the lovely Devon Churchland website.  Following on from that I researched further and wrote my first post on the theory which has now been viewed over three thousand times,  so I know that many of you reading this may already be familiar with the story.  Rather than scrolling away I would ask you to please bear with me.  In the course of my research I came across other links that strengthened the theory particularly the pivotal role of Sir Henry Bodrugan  to which I will return to later.  Now and again I come across people dismissing  the theory out of hand because, they insist, the princes disappeared on Richard’s watch ergo he must have murdered them despite there being not the slightest scintilla of evidence that such a crime was ever carried out.   Thus I find Coldridge in itself being dismissed without any further thought given, unfortunately,  to the other equally important links and participants that strengthen the theory – which although still unprovable – becomes at the least very plausible.    And here’s a thing – ironically when all the leads are considered the theory has more going for it than the tired old chestnuts still being trotted out that Richard was guilty of this atrocious crime or  if not murdered by him then they were done in by either Henry Tudor, who was not in the country at the time, or his mother, Margaret Beaufort,  which is equally absurd and unsupported but there you go.   Some people simply refuse to remove their head from the sand which is a great shame as just a small amount of research can uncover intriguing possibilities that the princes were murdered by no one but sent to places of safety.  An example of these blinkered and dated views is when you ask these naysayers what they think about the crucial role Sir Henry Bodrugan played in the story – no answer comes the stern reply.   It is for this reason that I’m now going to approach the theory from a different angle – this time in the date sequence that notable incidents  occurred – a reappraisal and fresh collation aimed at those who may know some but not all the story if you like.  I hope you will stick with me. So back we go to the beginning:

Dramatis Personae:

Sir Henry Bodrugan/Bodryngham  One of the most powerful men in Cornwall.  Popular with both Edward IV and Richard III.  Crucially one time owner of Coldridge Manor and Park –  granted to him by Richard in April 1484.

Thomas Grey,  Marquess of Dorset: Elizabeth Wydeville/Woodville’s eldest son by her first husband, Sir John Grey.  Thus half brother to Edward V.  Owner of both Coldridge and Gleaston Castle via his marriage to wealthy heiress Cecilia Bonville  Coldridge was confiscated from him in 1483 but returned in 1485 by Henry VII after Bosworth.

Edward V: Became king aged 12 on the death of his father Edward IV in April 1483.

Sir Robert Markenfield/Markynfeld: Loyal follower to King Richard III.  Sent to Coldridge on the 3 March  1484 two days after Richard swore an oath on the Ist March that neither Elizabeth Wydeville nor her daughters would be harmed if they came out of sanctuary and  thus the likely date she did indeed depart from the sanctuary with her daughters.   Sir Robert’s brother, Thomas, was also a loyal follower as well as personal friend to Richard III, and rewarded generously by the king for his services.

Cecilia Bonville: The wife of Thomas Grey.   A wealthy heiress and courtesy of his marriage to her,  Thomas became owner of both Coldridge and Gleaston Castle,  as well as numerous other properties.  Cecilia had wall to wall familial Yorkist links.

Elizabeth Wydeville/Woodville.  Edward IV’s queen.  Mother to two sons by her first marriage to Sir John Grey, Thomas and Richard,  two sons by Edward, Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury and several daughters including Elizabeth of York who went on to become Henry VII’ s queen.  After a royal council meeting in early February 1487 to discuss the rebellion led by the Yorkist leaders she was sent to live out the rest of her days in Bermondsey Abbey.

Elizabeth Wydeville’s portrait from the Royal Window, Canterbury Cathedral.

EVENTS

Atmospheric old photo of the archway leading out of Abbot’s court, where Cheyneygates stood, to the cloisters and outside world.  Elizabeth Wydville and her family would have walked through this arch during their stay at Cheyneygates. 

APRIL 1483 Edward IV died unexpectedly at his palace of Westminster.  His Queen, Elizabeth Wydeville, and her Wydeville family were immediately galvanised into action, attempting and failing to both gain control of the young Edward V,  who was at Ludlow at the time,  and to outmanoeuvre his uncle,  Richard of Gloucester before he could arrive in London to take control of the situation in his legal role as Lord Protector.  Upon their enterprise failing,  Elizabeth, her youngest son, ten year old Richard and his sisters,  along with her son by her first marriage, Thomas Grey,  beat a hasty retreat into the sanctuary of Cheyneygates, the Abbot’s luxurious house within the precincts of Westminster Abbey.  However it was not long before Thomas made his escape and joined Henry Tudor in Brittany.  It was at this point Coldridge was removed from the ownership of Thomas and granted to Sir Henry Bodrugan.   I will return to this later.   Elizabeth was later persuaded to allow Richard to join his brother Edward V,  who was by then staying in the royal apartments at the Tower of London.  Richard was later reported by Simon Stallworth, the Mayor, in a letter dated 21 June to William Stonor,  to be ‘blessid be Jhesus, mery‘  while it was also mentioned in the Great Chronicle of London the young brothers were both seen practicing their archery at the butts and ‘playing in the garden of the tower at sundry times‘ (1).  

However before the young Edward V could be crowned a ‘precontract’ was revealed – possibly by Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells.  This precontract was basically an earlier marriage that Edward IV had made with Lady Eleanor Butler, nee Talbot daughter of John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, which, obviously,  left him unfree to marry anyone else.  The simple crux of the matter was the almost casual ease with which medieval marriages could be made with no need for priest or witnesses to be present.  All that it needed was for A to say to B  ‘I take thee B to be my wife’  and B to say to A ‘I take thee A to be my husband’ – consummate it and bingo! – you were wed.  Of course it was a good idea – especially if you were a king or marrying one, particularly Edward IV – to make sure you did  ensure you had witnesses and a priest present in case of later problems occurring.   Which they certainly did in this case.   The cat was out of the bag and basically Elizabeth was up the Swanee without a paddle –  the  children she had with Edward were, under the medieval Canon Law of the time, declared bastards and thus ineligible to succeed to the throne.    The Three Estates of the Realm having  ‘accepted the legality of Edward IV’s first marriage to Lady Eleanor Butler, and consequently, the bigamous nature of Edward’s subequent union with Elizabeth Wydeville’  petitioned Richard Duke of Gloucester, who was next in line, to take up the throne.  Richard accepted and was duly crowned King Richard III on 6 July 1483 (2)  For those who would like to delve further in this matter you will find it all in  TITULUS REGIUS. 

A wonderful artist’s impression of the offer of the Kingship to Richard, Duke of Gloucester, Baynards Castle by the Three Estates of the Realm.  Mural in the Royal Exchange.  Artist Sigismund Goetz. 

Soon after his coronation, perhaps too soon and before he had fully consolidated his position, the King with Queen Anne, left London, turning Northwards to go on a progress.  It was shortly after this an abortive attempt was made to ‘rescue’ the boys from the Tower.  This resulted in them, understandably, becoming more withdrawn from view until further sightings of them dried up altogether.   They simply disappeared.  This, perhaps not surprisingly,  led to rumours arising of their deaths,  although no bodies or graves were ever found, and no requiem masses performed for them either. We can safely dismiss the ludicrous and lurid story later penned by Sir Thomas More – who grew up in the household of Cardinal John Morton, Richard III’s nemesis,  which frankly,  only need be read if you are in need of a laugh.

Ist MARCH 1484.   Close to this date Richard and Elizabeth reached an agreement and on the Ist March Richard publicly swore an oath promising that if Elizabeth and her daughters were to leave sanctuary and her older daughters be placed in his care, he would ensure no harm would befall them and suitable marriages  be made for them.   This is therefore the most likely date for Elizabeth’s departure from the tedious confines of sanctuary at Cheyneygates.    She also wrote to Thomas Grey, at that time in France,  to return home:

‘By secret messengers she advised the marquise her soon,  who was at Parys, to forsake erle Henry and with all speede convenyent to returne into Enland, wher he showld be sure to be caulyd of the king unto highe promotion…’ (3). 

Are we really to believe that she left the safety of sanctuary and handed her daughters over to the very man who had murdered their young brothers as well as advise her eldest son to leave the safety of France to return to England ?  Really? Still onwards…

3 MARCH 1484.  Here enters the story Robert Markenfield.  Based in Yorkshire and from a family of high status who first begun their rise under Edward II,  Robert was a loyal and trusted follower of Richard III.   He was sent by the king southwards to Coldridge in Devon, the confiscated property of Thomas Grey,  now in royal hands but on the cusp of being granted to Sir Henry Bodrugan.   Coldridge has been variously described as a backwater, difficult to reach and  ‘a gritty little village in the boondocks of Devon’ (4).  Robert was made keeper of the deer park there. This is fact.  The question is why? 

‘Robert Markyngfeld/the keping of the park of Holrig in Devonshire during the kinges pleasure…’   Harleian Manuscript 433. 

During his time at Coldridge Robert became a friend to Sir John Speke who lived nearby and who would later get himself into trouble for supporting Perkin Warbeck.  Incidentally Speke was linked via marriage to Sir James Tyrell,  later executed for treason by Henry VII. Tyrell’s wife,  Anne Arundel had a  niece Alice,  who was Speke’s wife.   There is a family tradition that Tyrell provided a safe house where Elizabeth Wydeville stayed with some of her children after leaving sanctuary (5).  So that is yet another link for you Dear Reader…..   Following the Battle of Bosworth in August 1485, Coldridge was returned to Thomas Grey and far as I have been able to ascertain Robert moved to nearby Wembworthy where he lived out the remainder of his life.

We’ve now galloped a little forward in time here and need to  backtrack a little:

 4 APRIL 1484 but a few weeks after Robert Markingfield’s appointment as Parker at Coldridge,  Richard III granted Coldridge as well as a further slew of properties to Sir Henry Bodrugan (6).  He was clearly being handsomely awarded by the king as well as having his income increased.  Why?  A little of Sir Henry’s story should be told at this point.   Described as being a ‘lawless and rumbustious individual who was pardoned on at least four occasions between 1467 and 1480.  He and his associates seem to have terrorised Cornwall, breaking and entering, engaging in piracy, extracting and misappropriating money under cover of the King’s commission and corrupting wills.  His victims complained they could obtain no common law remedy against him ‘for if any person would sue the law against the said Henry  … or against any of his servants, anon they would should be murdered, slain and utterly robbed and despoiled of all their goods…’ (7).    Nevertheless on a more encouraging note he managed to leave behind him ‘a positive memory in Cornish tradition’ (8).  He was clearly one of those larger than life figures prone to often finding himself in hot water  – think a medieval Errol Flynn.  What’s not to like?  With ‘a propensity towards violence‘  – not considered a handicap in those turbulent times  – he was inclined to now and again go full tonto (9).  He was, nevertheless,  popular with both Edward IV and Richard III,  being knighted by the former on 18th April 1475 at Westminster on the occasion of his son, the then Prince Edward, being created Prince of Wales, and helping the latter in the Buckingham uprising.   It was during the uprising he had tried unsuccessfully  to hunt down and capture Sir Richard Edgecombe who managed to escape by the skin of teeth before joining Henry Tudor in Brittany (10). However, for us the most crucial part of Bodrugan’s story is the granting to him by Richard III of none other than Coldridge Manor and Park.  Well, well, well.  So to summarise at this point,  we have Coldridge formerly owned by Thomas Grey, Edward V’s half brother, now owned by one of Richard III’s loyal supporters, Sir Henry Bodrugan, with another of Richard’s supporters. Robert Markenfield, also there in the position of Parker.   For some reason the backwater that was Coldridge had become a hotbed of activity.

1485

We now move on to the aftermath of the Battle of Bosworth August 1485.  Richard III was dead,  Henry Tudor now king and Coldridge Manor and Park back again in the possession of Thomas Grey and his wife Cecilia Bonville. The next question is when Thomas Grey returned from France did he discover his half brother Edward, king for such a short while, ensconced at Coldridge incognito as John Evans?   If so it could hardly have come as a surprise as his mother would surely  have been informed by Richard III where he was sending Edward or perhaps even the decision had been reached by joint agreement.  It was certainly an ideal place with family connections and hidden away.  It’s about this time that John Evans first appears out of nowhere as resident at Coldridge where he would in the fullness of time hold the lucrative post of Parker of the deer park.  Despite the best efforts of the Missing Princes Project no trace of a John Evans who could be this John Evans has ever been found.

I486

Moving on, Henry,  having married Elizabeth of York on 18 January 1486,  now had a male heir, Arthur,  born in September 1486.  Elizabeth Wydeville, now mother of the Queen,  had some of her former glory and privileges returned to her.    She had also taken out a forty year lease on Cheyneygates, the sumptuous Abbot’s House at Westminster where she had lived with her family during the period of sanctuary.  She clearly liked it there – all is rosy!   However in February 1487 trouble looms and looms large.  Henry had got wind of rebellion…

PRINCE ARTHUR, b 1486. d. 1502.  HENRY VII’S HEIR.  WAS IT POSSIBLE ELIZABETH WYDEVILLE SOUGHT TO DISINHERIT HER GRANDSON IN ORDER TO REPLACE HIM WITH HER OWN SON, EDWARD V?

1487.  

In early February a royal council meeting was held at Sheen – a short time after ‘candell masse‘ –  where the rebellion that later became known,  quite erroneously,  as the Lambert Simnel Rebellion,  was discussed.  The meeting triggered an immediate tsunami of events beginning with the prompt exit of one of the participants,  John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, from England to join Francis Viscount Lovell in Flanders.  Lincoln’s departure coincided with a slew of arrests, attempted arrests and banishments –  

A.  Elizabeth Wydeville,  Henry’s mother-in-law was sent to live at Bermondsey Abbey.  She lost everything she had so recently regained and was never to leave, except for being wheeled out for one or two very rare outings,  dying there on the 8th June 1492 and according to her will quite, quite destitute.   We can discount her entry into Bermondsey of her own free will as she had recently – on the 10 July 1486  – taken out a 40 year lease on the sumptuous Cheyneygates, the Abbots House at Westminster (11).

B.  Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset, quelle surprise, was also caught up in the suspicions that were swirling around,  and was promptly despatched to the Tower of London, despite his loud protestations of innocence, for the duration of the rebellion.   After his release he clearly was never entirely trusted by the wily Henry VII ever again.  

C.  Bishop Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells, the man who it is believed had informed Richard III about Edward IV’s first and legal marriage to Lady Eleanor Butler, was also arrested and imprisoned,  never to be released,  dying in 1491. 

D. Sir Henry Bodrugan and his son John Beaumont became fugitives after Henry VII sent Sir Richard Edgecombe to Bodrugan Barton, their home in Cornwall to arrest them. Both managed to escape by the skin of their teeth. I will return to this matter below.

This chain of events all begs the question why?  Why would Elizabeth Wydeville and Thomas risk absolutely everything for the sake of a fake child king or as was rumoured, Edward  of Warwick,  the young son of George Duke of Clarence,  who had been Elizabeth’s enemy? Surely if her sons by Edward IV were indeed dead it would have been more advantageous for Elizabeth to have at least a grandson, Arthur,  who would one day sit on the throne rather than rock the boat and have the son of Clarence take the throne? Why on earth would they throw it all away?  It makes no sense at all and frankly is the strongest indication that both she and Thomas knew at least one of her young princelings had survived.  Could it be they were both fully aware that the young John Evans living at Coldridge was in actual fact Edward V incognito who had been sent there as part of a deal struck between Elizabeth Wydeville and Richard III when she had agreed to leave sanctuary in March 1484? How could they not know seeing that Coldridge had been returned to Thomas?  

These links of the story now start to join up –

1. The royal council meeting at Sheen where the rebellion was discussed.  A French ambassador was also present – probably to wind everyone up……
2. The ‘retirement’ of Elizabeth Wydeville to Bermondsey Abbey.
3. Thomas Grey, then owner of Coldridge, sent to the Tower of London.
4. The arrest of Bishop Robert Stillington.
5. Sir Richard Edgecombe being sent to Cornwall to hunt down and arrest Sir Henry Bodrugan, who had only recently been the owner of Coldridge, and his son John Beaumont.

Bodrugan’s Leap.  It was from here that Sir Henry Bodrugan made his leap into the sea and into a waiting boat that carried him to safety from Sir Richard’s Edgecombe’s men.  He is said to have cursed them as he looked back – all very Errol Flynnish if you ask me…

Now we have reached what is the zenith of the story.  Backtracking to February 1487 and following on from the chain of events already mentioned above.    Bodrugan and his son Sir John Beaumont were accused of having ‘withdrawn themselves into private places in the counties of Devon and Cornwall and stir up sedition’ (12).  What shape could this ‘sedition’ have taken? Bodrugan’s bête noire, Sir Richard Edgecome, who had returned to England with Henry Tudor, was sent to Cornwall to arrest Bodrugan and Beaumont. With his own personal axe to grind how Edgecome must have relished that order! However Bodrugan managed to escape from the back entrance of his house at Bodrugan Barton making his way to nearby cliffs where beneath him a boat awaited.   He made one massive leap in the sea and clambered aboard the boat which then carried him to a waiting ship.   The place from where he took this leap is known today as Bodrugan’s Leap.  Where did he go? What did he do next?  This evades us until the next thing we know is that he rocks up in Dublin along with his son John Beaumont and a young lad named Edward.  Also arriving soon after are other high status Yorkist rebels including John de la Pole,  Earl of Lincoln, Richard III’s nephew,  and Francis Viscount Lovell,  Richard’s loyal friend from childhood.  Margaret the Duchess of Burgundy, sister to Edward IV and Richard III and a thorn in Henry VII’s side,  financed the whole enterprise as well as sending Martin Schwartz –  a renowned German mercenary and ‘manly manne of warre’ – who brought along 2000 German veterans (13)

The indomitable Margaret Plantagenet, Duchess of Burgundy 1446-1503. Sister to Yorkist kings, Margaret was an persistent and annoying thorn in Henry Tudor’s side and financed the 1487 rebellion. Artist unknown.

The young lad was crowned King Edward in a coronation in Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin on the 24 May 1487.  This leads to the question – was this lad actually Edward V who had been living at Bodrugan’s property – Coldridge – incognito as John Evans?  Had Bodrugan somehow managed, since evading arrest by Edgecome,  to retrieve him from Coldridge and was it he who escorted him  to Ireland?  Coldridge was now back in the ownership of Thomas Grey and his wife Cecilia Bonville.  Did they all – Yorkists diehards –  collude together in a joint effort to get a Yorkist king returned to the throne?  To clarify it should also be noted that up until this point there is no mention of an even younger boy aged about 10, who went by the name of Lambert Simnel (13).  Why? Because Lambert Simnel was a made up name, a Tudor invention – and was never mentioned until later in Lincoln’s Act of Attainder in November 1487 after the Tudor regime had enough time to dream it up.  Despite the historian A F Pollard making it perfectly clear that ‘no serious historian has doubted that Lambert Simnel was an imposter ‘  this innocent young ten year old  boy is still regularly, up until today,  said to have been the lad that was crowned in Dublin.  Give Me Strength…

The glorious nave of Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin – scene of the Coronation of the young lad the rebels crowned King Edward  –   the ‘Dublin King’ .

And so the young Edward had been crowned in a coronation in Christ Church, Dublin.  Undeterred by the lack of a crown one was purloined from a nearby statue of the Virgin Mary.    Shortly after that the rebels, accompanied by the young newly crowned king, embarked on a journey back to England.  There is no indication that Bodrugan was with them.  Now aged 61 was he deemed too old or perhaps even too ill to join them.  But I wonder did he wave them off as they left on their do or die venture? His son John Beaumont was with them and it must have been a worrying time for him.  Finally the terrible news about the outcome of the  Battle of Stoke would have reached him.   It is not known exactly where or when he died only that it was somewhere in Ireland.  Why return to England? His second wife – Margaret, Viscountess Lisle, daughter of William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke who had been executed in 1469 –  had predeceased him and now John, his son was also dead.

The Last Stand of Martin Schwartz and his German Mercenaires at the Battle of Stoke Field 16th June 1487.  Unknown artist Cassell’s Century Edition of the History of England c.1901. 

The rebels, led by Lincoln and Lovell arrived somewhere on the Furness Peninsular around the 5 June.  Now here is yet another link.  Although the exact landing place is debated where ever it was would have been close to Gleaston Castle (15) Yes! another property owned by Thomas Grey – again having come into his ownership through his marriage and thus via Bonville/Harrington holdings.   Could Gleaston, with the kind permission of Thomas obviously,  have been a rendezvous point for the rebels who were soon joined by other disgruntled Yorkists wanting to turf Henry VII off his throne and return Edward V to it?   In the years following the rebellion Gleaston was abandoned.  An in-depth conservation report commissioned by Historic England, and funded by the Castles Studies Trust,  suggests that the abandonment may have been down to the civil unrest in the ‘early part of the reign of Henry VII’ as well as the ‘Bonville’s family’s political affiliation with the Yorkist faction during the reign of Edward IV’  which would be a clear indication that Thomas Grey was involved up to his neck in the rebellion.  But to return to the rebels.  Finally they arrived at Stoke Field where as we know, they were totally defeated – their leaders lost including the brave Martin Schwartz.  Among the fallen was John Beaumont, Bodrugan’s son.  After the battle the young man who had been crowned King Edward was discovered.  We know this because the Heralds reported it:

THE HERALDS REPORT

‘And there was taken the lade that his rebelles called King Edwarde whoos name was in dede John – by a vaylent and a gentil esquire of the kings howse called Robert Bellingham’ 

Puzzlingly – the Heralds being noted for their precision in identifying folks, and their main raison d’être – omitted to record the surname of ‘John’ or  was it later scored out?  Why? Well I’ll leave that to you Dear Reader to make your own mind up.    Astonishingly this has never been picked up by historians and linked to the Coldridge John Evans although even the strongest doubters must concur it is the most astonishing coincidence.    He was taken to Newark, where Henry Tudor, now Henry VII went immediately after the battle, and from that point on he simply disappeared from the annals of history.  The Tudors, thinking they were smart, which indeed they were going by the number of folk taken in by it,  replaced him with a younger boy, said to be aged about 10, who they named Lambert Simnel – possibly after a cake.  I jest of course.  And so the biggest question of all –  what became of young Edward lately crowned king in Dublin?   Is it possible – and I believe it’s highly likely –  that Edward was returned to Coldridge to live out his days as John Evans and presumably with the blessing of Henry VII?   But why would Henry take the risk of letting Edward live with the danger of further revolts?   Of course we can only speculate.  In one version of events the French chronicler, Adrien de But, who was not in England at the time,  wrote that the young lad – who he called ‘Warwick’ was taken to safety to Guines once the ‘heavy odds again the rebels became known’ .   This seems impossible seeing that the Herald noted that the young man was taken after the battle and I only repeat it here in the interest of clarity.    Perhaps he was badly injured, maybe even disfigured facially – see point made about this below.  Did he himself, after witnessing the deadful carnage at Stoke declare he wanted nothing else other than to just to live peacefully in obscurity?  We should also remember that Henry was married to Edward’s sister, Elizabeth of York.  Did that also sway him? Did he spare the young lad, his brother-in-law,  out of consideration for the feelings of his wife, Elizabeth of York,  who Henry is said to have loved.   We are after all talking about human beings here not wooden cutouts lacking the most basic of human feelings.

COLDRIDGE

Finally we can now at last focus upon Coldridge and the clues there that have led to the theory that John Evans was Edward V and where he lived out his days as Parker of the deer park.   John Evans, after appearing in Coldridge out of nowhere,  would marry into the ‘neighbouring local gentry‘ and the Evans family would ‘retain its status throughout the greater part of the sixteenth century’ (16).  Today there is no trace of the Evans family in the village.  The tradition that John Evans was Edward V incognito (note the clue in the first two letters of the name –  Ev = Edward V – plus a Welsh name, Edward being the former Princes of Wales)  evolves from various clues in the church which, when tied up to the other links mentioned above,  becomes very credible indeed.  All this has been covered in my previous posts with their links above.  But in a brief resume – we have in the church the wonderful window depicting a young crowned King Edward V.   Perhaps that ever loyal Yorkist Cecilia Bonville, who had been widowed in 1501,  funded this window which would have been expensive? Above the image of Edward is a large closed crown, which has came from another window, now destroyed, which  is very similar to the crowns that can be found over Royal Standards and it’s highly likely that this was its original purpose.  In the middle of this crown is a Falcon and Fetterlock, personal badge to Edward IV which is  ‘always shown locked in recognition of the line of succession‘ (17)   Why all this splendorousness in an inconsequential,  hard to reach Devonshire village?

The large closed crown above the image of Edward V and taken from another window.  Note the Falcon in Fetterlock Yorkist badge in the middle of the crown and the ermine with 41 deer…

However it was certainly John Evans who founded his chapel there as well as some of the church furniture such as his prie-dieux, now combined into one,  as he left us his messages:

‘Pray for John Evans, Parker of Coldridge, maker of this work in the third year of the reign of King Henry VIII’ and ‘Pray for the good estate of John Evans, who caused this to be made at his own expense the second day of August in the year of the Lord 1511’.

Inside his chapel is his monument,  topped with his effigy,  his name carved on a shield supported by a roly-poly cherub.   The name is spelt as  John Eva`s – the letter ‘N’ being missed out although there was more than enough room for it.  Was this an intentional message to us: EV  = Edward V and Evas which is latin for ‘escape’ and from which the modern word ‘evades’ has evolved from?

There are numerous surviving Yorkist Sunne in Splendour badges dotted about both in glass in the windows and the carved wooden bosses.  His effigy lies there looking up at the image of Edward V.  Also the face of the adult man, which seems to have been an attempt at a human likeness –  all that has survived from another large image in a different window.   His face looks uncannily similar to the young face of Edward V.  He wears an ermine collar and clutches a crown to his chest.  His top lip and chin appears to be disfigured.  See my comments above.

The face of the adult man.  His top lip and perhaps chin appears to be disfigured.  He also wear ermine and part of a crown can be seen.  He has chin length hair as does both the image of Edward IV  and the face on the effigy.

There are several carvings of ladies in Tudor headdresses vomiting hidden away.  But of course the pièce de résistance is the window with the full length image of the young Edward V.  Funds are at this very moment being raised to have this extremely rare early 16th century window saved for future generations to enjoy. An informative article on the church  written by John Dike leader of the Devon Missing Princes Project can be found here.

The unique and wonderful image of Edward V, St Matthews Church, Coldridge

One of several Sunne in Splendour badges to be found in the church…

FINALE..

It appears to me that perhaps everything that can be discovered/uncovered about John Evans and Coldridge may have now been achieved.   Are we now sadly at a dead end?  His actual grave and remains are undiscovered and it seems to me that the only way to prove this theory would be their discovery and dna tests.   But who knows?  I am not an expert on these sort of things – but still – perhaps one day.

Church of St Matthew’s Coldridge under a glowering Devon sky. Possible resting place of Edward V,  one of the Missing Princes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to give my heartfelt thanks to the following, some of whom are sadly no longer with us.  The information they supplied in their books and articles has helped me immeasurably:

Devon Churchland website;  Lambert Simnel and the Battle of Stoke Michael Bennett;  The Battle of Stoke;  Lambert Simnel Tudor Imposter – Randolph Scott;   Lambert Simnel and the King from Dublin, Gordon Smith;   Rosemary Horrox and Peter Hammond for their editorship of the priceless Harleian Manuscript;   John Ashdown-Hill who delved so deeply into the story of Eleanor Talbot, the Forgotten Queen;    South Cumbria Richard III Society group who made me aware of the existence of Gleaston Castle;   The Castle Studies Trust  who made an in-depth study of Gleaston and linked it to the rebellion of 1487;  John Dike, leader and other members of Philippa Langley’s Missing Princes Project in Devon;  The Herald who informed us that the young lad that had been crowned King Edward captured after Stoke also had the name of ‘John – ‘;   Historian A L Rouse who wrote the excellent article The Turbulent Career of Sir Henry de Bodrugan;  Dr James Whetter, author of the History of the Bodrugan family;   Chris Brooks and Martin Cherry authors of an in depth article in the Journal of Stained Glass Vol. XXVI which does away with any doubts that it was indeed intended to represent Edward V; and last but not least my good friend Sandra Heath Wilson who has given me unstinting support when I have, at times been about to lose the will to live.  If I have left out anybody I do apologise….thank you.

1.  Kingsford’s Stonor Letters and Papers 1290-1483 p.416.  Editor  Christine Carpenter.
   
2. revealingrichardiii.com 
3. Virgil. Quoted in Elizabeth Widville Lady Grey p. 165 John Ashdown-Hill.
4. Devon Churchlands website.
5. Sir James Tyrell: did some notes on the Austin Friars, London, and those buried there. W. E Hampton
6. Harleian Manscript 433 p.124.  edited by Rosemary Horrox and P W Hammond.
7. Stoke Field, The Last Battle of the Wars of the Roses p.p.25.26 David Baldwin. 
8. The Turbulent Career of Sir Henry Bodrugan.  1944. A L  Rouse
9. The Bodrugans – A Study of a Medieval Knightly Family p.141. Dr James Whetter.
10. The Turbulent Career of Sir Henry Bodrugan.  1944. A L  Rouse
11. The Abbot’s House at Westminster. 1911. J Armitage Robinson. 
12. Cal.Pat.Rolls 1485-94. 
13. The Heralds Memoir 1486-1490. p.117. Ed.Emma Cavell.
14. Lambert Simnel and the Battle of Stoke. Michael Bennett
15. Gleaston Castle, Cumbria. Results of aerial survey and conservation statement 2016. Helen Evans and Daniel Ellsworth. Castle Studies Trust.
16. Journal of Stained Glass Vol. XXVI. p.28.  Chris Brooks and Martin Cherry
17. royalmint.com

.

The Crystal Sceptre.  Given by a grateful King Henry V to the City of London in recognition of the financial aid given towards the Battle of Agincourt. Photo The Lord Mayor of London @Twitter.

Some of the eagle eyed amongst you who recently watched the coronation of Charles III may have spotted a very special piece of regalia that was being carried not by the king but by the Lord Mayor of London.   This extraordinary and exquisite artefact is known as the Crystal Sceptre and was given to the City of London by a grateful Henry V (b.16 September 1386 – d.31 August 1422) as thanks for the generous financial aid the City gave towards the funding of the Battle of Agincourt fought on the 25 October 1415.  It had dawned on Henry in November 1414 – after announcing his plans for a French campaign in Parliament  – that the resultant grant, which was to be collected via taxes in two instalments in February 1415 and February 1416, was not going to supply him with the ready cash he desperately needed up front to pay for the army he would be taking to France.

This was obviously a huge stumbling block and problem.  What to do?  The City of London was known to be a provider of loans in certain circumstances if they could be convinced to do so.    Historians Sinclair Rogers and Anne Curry describe in their interesting article how Henry ‘to that end, and following customary practice,  sought loans on the security of the tax grants’.  However Henry stlll had to somehow  persuade the City it was a good idea to agree to the funding.  And so on the 10 March 1415 he duly  ‘summoned the mayor and aldermen, and some of the more substantial citizens of London to the Tower of London to tell them that he intended to reconquer the possessions of the crown in France and that he needed money: 

‘Well-beloved. We do desire that it shall not be concealed from the knowledge of your faithfulness, how that, God our rewarder, we do intend with no small army to visit the parts beyond sea, that so we may duly re-conquer the lands pertaining to the heirship and crown of our realm, and which have been for long, in the times of our predecessors, by enormous wrong withheld. But, seeing that we cannot speedily attain to everything that is necessary in this behalf for the perfecting of our wishes, in order that we may make provision for borrowing a competent sum of money of all the prelates, nobles, lords, cities, boroughs, and substantial men, of our realm, we, knowing that you will be the more ready to incline to our wishes, the more immediately that the purpose of our intention, as aforesaid, redounds to the manifest advantage of the whole realm, have therefore not long since come to the determination to send certain Lords of our Council unto the City aforesaid, to treat with you as to promoting the business before mentioned’ (1).

This astute little speech did the trick and the City offered the king a loan of 10,000 marks  which equated to ‘£6,666 13s 4d which is worth almost £2,760,000 today.  For security the Bishop of Norwich, Richard Courtney, treasurer of the royal chamber and keeper of the king’s jewels handed over : one great collar of gold, made of workmanship in crowns and beasts called antelopes, enamelled with white esses (i.e. in the style of the Lancastrian SS collar), and the beasts surcharged with green garnets; the charge being of two pearls, and each beast having one pearl about the neck. And each of the crowns is set with one large balass and nine large pearls; and in the principal crown, which is in front, there are set, in addition to the balass and the pearls, two large diamandes in the summit; and besides the crowns, there are other balasses therein, eight in all, the collar weighing 56 ounces in the whole…’ (2). 

And so the financial bits taken care of Henry and his army sailed for France on the 12 August 1415.  What happened after that is well documented elsewhere and I won’t touch upon it here but return to the crystal sceptre given in gratitude by Henry. Despite its great historical value it has remained rather a mysterious object that is sadly seldom seen by the general public being only brought out on rare occasions such as coronations –  which as we know are very few and far between –  and for the ceremonial swearing in of each new Lord Mayor.   On a very rare occasion to mark the 600th anniversary of the St Crispin’s Day that fell on the 25 October 1415 it was put on public display in 2015 at the Guildhall Art Gallery  for six weeks.  St Crispin’s Day 1415 was of course the day  when it is said 9,000 English and Welsh soldiers engaged as many as 36,000 of their French counterparts at Agincourt (3),  I have to say I’m not so sure on the accuracy of these figures but it’s clear to see that the English and Welsh were vastly outnumbered and without this massive loan which paid for men, equipment and particularly the longbow archers who played such a pivotal role in the battle the day may have ended very differently possibly changing the history of England rather drastically.    To mark his relief and delight at winning the battle a grateful Henry commissioned the sceptre which was presented to the City of London some time between 1415 and 1421 as a tangible sign of his thanks.   .

The Battle of Agincourt.  From the painting by Graham Turner.

Described as ‘17 inches long and made out of two spiral stems of rock crystal – which is thought to have been made in Paris – ironically perhaps, given the reason behind its creation – and was inlaid with gold. The jewels which decorate the crown at the top of the stem were sourced from the far corners of the known world; its red spinels from what is now Afghanistan, blue sapphires from Ceylon and dozens of pearls plucked from the seas of the Arabian gulf and traded in Cairo’ (4). 

Photo Medieval Histories.  

Photos with thanks to Paul D Jagger.

As Art Historian Dr Michael Hall points out:

“The most remarkable aspect of the story surrounding the Crystal Sceptre is that it is still safely in the hands of those for whom it was made 600 years ago – the City of London.  As well as being a rare and surviving English royal treasury object, the precious materials – rock crystal, gems and gold – make it an object of great beauty which has been carefully hiding in plain sight for six centuries……” (5).

Henry V, as Prince of Wales.  Artist Homas Hoccleve c.1411-1413

The gold crown at the top of the sceptre displays Henry’s coat of arms on parchment.  Photo Paul D Jagger.

How has this precious treasure survived?  During the republican protectorate of Oliver Cromwell when royal regalia and jewels were sold, reused or simply melted down the City authorities were worried that the precious Crystal Sceptre could go the same way and had it surreptitiously hidden away.  A few years later in 1666 another great danger reared its head in the form of the Great Fire of London.  This time it was the then incumbent Lord Mayor of London, Sir Thomas Bloodworth/Bludworth  who saved the day ensuring that the sceptre was evacuated from the burning city.  However the sceptre did not escape entirely unscathed in its long history for in the 1830s the stem’s central cut-glass boss was damaged so badly that it had to be replaced by the royal jewellers, Rundell, Bridge & Rundell.   Casting this aside we should give thanks that this fabulous object has indeed came through the centuries in one piece and would to this day be recognised by Henry V, the grateful king,  who gifted it in thanks for the financial aid given that no doubt contributed towards his victory at the Battle of Agincourt.

1. How did the City of London fund Henry V’s expedition of 1415? Sinclair Rogers and Anne Curry.
2. Ibid.
3. 11 Oct 2015 Patrick Sawyer. Daily Telegraph.
4. Ibid.
5. Medieval Histories.  Nature History Heritage

If you have enjoyed this post you might also like:

MEDIEVAL POSY RINGS – GIVEN WITH LOVE…

THE MYSTERIOUS CHEAPSIDE HOARD, DISCOVERY AND FURTHER ADVENTURES

RICHARD WHITTINGTON c.1350-1423. MERCER, MAYOR AND A MOST

ANOTHER PRECIOUS FIND TO ADD TO THE MIDDLEHAM JEWEL AND RING..

OLD LONDON BRIDGE – A MEDIEVAL WONDER!

Gleaston Castle today.  Entrance to south west tower.  Photo Chloe Grainger @castlestudiestrust.org

Some of you reading this may be familiar with other posts I have written concerning what I call the Coldridge theory.   For those of you who are not familiar with the theory here is a brief résumé.  A number of clues in Coldridge church, Devon have led to a theory that Edward V was sent to Coldridge by Richard III to live incognito as John Evans where he was in time given the position of Parker.   An important  point here is that Coldridge was owned by Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset – Edward’s half brother. Another lead is that Richard sent one of his loyal followers, Robert Markynfield  from Yorkshire to Coldridge on 3rd March  1484  which was two days after Edward’s mother, Elizabeth Woodville/Wydeville,  left sanctuary at Westminster after making her peace with Richard III:  Robert Markyngfeld/the keping of the park of Holrig in Devonshire during the kinges pleasure…(1).   It was at this point that Elizabeth wrote to Thomas, who was then in France with Henry Tudor, telling him to return home …. all was well and that King Richard would treat him well.  It was around this time Coldridge, which had been at that time removed from Thomas but would be returned to him when Henry Tudor took the throne,  was granted by Richard to one of the most powerful men in Cornwall Sir Henry Bodrugan (2).  Following Richard’s death at Bosworth 1485 and around the time news of the so called Simnel Rebellion (early 1487) was breaking, Henry Tudor would send one of his loyal followers,  Sir Richard Edgecombe,  to Cornwall to arrest Bodrugan and his son Sir John Beaumont,  after accusations were made that they had  ‘withdrawn themselves into private places in the counties of Devon and Cornwall and stir up sedition’ (3).  Bodrugan made his escape and then rocked up in Dublin where he was a participant in the coronation of the youth who was crowned as King Edward (14th May 1487).   Only later in Lincoln’s Attainder, November 1487,  would the Tudor regime produce a younger boy of about 10 years old who they named –  possibly after a cake? –   Lambert Simnel – who was clearly a fake.  However some historians even today seem unable to grasp this despite historian A F Pollard clearly stating that ‘No serious historian has doubted that Lambert Simnel was an imposter’.   Bodrugan had been  joined in Dublin by the Yorkist leaders Lovell and Lincoln and following the coronation the latter two left Ireland and arrived – with an army obvs –  in Lancashire accompanied by the newly crowned King Edward.  Their journey took them to East Stoke, Nottinghamshire, where the matter was concluded at the battle known as Stoke Field fought on the 16th June 1487.

The choir Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin.  Here the Yorkist rebels including  Sir Henry Bodrugan and his son John Beaumont attended the coronation of the ‘Dublin King’.  Photo with thanks to Diliff @ Flikr.

 Following the rebels defeat at Stoke and the deaths of the leaders, the young king Edward, so recently crowned in Dublin, was discovered:    ‘And there was taken the lade that his rebelles called King Edwarde, whoos name was in dede *John*, by a vaylent and a gentil esquire of the kings howse called Robert Bellingham’ (4).   Well I never!  Jean Molinet further reported that King Edward was taken and made prisoner in the town of Newark but after that what become of King Edward/John (Evans) has been carefully blotted out from history (5).   However If the Coldridge theory is correct Edward/John Evans, possibly wounded or even disfigured,  was returned there to live out the remainder of his life incognito.  This Coldridge theory is littered with links and numerous coincidences similar to  a jigsaw puzzle with new pieces being discovered and slotted into place regularly and I have now come across yet another possible link which could add weight to the theory that Thomas Grey Marquess of Dorset, half brother to the young Edward V/John Evans, was an important and vital cog in the wheel of this mystery allowing his properties to be utilised in firstly providing a sanctuary, Coldridge,  for his young half brother and then a rendezvous point, Gleaston Castle,  for the rebels in 1487.   It’s thanks to an article in a Richardian Bulletin of June 2022 written by members of the South Cumbria Richard III Society group entitled Simnel’s real march to battle? that made me aware of the ownership of Gleaston Castle and its handy proximity to the feverish activity that took place in that area in June 1487.  On reading the article I had a weird sense of déjà vu when I read ‘the army’s most likely route would have to been to follow the coastline past Gleason Castle’.  For Gleaston Castle was owned, as noted above,  by none other than Thomas Grey Marquess of Dorset.   Thomas had come into ownership of Gleaston castle the same way as he had come into ownership of Coldridge – that is via his lucrative marriage to wealthy heiress Cecilia/Cecill/Cecily Bonville (c.1461-1529).  It may be that more importance should be placed on Cecilia’s role in this story than has been done so far.  She came from a family of staunch Yorkists – her father William Bonville (b.1442) and grandfather, another William had both died at Wakefield on the 30 December 1460 where they fought for Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York.  Her great grandfather, yet another William,  had been ‘treacherously’ executed after fighting for York at the second battle of St Albans February 1461 (6).  Her mother, Katherine Neville,  was the sister of Richard Neville,  later known as the Kingmaker,  who took as her second husband that fiercely loyal Yorkist, Sir William Hastings, bosom buddy to Edward IV.   Look no further for why the couple should be involved in what was such a highly dangerous enterprise.    Besides a sense of familial loyalty to the young Edward V  how much more advantageous for them both to have a Yorkist king – with links to both of them –  once again sat upon England’s throne rather than the new Tudor one?  This is the crux of the matter and it’s highly likely that the youth crowned in Dublin was the same lad that had been living incognito at Coldridge and also highly likely that he had been escorted to Dublin by Sir Henry Bodrugan, who was but a short time ago the owner of Coldridge but now rebel and fugitive.  

GLEASTON CASTLE

Leaving the rebels for a while and turning to Gleaston Castle which stands on the Furness Peninsular in a part of Cumbria that was formerly known as Lancashire North of the Sands. The castle, also known as Glaiston or even Gleanson –  was built for John Harrington, Ist Baron Harrington (b. 1281–d. 1347) in the 14th century.  Sir John was knighted in 1306 and fought in the Scottish border wars.   The castle then descended through several generations of the Harrington family until 1457 when it ceased to be a ‘manorial residence’  and passed through marriage to the Bonvilles (7).  When both Cecilia’s father and grandfather fell at the battle of Wakefield on the 30 December 1460 fighting for Richard Duke of York, the castle would pass to her while she was still an infant.   Following her marriage the castle, and Coldridge,  then became the property of her husband, Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset.  Although the reasons for Gleaston being abandoned as a manorial residence are unknown today, Dr Helen Evans and Daniel Elsworth the authors of an in-depth conservation report commissioned by Historic England, and  funded by the Castles Studies Trust,  have suggested that the abandonment may have been down to the civil unrest in the ‘early part of the reign of Henry VII’ as well as the ‘Bonville’s family’s political affiliation with the Yorkist faction during the reign of Edward IV’ . This civil unrest was of course was  the Yorkist rebellion led by Lovell and Lincoln later named erroneously as the Lambert Simnel rebellion.  The authors of the report suggest that this pertinent question – which was out of their remit at the time of making the report in 2017 – should be the focus of any future research into Gleaston.   Bring it on I say.  For if it indeed transpired that Thomas Grey, the owner of the castle, which stood so conveniently close to the landing point of the rebels,  was so heavily embroiled in the rebellion to the point that he offered up Gleaston as a convening point then that would strengthen the theory that the young Edward V had been sequestered away at Coldridge – another Grey property.   Henry Tudor, who may have been many things, but being a fool was not amongst them,  had been informed at a council meeting at Sheen in February 1487 that Thomas Grey was up to his neck in rebellion  –  which Thomas,  acting all offended like,  strenuously denied – as you do.   Perhaps, unable to get to the bottom of Thomas’ involvement in the plot, Henry prudently had him – now his brother-in-law – placed in the Tower for the duration of the rebellion.   Meanwhile Thomas’ mother, Henry Tudor’s mother-in-law, Elizabeth Wydeville/Woodville,  mother to the young Edward V,  also up to her neck in the plot  – quelle surprise – was without any further ado sent to Bermondsey Abbey for the duration of her life.  And here may be the real reason why Gleaston was finally abandoned.  Strangely the castle was never mentioned in neither Grey’s or Cecilia’s wills.  Which is hardly surprising considering the castle’s role in the rebellion.

The castle then passed down through the Grey family until Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk  was executed for treason in 1554. As a result, Gleaston Castle became royal property before it was bought by the Preston family in the 17th century, and then passed to the Cavendish family.

Interior of south eastern tower.  Photo Chloe Grainger @ castlestudies.org 

Now in a ruinous state and with a 19th century farm incorporated into parts of it,  in its heyday it was  a substantial building with walls 9 foot thick in some parts,  consisting of a large hall and three stone towers joined by a curtain wall.  Built at a time when that part of Cumbria – or Lancashire North of the Sands as it was then known – was subjected to regular Scottish border raids although it was probably also built as much to reflect wealth, status and comfort as defence with what archaeologists believe,  a ‘pleasure garden’ in a landscaped area to the north.   Think more fortified manor house than rugged castle.   One hundred years after its abandonment it was reported to have become ruinous by the antiquarian John Leland who wrote ‘there is a ruine and waulles of a castell in Lancastershire cawlyd Gleston Castell sometyme longinge to Lord Harrington now to the Marquis of Dorset’.    Evans and Elsworth also go on to say that while it is assumed that Gleaston Castle was dismantled after its use as a manorial residence ceased ‘17th and 18th century leases suggest parts of it were still habitable in those periods’.    Although the location on the Furness Peninsula today appears to be remote, this is misleading,  as historically access  was easy either by boat or by crossing the sands of the Morecambe Bay estuary at low tide  – a mere short walk (8)

A three D model of the castle can be found here.

REBELLION 1487

To return to the rebellion.  There is some debate as to where the rebels actually landed.  Some believe it was Piel Island, or as historian David Baldwin prefers,  somewhere else in the Furness Peninsula although this is not of overly importance to us because wherever it was would have been in close proximity to the castle.  Baldwin also repeats the local tradition that the rebels spent their first night camped on Swarthmoor near Ulverston.   Their route thereafter would have taken them via Newby Bridge, Kendal, Sedbergh and through Wensleydale (9).   However Michael Bennett states the landing place was Foulney Island, ‘a safe natural haven which even at low tide was six fathoms deep’ and mentions  ‘allies in the neighbourhood‘ (10).  These allies would have included Sir Thomas Broughton who had fought for Richard III at Bosworth in 1485 and since making his escape from that place had been holding out in Furness Fells. Thomas’ brother John and the Huddlestons of Millom would also have been counted in the welcoming party.    A further suggestion that  Furness Harbour was the landing place was made by both Molinet who told of the rebels disembarking at a  ‘harbour known as Furness’  and in Lincoln’s Act of Attainder which mentioned a ‘great navy in Furness in Lancashire’.  Bennett mentions that the Abbot and convent of Furness, owners of the harbour as well as Furness castle,  were slightly less than welcoming and at the most may have provided the rebels with food and supplies alone (11).   The fact that the father of one of  Henry VII’s most trusted agents, Christopher Urswick,  was a lay-brother at Furness may have had some input in their reluctance to aid the rebels more than absolutely necessary. However, as mentioned above,  wherever their landing place was  should not bother us too unduly – wherever it was would have placed them but a short distance away from Gleaston Castle and a sheltered spot for meeting, greeting and getting their acts together. Bennett goes on to repeat the Swarthmore tradition, which lay less than 10 miles away from his choice of landing place,  and agrees with Baldwin that their most direct route would have been via Newby Bridge, Kendal, and Sedburgh.

However, Gleaston Castle, if Gleaston Castle was indeed the rendezvous point for the rebels, was left behind by the rebels who continued onwards with their journey which reached its bloody and tragic climax at Stoke Field.  The story of the Battle of Stoke is readily available elsewhere.  I would recommend Michael Bennett’s Lambert Simnel and the Battle of Stoke and  Stoke Field  David Baldwin.