The Princes in the Tower, page 26
Less than a month before Edward IV’s death, on Saturday, 8 March, Rivers wrote to his London agent, Andrew Dymmock, requiring copies of the letters patent that granted him the governorship of the prince, the control of moving him from place to place, and the right to raise troops on his behalf. Yet Rivers had only recently attended Parliament at Westminster and could have requested the desired copies at that time.
In the same letter, Rivers issued a further instruction, handing his authority as Deputy Constable of the Tower of London to his nephew, Thomas, Marquess of Dorset, the Prince of Wales’ other half-brother. For a Deputy Constable to reassign his office unilaterally would have been quite irregular,5 especially since Dorset had wielded nothing approaching such authority in any previous appointment. Possession of the Tower was a vital element if one needed to control the capital and government, being not only London’s royal palace but also home to the Treasury, Mint, Armoury and Garrison.
Analysis of Rivers’ movements at the time of the king’s death strongly suggests he was on his Norfolk estates when he heard the news (see Chapter 3), and that he proceeded to London, where he received the queen’s instructions before travelling to Ludlow to inform the young King Edward V of his father’s demise.
Meanwhile, the queen and her circle had seized the reins of power by swaying members of the Council in London to act precipitately before the royal dukes (Gloucester and Buckingham) and other senior nobility had time to arrive. Taxes were levied, a hasty coronation arranged for 4 May, and Dorset, as Deputy Constable of the Tower, shared what remained of state funds with his mother’s youngest brother, Sir Edward Woodville, to man and equip a seagoing fleet.
Dorset would remain in London, while Woodville, despite orders by the Council to return to port, instead took two vessels (and a vast amount of gold) to the Tudor camp in Brittany. Though he supported Henry Tudor’s bid for the crown, their relationship eventually soured, and he did not attend the coronation of his niece, Elizabeth of York.6
Referring to decisions taken by the queen’s party after Edward IV’s death, Mancini writes that Dorset declared, ‘We are so important that even without the king’s uncle [Gloucester] we can make and enforce these decisions’.7 As historian Stephen David observes, this bold claim:
… was not the empty boastfulness it has sometimes been portrayed but a confident assessment based on their experience of ruling Wales and the Marches since 1473 and an assured recognition that in April 1483, they now also controlled the future.8
Rivers, using powers to recruit his escort and control his every move, made haste to bring the new king to London in time for the coronation. There followed the events in Northamptonshire (described in Chapter 3), which resulted in various leaders of the king’s escort being arrested and imprisoned. The armorial devices on their confiscated weaponry, says Mancini, displayed those of the queen’s sons, Dorset and Grey.9 This again indicates prior preparations, thanks to Dorset making full use of his access to arms and men at the Tower of London.
Frustrated in trying to raise an army at Westminster to seize the king, the remaining Woodville family fled into sanctuary. Their impetuous April coup, followed by flight without any attempt at reconciliation, seems inexplicable unless prompted by their likely concern that King Edward’s secret marriage to Lady Eleanor Talbot might be revealed before they had entrenched their position.
Eight weeks later, with the queen’s family further implicated in unrest against the government, the writing was on the wall for the imprisoned Rivers and Grey. On Wednesday, 25 June, they were put on trial at Pontefract Castle with Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland acting as ‘their chief judge’.10 Mancini gives the prevailing view in the capital that their execution was to be effected judicially ‘by certain quaestors [prosecutors]’.11 Sir Richard Ratcliffe, Gloucester’s close adherent, had earlier been sent to Pontefract, probably bearing materials relevant to the impending trial.
The New Discoveries
Following the discovery of new evidence supporting the survival of Edward V and Richard of York post-Bosworth, an important new line of enquiry has emerged. We need to examine the actions of the immediate family during the reigns of Richard III and Henry VII in case new insights are revealed concerning the princes’ later lives.
Thomas Grey, Marquess of Dorset (1455–1501): Maternal Half-Brother
As the adult half-brother of the princes, Dorset is a significant person of interest. Following Gloucester’s seizure of Edward V at Stony Stratford, Dorset took sanctuary at Cheneygates Mansion, in Westminster, with his mother, half-sisters and uncle Lionel. He later absconded, and by 2 February 1485 was in Bruges, Burgundy. Here Dorset sent several messages via the herald, Roger Machado, to the town of Laon in northern France and to his great-uncle, Jacques de Luxembourg, at Porsnay Castle.12 By Christmas or early 1485, Dorset had received a letter from his mother telling him to return to England and, like her, make his peace with King Richard.13 At this time, Dorset was in France with the pretender, Henry Tudor. Dorset deserted Tudor but was captured at Compiègne, en route for Flanders.14
When Henry Tudor invaded England in early August 1485, he left Dorset in prison in Paris as surety for his loan from the French king. Although not summoned to Henry VII’s first Parliament, a petition was raised on Dorset’s behalf in its second session (23 January–23 March 1486).15
By Whit Sunday, 14 May, Dorset had been allowed to return.16 He received a commission, several land grants and, in September 1486, attended the christening of Prince Arthur, King Henry’s heir.
Later, while rumours circulated of a Yorkist claimant in Ireland, hailed as ‘King Edward’, Dorset attended Henry’s Council at Sheen (around 2 February–3 March 1487).17 Here, his mother was deprived of her income and possessions.
A few weeks later, in mid-March, King Henry made an urgent journey to the de la Pole and Howard family territories in East Anglia.18 On his way to join the king, Dorset was arrested in Suffolk, near Bury St Edmunds, and imprisoned in the Tower of London on suspicion of complicity in a new Yorkist plot.19 It is not known if Dorset helped finance the 1487 invasion.
In early June, King Edward V’s invading army marched unopposed past Gleaston Castle, on the north-west coast, which belonged to Dorset’s mother-in-law, Katherine Bonville (née Neville, niece of Cecily, Duchess of York).20 On 16 June, King Edward was defeated and possibly injured or killed. Five months later, on Sunday, 25 November 1487, Dorset’s half-sister Elizabeth of York was crowned. Dorset’s young son Thomas attended the coronation.21
By 21 November 1489, Dorset was released from the Tower.22 His term of imprisonment spanned one year and four months to (potentially) two years and eight months.23 By 11 February 1490, Dorset was described as the ‘king’s councillor’.24 His incarceration may have affected him, as Vergil describes him as part of Henry’s Council with men chosen for their ‘prudence, faith and gravity’. He describes Dorset as ‘a good and prudent man’.25 This description is in sharp contrast to Mancini’s boastful and arrogant young man of 1483.
Dorset was back in favour but by 22 May 1491, his loyalty to King Henry was again in question. Fifty-five individuals were ‘mainprized’ (stood surety) for Dorset’s loyalty with pledges of very large sums of money. These included John Alcock, Bishop of Ely (£200); John Russell, Bishop of Lincoln (£100); Edward Grey, Viscount Lisle (£1,000); a Doctor Hanswell (£100); Sir Richard Haute (£100); Halneth Mauleverer (£100); and Robert Fabyan, draper (100 marks). These men, all associated with Dorset and Edward IV’s sons, comprised merchants, suppliers and a brewer, and possibly even Dorset’s own doctor. Moreover, one of those named was the Abbot of Bermondsey, the monastery where Dorset’s mother, the former queen, now resided in poverty. The Abbot of Bermondsey was mainprized for £200.26 By around November 1491, Richard, Duke of York, was welcomed in Ireland as the youngest son of Edward IV.27
By June 1492, Dorset, who should have realised he was under surveillance, had managed to displease Henry VII more seriously. To receive a pardon and regain favour, he was placed under an extortionate bond not only for good behaviour but also under compulsion to divulge any treasonous plans that came to his knowledge. In addition to a cash bond of £1,000, he had to yield his son’s wardship to the king, find another group of guarantors willing to stand mainprize to the tune of £10,000, and see nearly all his estates forfeited if he reneged.
Having agreed to all this, he received his pardon – but it extended only to the date of his last mainprize, twelve months earlier, and did not extend to Calais, Guînes and Ireland, including Ireland’s Treasurer.28 If Henry wanted to keep Elizabeth Woodville’s eldest son in check, he had comprehensively achieved his objective. Dorset was then named as a participant in King Henry’s (half-hearted) French expedition of the same year.29
But why place Dorset under restraint now? By this time, Thomas Peirse had probably informed Dorset and his mother of Richard of York’s survival and arrival in Ireland as the new Yorkist claimant. By 28 February 1493, John Grey, Viscount Lisle, was also bound to Henry VII for £1,000 as surety for Dorset’s good behaviour.30 This strongly suggests that Henry VII intended to deter support for Richard, Duke of York, by threatening suspects and their families with bankruptcy.
Four days after Dorset’s restraint, on 8 June, Elizabeth Woodville died in poverty at Bermondsey Abbey.31 Dorset attended her funeral Mass where he alone offered a piece of gold.32
Dorset’s actions are the subject of continuing investigations (see Appendix 3). After his mother’s death, he adopted the role of a model subject, taking his place on several commissions of the peace. His son, Thomas, was the first to be knighted on All Souls’ Day (2 November 1494), when the king’s second son, Prince Henry (age 3), was installed as a Knight Companion of the Bath and created Duke of York.33 Thus, on Edward V’s birthday, his brother Richard was stripped of his dukedom and Dorset’s son was knighted in celebration.
It was a master class of message and manipulation by the first Tudor monarch. But these actions had little effect on the support being garnered by ‘Richard IV’ at home and abroad.
By 26 February 1495, Henry VII may have harboured lingering doubts and insecurities concerning Dorset’s fealty or may have felt that extra insurance was required. Sir Thomas West, Lord de la Ware (8th Baron Warr, d. 1525), was now entered into a bond of 500 marks for life to ensure Dorset’s loyalty.34 By 26 August 1496, these precautions were augmented with the addition of ten individuals in Devon and Somerset mainprized for further large sums of money in guarantee of Dorset’s continued ‘allegiance’.35
At this time, Richard of England was in Scotland preparing an invasion with the assistance of James IV. Henry’s policy towards Dorset seems to have worked. After Richard of England’s capture in 1497, Dorset played little part in Henry’s administration, receiving on 1 July 1497 tenements and lands in Calais following the death of his uncle, Richard Woodville (see below).36
Intriguingly, a few weeks before his death, Dorset had a private dinner with the new Yorkist claimant to the throne, Edmund de la Pole, Duke of Suffolk, just before Suffolk fled to the continent (see de la Pole family further on). Also present was William Courtenay, heir of the Earl of Devon, who showed the new Yorkist heir ‘great reverence’.37 Courtney was the husband of Dorset’s half-sister, Katherine of York. Dorset’s son was now arrested and imprisoned, first in the Tower and later in Calais.
Dorset died on 30 August 1501. Writs of diem clausit extremum were posted for his death on 2 September.38 He was buried at the collegiate church of St Mary’s, Astley, in Warwickshire.39 His son escaped execution due to King Henry’s death.40 Cecily and Thomas were buried beside him.
Elizabeth Woodville (1437–92): Mother
Elizabeth Woodville, mother of the princes, is a significant person of interest for the enquiry. Her timeline reveals three events which require closer examination.
The first is her decision to take sanctuary at Cheneygates Mansion, Westminster, on 1 May 1483. What led the Queen Mother to take such an unprecedented step during a time of peace? As the young king’s mother, Elizabeth could look forward to an honoured place at court and at his coronation together with all his relatives and siblings.
It has been suggested that Elizabeth feared for her life at the hands of Richard of Gloucester. Does this stand up to scrutiny?
The Yorkist kings had no record of executing their women, a practice later pursued under the Tudor dynasty. Elizabeth’s flight to sanctuary could elicit sympathy and embarrass her son’s government, but the overriding opinion among Londoners, who were aware of the reputation of the queen’s relatives, seemed to support Gloucester’s new role as Protector and his separation of the young king (at Stony Stratford) from their corrupting influence.
So, did Elizabeth fear some other form of personal attack or punishment? Was she aware of or implicated in plots against Gloucester’s life at Northampton and Stony Stratford? And did she fear the consequences of answering these allegations?
This seems unlikely, because Gloucester was already holding the relevant individuals who were under suspicion. Holding them in prison ought, potentially, to bring the family to its senses – and the negotiating table. Gloucester had taken the precaution of writing to the Council and Mayor of London that all was now well, and this had been generally accepted.
Did Elizabeth fear something else? Mancini offers an account of the death of George, Duke of Clarence in 1478, alleging a deadly feud involving the Woodvilles against Clarence, initiated by his objection to the queen’s marriage to King Edward. Mancini tells us that Clarence was ‘removed’ at the instigation of the queen and that the Duke of Gloucester, ‘his feelings moved by anguish for his brother … was heard to say that one day he would avenge his brother’s death. Thereafter he rarely went to court, but remained in his own province.’41 That Clarence harboured a grudge is undoubtedly true, but we need to examine this accusation closely in relation to Gloucester.
It is important to note that Mancini had no personal experience of England in the 1460s–70s: as we have seen, his account was penned in France on 1 December 1483. The Franco-Italian cleric does not say how these stories of past resentments and overheard threats came to his ears, but he was writing after the October 1483 uprising against King Richard when several rebels fled to the continent.
Michael Hicks, Clarence’s modern biographer, makes clear that the evidence of Mancini’s text indicates that he knew none of the individuals he described.42 Moreover, contemporary evidence suggests that Gloucester maintained normal relations with the queen and her Woodville family throughout Edward IV’s reign. Furthermore, there is no evidence of tensions between the parties in areas ‘where both were important landowners’.43 To add to this, A.J. Pollard, a specialist in the north of England in the later fifteenth century, produced substantive materials to reveal that Gloucester ‘remained “persona grata” at court throughout the last five years of his brother’s reign, for he lent his name to every royal charter issued between February 1478 and January 1483’.44
Mancini (via his informants) goes further with his allegations about Elizabeth Woodville’s motives. He tells us that the queen, mindful of accusations that:
… according to established custom she was not the legitimate wife of the king, deemed that never would her offspring by the king succeed to the sovereignty unless the Duke of Clarence were removed; and of this she easily persuaded the king himself.45
Considering the events outlined in Chapter 3, which led to Edward V’s precipitate coronation on 4 May, it is likely that Elizabeth Woodville (and some of her family) knew about the late king’s prior secret marriage to Lady Eleanor Talbot. In this context, the Woodville family’s arrangement of a hasty coronation to secure the succession without delay begins to make sense.46 Once Edward V was crowned, he would have been anointed with the Holy Chrism and God would have entered his body. This religious ceremony was definitive in the eyes of the populace, and even more importantly, it formed a shield around the king and his inner circle. As a fait accompli, it was sufficient to deter any whistle-blower from questioning the king’s legitimacy, and from their position of power they could dismiss or take punitive measures against anyone with the temerity to come forward.
The second important incident is Elizabeth’s rapprochement with Richard III on 1 March 1484. This directly followed Parliament when the bastardy of Edward IV’s children was enacted into law. At this time, King Richard entered into an agreement with Elizabeth in which her daughters were placed in his care (see Appendix 1). By late 1484 to early 1485, Elizabeth had written to Dorset telling him to desert Henry Tudor in France, return to England and make his peace with Richard. Dorset attempted to do so but was apprehended.
Following Richard’s death and Henry’s marriage to Elizabeth’s eldest daughter (Elizabeth of York), Prince Arthur was born on 24 September 1486. Elizabeth Woodville was now grandmother of the future King of England, as well as his godmother.47 Additionally, her children from her marriage to Edward IV were no longer officially bastards after the 1484 Act of Parliament had been repealed unread in Henry’s first Parliament.
Elizabeth Woodville had achieved the highest status and recognition as Queen Elizabeth48 and received an honoured place at the new Tudor court. Her bloodline on the English throne through Edward IV was secured.
The Rebel Queen
Given such a remarkable transformation in fortune, it is the third significant event in Elizabeth Woodville’s timeline which confounds expectations. Around November 1486, rumours of a Yorkist claimant to Henry’s throne began to surface: a youth hailed in Ireland as ‘King Edward’. There was only one known King Edward (Edward V).
