The Princes in the Tower, page 21
Fig. 2. City accounts of Bergen op Zoom 1487–1488, Archive of West-Brabant, Bergen op Zoom. (West-Brabants Archief, City accounts, Bergen op Zoom 1487–1488: boz – 0005, inv. nr. 759)
With Bergen op Zoom acting as a naval base for the Yorkist invasion, then following the same procedure as with the first expeditionary force, this second force was also to be armed and equipped in Bergen op Zoom and gather in Arnemuiden to depart for England. This pincer movement against Henry VII could have produced a very different outcome.20
Still, the Van Glymes, who appear to have been one of the main forces among the Dutch nobles to support the Yorkist invasion, did see their efforts rewarded, despite the invasion being unsuccessful. From the Domain Accounts 1487–88 of the island of Voorne, an entry records Margaret awarding John II of Glymes and his son the governorship of the city of Den Briel and the lands of Voorne, from which they would receive a yearly sum of 3,000 livres from 26 February 1489.21 Not only does this illustrate how valuable the Van Glymes were to Margaret, it can also be viewed as the final piece of evidence of their unfailing support for the Yorkist invasion.
Conclusion
From these findings, we can conclude that the Van Glymes actively supported the Yorkist invasion of 1487. But more importantly, once again, we see the Van Glymes appearing at an important moment in one of the key years within The Missing Princes Project, acting on behalf of the prince’s main supporter, Margaret of York. Moreover, it reveals the level of support (financial and otherwise) for Edward V and the plan to send out another force to attack Henry VII’s army from two fronts. Had this force been sent as intended, the Battle of Stoke might very well have turned out differently.
14
Richard, Duke of York: Proof of Life
by Nathalie Nijman-Bliekendaal and Philippa Langley
This is the first examination of a unique contemporary document rediscovered in the Gelderland Archive in the Netherlands in November 2020 by Nathalie Nijman-Bliekendaal of the Dutch Research Group.1 It concerns the fate of the younger Prince in the Tower, Richard, Duke of York, second son of King Edward IV (also known as Richard of England or Richard Plantagenet) who – according to the text of the manuscript – was brought to safety (delivered) from the Tower of London to the continent with the help of John Howard, 1st Duke of Norfolk (c. 1425–85).
Preface
In the early 1950s, the Dutch historian Professor Diederik Enklaar, at the University of Utrecht, received a letter from the Gelderland Archive concerning the discovery of a rather curious document. The Master of the Charters, Mr P.J. Mey, wrote that a colleague had recently found a document in the archive, of which the origin is not clear.2 According to Mey, it concerned a manuscript from about the year 1500, in which the fortunes of ‘Richard’, the younger brother of Edward V, are told; but the brothers, as Mey continued, ‘according to literature – I have at hand here, were both murdered in the Tower’. Clearly intrigued by the manuscript, Mey wrote to Enklaar:
However, the story I have here before me states that Richard was taken from the Tower under the direction of Hinrijck and Thomas Parcij and that he is staying in Paris and later goes to Middelburg via Brabant. To Lisbon, to Ireland, France and finally to the Duchess of Burgundy. The question now is: Is this reading ‘of the Richard case’ known in English literature? The Great Encyclopedia only says that there have been doubts about the truth of the mainstream story.
A short exchange of letters between Mey and the professor followed.3 Mey suggested having the document examined by an expert on the matter as he had noticed that several (unknown) names are mentioned in the manuscript. However, Enklaar’s response was rather discouraging: ‘Is the case of the false York “Perkin Warbeck” not already sufficiently known? If you want to make a publication, it will only be due to the fact/importance of a new Dutch source.’
Although Professor Enklaar eventually provided the names of two experts in the field, namely the English Professors Grierson (Cambridge) and Bindoff (London), it seems that Mey lost his initial enthusiasm and the sense that he held an extraordinary manuscript.
As far as is known, no further research has been undertaken into this remarkable document. Shortly after this brief exchange of letters in February 1951, the manuscript was returned to the archive repository.
Introduction
The mainstream story to which Mey alluded concerns Thomas More’s well-known dramatic narrative, based on the alleged confession of Sir James Tyrell, that the two sons of King Edward IV, known today as the Princes in the Tower, were murdered in the Tower of London by a certain Miles Forest and various henchmen, including John Dighton, on the orders of Richard III. This popular story, first published under More’s name in 1557, twenty-two years after his death, culminated in Shakespeare’s 1593 play The Tragedie of Richard the Third. As a result, More’s narrative continues to be widely accepted as the truth.4
The same uncritical acceptance is true of the story of the young man who arrived in Ireland in 1491 and was recognised there as one of the missing princes – Richard, Duke of York.5 This Richard, who was supported in his claim to the English throne by European rulers in the years that followed, has gone down in history as the impostor named by Henry VII ‘Perkin Warbeck’, the son of a Tournai boatman.6
This traditional story, based on a single confession, is still widely taken to be proven history.7 A good example is the response of Professor Enklaar, who, unreservedly and without inspecting the manuscript, concluded that it was the story of the ‘false York’.
Diana M. Kleyn remarked on this ‘false York’ bias in her 1990 work Richard of England, noting that ‘no one who has ever written anything about Perkin Warbeck has equally regarded him as other than an impostor’.8
According to the first line of the Gelderland manuscript, the narrator of the recorded events is none other than the ‘Hertoghe van Jorcks, soene ins erffgename van Conynck Edward de vierde Rychart [The Duke of York, son and heir of King Edward the Fourth, Richard]’.
In this manuscript, Richard recalls his secret departure from the Tower of London, including those who were present and responsible. He also records chronologically the events of his life from the time he was delivered from sanctuary in Westminster Abbey by his mother, the Dowager Queen, Elizabeth Woodville, to the Archbishop of Canterbury (and other nobles), up to and including his arrival at the court of his aunt, Margaret of York, in Burgundy at the end of 1492/early 1493.
Since the disappearance of Edward V and his brother, Richard, different stories have circulated about their potential survival. Some historians have recorded these, among them Polydore Vergil, who writes that ‘a report prevailed among the common people that the sons of Edward the king had migrated to some part of the earth in secret, and there were still surviving’9 and Sir George Buc, who, in his History of King Richard the Third, points out that ‘some write that they were both secretly taken out of the Tower and both set afloat in a ship and conveyed together over the seas’.10
The Zeeland chronicler Jan van Reijgersbergh (c. 1510–91) simply states in his Dije Cronijcke van Zeelandt (Antwerp, 1551) that both sons were expelled from England after the death of their father, King Edward IV, in 1483.11
In a proclamation issued in Scotland in September 1496, Richard of York described the circumstances of his survival: ‘and whereas we in our tender age escaped by god’s might out of the tower of London and were secretly conveyed over the sea into other divers countries there remaining certain years as unknown’.12
However, no decisive evidence supporting their survival has ever been found, just as none has been found of the traditional murder story.
The Gelderland manuscript describes for the first time, in a personal account, the events surrounding the disappearance of Richard, Duke of York, and his brother Edward V in 1483. It also tells how and by whom one of the princes is secretly moved from the Tower of London and sheltered in safety on the continent.
Consequently, major question marks can now be placed against the traditional narrative. It may also confirm that one of the alternative stories – that the princes were taken from the Tower and sent abroad – is the true version of events, and that the man known as Perkin Warbeck was indeed the son of King Edward – Prince Richard, Duke of York – as many have argued.13
The period surrounding Richard’s departure from the Tower of London is described in considerable detail. This not only is quite remarkable but also provides a relatively easy means of checking the various names and places mentioned in the narrative. In this way, the veracity of the account can be tested, and its credibility and reliability assessed.
The English translation of the original Middle Dutch text of the manuscript14 is included in its entirety in this chapter and subjected to an analysis of its most significant details. As a result, this examination represents the first exploration of the manuscript.
Its origin, language, date and handwriting will be briefly examined in order to assess its authenticity. The text will then be presented in full, and its contents analysed.
The Authenticity of the Document
It is likely that the Gelderland Archive acquired the manuscript in the nineteenth or early twentieth century through a gift or deposit. It is also possible that it was purchased as a separate item by the archive itself at auction or from a vendor. For this reason, it is difficult to trace its provenance.15
The manuscript consists of four bound pages. It is neither dated nor signed. The dating of the piece to around the year 1500 by the Gelderland Archives appears to be correct, partly in view of the typical late-fifteenth-century handwriting. It is probable that the Gelderland document is a copy of an original.
The text provides some internal evidence regarding the date of composition. The narration ends when Richard leaves Charles VIII’s court in France and arrives with his aunt, Margaret of York, in Malines. This would have been at the end of 1492 or the beginning of 1493 (see Appendix 5 and Timeline).
It seems likely that Richard’s personal story was recorded shortly after his arrival in Malines, possibly at the insistence or request of Margaret of York. On 25 August 1493, Richard Plantagenet, as he called himself at that time, also wrote a letter from Dendermonde to the Spanish Queen Isabella.16
This letter, which will be discussed in more detail, appears to be a shortened, but more or less identical, rendition of events in the Gelderland document, which is an indication that both documents were written around the same time.
Another dating clue is the fact that the narration in the Gelderland manuscript was written in the past tense, except for the very last sentence, which reads, ‘And by the Grace of God, I received help, honour and comfort … that in a short time I will obtain my rights to which I was born.’ Richard thus speaks at the moment he arrives at the court of Margaret of York, about the (near) future and what has still to take place.
The language in which the narrative is written is Middle Dutch or Middle Low German. It also resembles Dietsch, the language spoken by the ordinary people in the Burgundian Netherlands, which at the time had many local variants.17 The style is narrative and it is told in an almost neutral and emotionless way by Richard himself. The death of his father, the flight into sanctuary and the sudden farewell from his mother, sisters and brother must have been traumatic for the 9-year-old; however, nowhere in this narrative do we get an impression of despair, fear or grief.
The Manuscript Text
Please note that names, capitals and punctuation have been modernised.
1–3: Here we follow the Duke of York, son and heir to king Edward the fourth, Richard (‘Rychart’), his son, delivered from the Tower of London where he has been for a while.
4–8: First of all, I remember that my dearest lady and mother, queen Elizabeth (‘elysabett’), delivered me from sanctuary of Westminster into the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury (‘cantelberch’), and other men, also from the states of the country, under commitment of certain promises made by him under oath to bring me back to the same sanctuary.
9–11: Which Archbishop brought me to my uncle of Gloucester (‘gloessester’). And so I was brought to my brother who was already there, in the Tower of London.
11–18: [… several knights?] and squires were waiting for us there, of whom I think I remember that John Norris (‘johan norijssche’) was one, and William Tyrwyth (‘tyrwijte’) another. On the first night, shortly after these guards were relieved, they took leave of us with great melancholy and sadness. To these guards my brother often said melancholic words. Among other things he said and prayed my uncle of Gloucester (‘glossestre’) to have mercy on him, for he was just an innocent person.
19–21: And then we were delivered to Brackenbury (‘Braekeberij’), and then to sir James Tyrrell (‘jacob tyrrijll’), and then to the Duke of Buckingham (‘Hertoghe van Buckgegen’), by whose orders we were separated.
22–33: And so they ordered my lord Foriest, Hamelett Maleven and Wylliam Puche by whom I was secretly taken into a room in a place where the lions are kept. There I was for such a long time, that Lord Howard (‘heer halbard’), later made Duke of Norfolk (‘hertoghe van nortfolck’), came to me and encouraged me. [At last?], he ordered the guards – described above – to leave and then brought two other men to me. They were called, they said so themselves: ‘hinrijck (Henry) Parcij’ and ‘thomas (Thomas) Parcij’. They swore by honour and oath to Duke Howard (‘hertoge halbard’), as mentioned before, to hide me secretly until certain years were past and that I would be placed under supervision by them for certain years. Then they shaved my hair and put a poor and drab skirt (‘rockesgen’) on me.18
34–36: And shortly after that they left the Tower with me and went to Saint Katherine’s (‘sinte katrijns’). There they took a boat and rowed aboard a small and narrow ship already waiting there.
37–38: And sailed to the sea and came ashore in the dunes of Boulognesur-Mer (‘boene’).19
39–44: And from there we went to Paris (‘Parijs’). We stayed there for a long time. Till the moment I was noticed by English folks there. And so we travelled from there to a city called Chartres (‘charters’) and from there to Rouen (‘ruwan’), to Dieppe (‘deijpen’) and various other cities and places in France (‘vranckrijk’). And finally, we got to Hainaut (‘hennegaw’).
45–49: From there in Brabant […?] Malines (mechelen), Antwerp (‘andwerpen’), Bergen (‘berghen’)20 for a period of certain years. And from there I went to Zeeland (‘Selant’) […?] Middelburg (‘mydelborch’) until Edward Brampton’s21 (‘eduwart bramtons’) wife was ready to sail us to Portugal.
49–53: [I sailed together with the prescribed Parcijs in a ship of their own.. ?]. To be able to tell [later?] [that they were on the same ship (with me), they knew a distinguishing feature (‘lyckteyken’) of me, namely that I played the clavichord.]
53–63: And then we arrived in Lisbon (‘lysseboene’). From there I sent the aforementioned Thomas Parcij to England, to my lady my mother with certain distinguishing features (‘lycktekenen’) and also with certain messages. Shortly afterwards Henry Parcij became ill with the plague. During his illness, he told me that when he died, I would have to travel to Ireland to the lords of Kyldare22 and Desmond23 and also told me how I should rule the country. Then he died, may God save his soul.
64–65: Shortly afterwards I found a ship from Brittany (‘bartayne’) that wanted to sail to Ireland (‘ierlant’). The master of the ship sailed me to Ireland (‘ierlant’) as he himself has testified and will testify more fully – at all times – when questioned.
70–72: There I found several of my acquaintances, among them the lord of Kyldare (‘de here van kyldare’), Garret the Great (‘gylbart de braven’) and many others.24 There I was recognised for who I was and treated as such.
73–85: And there I stayed for a while until my cousin the King of France (‘konyng van vranckrijk’)25 contacted me and made a firm promise to assist and help me to claim my rights. However, when I arrived in France, I found the opposite. So I left, and went to my dearest aunt, the duchess of Burgundy (‘myne leyffste moye de herthoginne van Burghoenen’). She recognised my rights and honesty. And by the grace of God, I received help, honour and comfort from my dear friends and servants that in a short time I will obtain my right to which I was born.
Content and analysis
The document begins, ‘Here we follow the Duke of York, son and heir to King Edward the fourth Rychart his son delivered from the Tower of London where he has been for a while.’
The title of the text is written in the third person. It has the same handwriting as the young duke’s personal narrative, which follows, suggesting that the document in question is a written copy of an original. It seems most likely that around the time the Duke of York was received at the Burgundian court, his story was recorded in an official document, possibly in Latin or French, the official language of the court.
Although Margaret of York could vouch for the ‘authenticity’ and identity of her royal nephew,26 such a statement was required to support his credibility. Copies of the original may have been distributed throughout Burgundy. The Gelderland document could be such a copy.
It is beyond dispute that in the years following his arrival in the Burgundian Netherlands, Richard, Duke of York, was unreservedly recognised as the son of Edward IV and rightful heir to the English throne.27 It cannot be ruled out, therefore, that Richard’s recorded narrative contributed to this firm belief.
It is known that the Duke of York received military and financial support from King Maximilian to regain his kingdom. This support seems to have taken greater form than previously assumed. Recent archival research has revealed that several nobles in prominent positions at the Burgundian court supported Richard’s ambitions with large sums of money. Both Albert of Saxony28 and Engelbert II of Nassau,29 who held leading military and administrative roles in the service of King Maximilian, lent to ‘Richard of England’ quite astonishing sums of 30,000 gold florins and 10,000 golden ecus respectively.30 In these two rediscovered charters, Richard of England promises to repay them once he becomes sovereign ruler of England. This strongly suggests that both Burgundian nobles believed him to be the true son of Edward IV and rightful heir to the English throne. One of the charters mentioned was found to bear the royal seal and monogram of Richard of England, which appeared to be in extremely good condition.
