History of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third: To which is Added the ...

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Preface

T

HIS work was first published about twenty years ago and, though it passed through two editions, has now been long out of print. Further study has in the mean time suggested some corrections and additions, not merely to the history of Richard III., but still more to the Chapter on Perkin Warbeck at the end, which is now very considerably enlarged, with details hitherto unknown derived from foreign publications.

The portrait of Perkin Warbeck inserted at page 282

is a photograph obtained through the kindness of

Mr Cust, the Keeper of the National Portrait Gallery,

* I of a drawing preserved in the town library at Arras.

^ It was quite unknown to me till very lately that any

likeness of the pretender ever existed. This drawing is

contained in a MS. volume along with a considerable

'^ number of other pencil and chalk portraits by a sixteenth

^ century artist, evidently taken, like this, from painted

> originals. With just a few exceptions at the end of the

VI PREFACE.

list, which are portraits of classical or other celebrities, the subjects are all distinguished persons of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and the name of each is written underneath his likeness, generally in a hand contemporary with the work, but apparently not in that of the artist himself, who, in the present instance, has written over the drawing particulars of colour, dress and other details in the original picture which he copied. Underneath this portrait, however, the inscription is in a modern hand, and is as follows :

"Pierre Varbeck, natif de Tournay, suppose pour Richard Due d'Jorck, second fils d'Edouard IV. Roy d'Angleterre, Tan 1492. Fut pendu k Londres par la fin de Fan 1499."

The fact that this is written in an eighteenth century hand might of course suggest the question whether the subject of the drawing has been rightly identified. But we may dismiss all doubt on that point, as the scribe has simply followed the authority of an alphabetical index (now mutilated at the beginning) which was clearly contemporary with the drawings themselves. And really, if we had no authority for the name at all, internal evidence alone would have very strongly suggested that the portrait represented Warbeck.

We may take it, therefore, I think, on the authority of this sketch that Perkin Warbeck was a fair haired youth — the artist, be it observed, has written on the hair the word " blon " (for blond) — bearing no striking

PREFACE. Vll resemblance to Edward IV. or the line of the Plantagenets, but still with a look and bearing that might have made his supposed parentage plausible when he was dressed in cloth of gold and cloth of silver, as he was when the original picture was painted from which this drawing was taken. The original picture is doubtless still extant and very likely entered in some catalogue as the portrait of a royal personage unnamed or wrongly identified. The photograph is on a reduced scale, the figure of Perkin in the original drawing being 8^ inches in height.

A catalogue of the portraits contained in the Arras Volume will be found in Bouchot s Les Portraits aux Crayons des XVI. et xvii. SiecleSy Paris, 1884. Several of them besides this are of very great interest to the English historian, and the likenesses in many cases are well borne out by other portraits.

r

Preface To The First Edition

FOR writing such a book as the present I have no other excuse to offer than that the subject is one which has interested me for very many years. It is a good quarter of a century since I first read Walpole's * Historic Doubts* ; and they certainly exercised upon me, in a very strong degree, the influence which I perceive they have had on many other minds. I began to doubt whether Richard III. was really a tyrant at all. I more than doubted that principal crime of which he is so generally reputed guilty ; and as for everything else laid to his charge, it was easy to show that the evidence was still more unsatisfactory. The slenderness and insufficiency of the original testimony could hardly be denied ; and if it were only admitted that the prejudices of Lancastrian writers might have perverted facts, which the policy of the Tudors would not have allowed other writers to state fairly, a very plausible case might have been established for a more favourable reading of Richard's character.

PREFACE.

It was the opinion of the late Mr Buckle that a certain skeptical tendency — a predisposition to doubt all commonly received opinions until they were found to stand the test of argument — was the first essential to the discovery of new truth. I must confess that my own experience does not verify this remark ; and whatever may be said for it as regards science, I cannot but think the skeptical spirit a most fatal one in history. It is an easy thing to isolate particular facts and events, cross-examine to our own satisfaction the silent witnesses or first reporters of a celebrated crime, and appeal to the public for a verdict of * not proven.' But, after all, we have only raised a question ; we have not advanced one step towards its solution. We have succeeded in rendering a few things doubtful, which may have been too hastily assumed before. But if these doubts are to be of any value as the avenue to new truths, they must lead to a complete reconsideration of very many things besides the few dark passages at first isolated for investigation. They require, in the first place, that the history of one particular epoch should be rewritten; in the second, that the new version of the story should exhibit a certain moral harmony with the facts both of subsequent times and of the times preceding. Until these two conditions have been fulfilled, no attempt to set aside traditional views of history can ever be called successful.

The old traditional view of Richard III. has certainly not yet been set aside in a manner to satisfy the

PREFACE. XI common sense of the world. Yet there has been no lack of ingenuity in pleading his cause, or of research in the pursuit of evidence. Original authorities have been carefully scrutinised; words have been exactly weighed ; and plausible .arguments have been used to show that for all that is said of him by contemporary writers he might have been a very different character from what he is supposed to have been. Only, the malign tradition itself is not well accounted for; and we are not clearly shown that the story of Richard's

life is more intelligible without it.

On the^^ontrary, I must record my impression that a minute study of the facts of Richard's life has tended more and more to convince me of the general fidelity of the portrait with which we have been made familiar by Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More. I feel quite ashamed, at this day, to think how I mused over this subject long ago, wasting a great deal of time, ink and paper, in fruitless efforts to satisfy even my own mind that traditional black was real historical white, or at worst a kind of grey. At last I laid aside my incomplete MS. and applied myself to other subjects, still of a kindred nature ; and the. larger study of history in other periods convinced me that my method at starting had been altogether wrong. The attempt to discard tradition in the examination of original sources of history is, in fact, like the attempt to learn an unknown language without a teacher. We lose the benefit of a living interpreter, who may, indeed, misapprehend, to

Xll PREFACE.

some extent, the author whom we wish to read ; but at least he would save us from innumerable mistakes if we followed his guidance in the first instance.

Tradition, however, is, for the most part, an interpreter and nothing more. The cases are few in which it supplies anything very material in the way of facts ; and where it does, the information is always open to correction. I have, therefore, in working out this subject always adhered to the plan of placing my chief reliance on contemporary information; and, so far as I am aware, I have neglected nothing important that is either directly stated by original authorities and contemporary records, or that can be reasonably inferred from what they say.

Whatever, then, be the merits or demerits of the present volume, I have at least aimed at treating the subject fully, and I think I may fairly say that the work is the result of mature thought and study. The dissertation at the end on Perkin Warbeck was written some years ago and has already appeared in print as an article in the Contemporary Review \ but some new facts, for which I am indebted to the researches of Mr James Weale in the Low Countries, have caused me to add a few paragraphs. It will be seen that the documents now published for the first time give great additional force to my original argument.

Contents

PAGE

Preface v

CHAP.

Chapter I. Richard's Career As Duke Of Gloucester Until The Death Of Edward IV

Richard III. was one of the first of those dark characters in history whom it has been the effort of some ^, ^ ^

•^ . Disputed

modem writers to present under an aspect not character of altogether so repulsive as that in which his name and deeds have been handed down to us. The apparent insufficiency of the testimony to most of his imputed crimes was first pointed out by Walpole in his Historic Doubts \ and since that day there have not been wanting inquirers who have inclined to a more favourable view of his character. Nevertheless, the general opinion is unshaken. The scantiness of contemporary evidences and the prejudices of original authorities may be admitted as reasons for doubting isolated facts, but can hardly be expected to weaken the conviction — derived from Shakspeare and tradition as much as from anything else — that Richard was indeed cruel and unnatural beyond the ordinary measure even of those violent and ferocious times. There is, besides, much in the undisputed facts

G. I

of the case which, in the eye of common sense, favours greatly this impression. A reign of violence is naturally short-lived ; and the reigns of Edward V. and Richard III. are the shortest in English history. Taken together, their duration was less than two years and a half; and it is in vain to deny that Richard had long before lost the hearts of his subjects — except upon the common supposition that they were never his to lose.

Yet, historically considered, Richard III. is not a. monster. He is the natural outgrowth of monstrous and horrible times. He is the fitting termination of the rule of the House of York — the exemplification of an old, divinely attested saying, that they who take the sword shall perish by it. It is true Richard's father, the Duke of York, who first urged the claims of that House, was anything but an extreme man. On the contrary, he protested by every loyal means against misgovemment, and exhausted every form of peaceable remonstrance, before he finally advanced his title to the crown. But his moderation — in which, unfortunately, he did not himself persevere to the end — was not imitated by his sons. It was, indeed, very ill requited by his enemies when he fell into their hands at Wakefield ; and the lesson of vindictiveness set by the fiiends of Margaret of Anjou was not forgotten when the next turn of the wheel gave the victory to Edward IV. How could it be expected that the conqueror should treat his opponents with greater leniency than they had shown to his father? Civil war had already blunted all sense of delicacy, and violence now became a part almost of the established order of things. The House of York abused their triumph, became intolerant of rivals, and imbrued their hands in the blood of princes. Hardened by degrees in acts of cruelty and perfidy, they grew faithless even to each other. Clarence rebelled against his brother Edward, and, though forgiven, was finally put to death by Edward's order. The court was split up into factions. The old nobility were jealous of the Queen

A.D. 1452. HIS BIRTH.

and of her relations. It was a world which, as Edward foresaw before his deaths was not likely to hold together very long after him. Such a world, in fact, almost invites a bold and unscrupulous man to take the rule and subdue it.

Richard III. was born at Fotheringhay, a castle belonging to his father, the Duke of York, on Monday, Birth of October 2, 1452 \ He was a military commander Rici>»«i "i. before he was nineteen, usurped the throne when he was thirty-one, and was killed at Bosworth at the age of thirtythree. Precocious, therefore, he certainly was, and accustomed from his early years to scenes of war and bloodshed. How early he exhibited the fruits of their teaching in his own conduct is a question rather difficult to answer. He left such a reputation behind him that even his birth was said to have proclaimed him a monster. He had been two years, we are told, in his mother's womb, and was bom — or rather, like Macduflf, was by a surgical operation separated from his mother's body — when he came into the world feet foremost, with teeth in his jaws, and with hair down to the shoulders". Such are the combined reports of different writers; and for effect they may as well be read together.

It is more material, perhaps, to observe that he was the eleventh in a family of twelve, of whom the eleven were bom in thirteen years, and the twelfth nearly '* °* ^' three years after his birth. A curious and painstaking collector of that age, by name William Worcester, has left us an exact record of the very day, hour, and place of the nativity of each of these children ; so that the ages of Richard and of all his brothers and sisters are tolerably certain*. Certain enough, at least, for the historian's purpose ; for with all his accuracy, it must be remarked that there are one or two slight numerical

^ Will. Wyrc. Annalgs, 477. ^ Rous, 215. More.

^ See W. Wyrc. Annates ^ 460-477.

errors in Worcester's account, although very trivial. The names and dates are, according to him, as follows : —

1. Anne, Duchess of Exeter, bom at Fotheringhay on August lo, 1439, between five and six o'clock on a Tuesday morning. But August 10, 1439, was a Monday, so perhaps the nth was intended.

2. Henry, the eldest son, bom at Hatfield on February 10, 1 44 1, at five o'clock on a Friday moming.

3. Edward, the second son (afterwards Edward IV.), bom at Rouen at two a.m. on Monday, April 28, 1442. But April 28 that year was a Saturday.

4. Edmund, the third son, bom at Rouen at seven p.m. on Monday, May 17, 1443. Perhaps an error for May 27, for May 17 was a F^riday.

5. Elizabeth, the second daughter, born at Rouen at two A.M. on Tuesday morning, April 22, 1444. But April 22 was a Wednesday^.

6. Margaret, third daughter, born at Fotheringhay on Tuesday, May 3, 1446.

7. William, fourth son, bom at Fotheringhay July 7, 1447.

8. John, the fifth son, bom at Neyet, near Westminster, on November 7, 1448.

9. George, the sixth son, bom in Ireland at noon on Tuesday, October 21, 1449.

10. Thomas, who died young, is omitted by Worcester.

11. Richard III., bom at Fotheringhay on Monday, October 2, 1452.

12. Ursula, bom at on S. Margaret's day, July 20,

But the reader will probably take a greater interest in a metrical, or at least a rhyming, account of the family, which

^ The error here appears to be in the month, which should have been September, See the genealogy appended by Heame to W. Wyrc., 525-6. * See W. Wyrc. AnnaleSi 460-477.

A.D. 1452. HIS FAMILY. S

was written during the life of the Duke of York, while Richard was still an infant : —

* Sir, aftir the tyme of long^ bareynesse God first sent Anne, which signyfieth grace, In token that al her hertis hevynesse He, as for bareynesse, wold fro hem chace. Harry, Edward, and Edmonde, each in his place Succedid, and aftir tweyn doughtris came, Elizabeth and Margarete, and aftirward William.

John aftir William nexte bom^ was.

Which bothe be passid to Godis grace.

Georg^ was next, and after Thomas Borne was, which sone aftir did pace By the path of dethe to the hevenly place. Richard liveth yit ; but the last of alle Was Ursula, to Hym whom God list calle.'

The honest rhymester goes on to tell us that Anne was married in her tender youth to the Duke of Exeter; that Henry, the eldest son, was dead, and had left Edward, *now Earl of March,' to succeed him; who with his brother Edmund, Earl of Rutland, might both be counted ' fortunabil to right high manage,' but that the other four were still in their pupillage^

Thus of this family of twelve five had been lost when Richard was a child ; and it would seem that Richard himself was slender and sickly. A modem historian, who devoted THuch thought and many years of study to the history of Richard III., found evidence somewhere, as he believed, that Richard had serious illness as a child, but was not able to refer to the source of his information*. Another writer suggests that the expression * Richard liveth yet' in the above verses rather favours this supposition; which, perhaps, is plausible.

^ Vincent on Brooke, 622-3.

^ Sharon Turner's History of England during the Middle Ages^ iii. 444, note 43 (Ed. 1830).

LIFE OF RICHARD III. CH. I.

5ut we have distinct testimony to the fact that in after life he was a small man of feeble bodily powers^ — disadvantages which did not prevent him from exhibiting, not only ereat I skill as a general, but great bravery on the field of battle. |

There is nothing to tell about his early history till he was His father's seven years old. Even at his birth the court stood career. jjj dread of his father's claims to the crown, and

the civil war had broken out openly before he was quite three years old. But in October 1459 a battle seemed imminent at Ludlow when the Duke of York finding himself deserted by a portion of his followers broke up his camp and fled to Ireland. So abrupt was his flight that he was obliged to leave behind him his duchess with her two youngest sons George and Richard in Ludlow Castle; and they fell into the hands of Henry VI., who handed them over to Anne duchess of Buckingham, the Duke of York's sister*. Next year, however, the state of matters was, for a brief time, completely reversed. At the battle of Northampton (10 July 1460) the King fell into the hands of the victorious Yorkists. The Duke of York returned from Ireland, and at last openly challenged the crown in Parliament. For years he had tried a more moderate policy with never more than temporary success. He had been met with repeated bad faith, and experience showed clearly that it was impossible to bind by any pledges a weakminded King who was continually in the hands of others. So he now put forth his claim to be the rightful king himself by inheritance, the whole line of the house of Lancaster having been mere intruders. The Lords were undoubtedly intimidated. The case was altogether novel. They sought counsel of the judges, but the judges declined to advise those who were themselves the supreme council of the realm in a matter of so high a nature. Left to themselves, the Lords declined to dispossess at once a reigning dynasty and an anointed king,

2 Heame's Fragment at end of Sprott's Chronicle, 284.

A.D. 1460. HIS FATHER.

but agreed that Henry should still be their sovereign for life and the Duke of York his successor. Meanwhile the Duke was to have full control of the government as Protector while King Henry lived.

Thus the matter was decided in Parliament ; but Margaret of Anjou immediately intrigued with her friends to overthrow the settlement by force of arms, and the Duke of York was compelled in December to go down into Yorkshire where he lost his life at the battle of Wakefield. The conquerors were ferocious in their triumph. After a mock coronation with a crown of twisted grass S they cut oflf the Duke of York's head, which Clifford, who also in cold blood killed his son the Duke of Rutland, had the savage gratification of presenting to Queen Margaret

When the Duke of York's widow heard of this crushing defeat, followed soon afterwards by the news that Ri^.jj^^ Queen Margaret and her followers were coming up jnd his to London, and had gained another victory over George sent the Yorkists at St Albans, she sent her two sons, George and Richard, across the sea to Utrecht for their security; and there they remained a while under the protection of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy". But the cloud passed away sooner than could have been anticipated. Young Edward, inheriting his father's pretensions, came promptly up from the borders of Wales, where he won the battle of Mortimer's Cross against the Lancastrian party ; and on his approach to London he was received with joy by the citizens, who by no means liked what they had heard of the ravages of Margaret's northern followers. The Council in London named Edward King. The people in St John's Field ratified their decision, and openly declared with a loud *No, No' that Henry should reign over them no longer. Before a month had passed away Edward had fully vindicated his

^ So Wethamstede (Rolls ed.), i. 382. Hall says, of paper. ^ Heame*s Fragment, 284. Hall, 353.

pretensions on the bloody field of Towton, in Yorkshire. Henry and his queen were driven to take refuge in Scotland, and did not improve their chances of recovering the hearts of Englishmen by surrendering Berwick to the Scots.

The new king's brothers then returned from Utrecht. The

Richard elder, George, was made Duke of Clarence; the DSk?of younger, 'Richard, Duke of Gloucester. Although Gloucester, gy^jj jj^^ elder was only twelve years old, high offices were conferred on both. Clarence was appointed Lieutenant of Ireland ; Gloucester was made admiral of the sea. Mauors and lands in various counties were also bestowed on each of them in abundance. The House of York was now strongly seated upon the throne, and all three brothers lived for a while, so far as it appears, in harmony. But before many

Dissen- ycars were over diflferences began to display House"?** themselves. Edward's marriage with Elizabeth York. Woodville was unpopular. The Earl of Warwick

seduced Clarence from his allegiance, but Richard remained faithful to his brother Edward. Clarence escaped secretly over sea, and married the Earl of Warwick's daughter at Calais; then came into England with his father-in-law, and raised a rebellion. The insurgents beheaded Earl Rivers and Sir John Woodville, the father and brother of Edward's queen. Next year Henry VI. was restored, and Clarence was declared by Parliament next in the succession on the failure of the male issue of King Henry. Edward, meanwhile, had to seek refuge with his brother-in-law Charles, Duke of Burgundy. But with the help of Charles he returned to England at the end of a stormy winter, before Margaret of Anjou with the young Prince Edward ventured to leave France to rejoin her husband. On his coming Clarence again changed sides, and was reconciled to his brother. Warwick was defeated and slain in the battle of Bamet, and a few days later Margaret and her son, having just landed on the south coast, received a final overthrow at the battle of Tewkesbury.

A.D. 1461-70. ASSISTS IN EDWARD'S RESTORATION. 9

These events are so well known to readers of English history that we need not enter into them more fully. ^^ ^ It concerns us only to remark that Edward's con- adheres to fidence in his younger brother Richard remained King unshaken, or rather was increased by the desertion of Clarence \ Richard accompanied him into Norfolk on a progress just before the breaking out of Robin of Redesdale's rebellion^. I presume that he also went with him against the rebels, though whether he shared his imprisonment that year, when the king fell for a time into Warwick's hands, there is no evidence to show. He, however, returned to London in his company'; and immediately afterwards, on the 17th October, Edward appointed him Constable of England for life, and Chief Justiciar of South Wales. Next year, also, just before his sudden expulsion from his kingdom, one of Edward's latest acts was to make his brother Richard Warden of the West Marches against Scotland ^

• But the part taken by Richard in his brother's restoration in 147 1 was so important that a few characteristic

details must be given which have hitherto escaped with him attention. Richard had shared his brother's exile '°'" ^ ' and returned along with him ; but Edward's fleet was dispersed by a storm before he reached Ravenspur, and Richard with a company of 300 men landed at a place four miles off, while the ship of the Earl of Rivers touched land at fourteen miles' distance. Next day, however, the companies joined ; but the

^ According to Wavrin (Rolls ed. v. 458-9) Warwick had some time before attempted to shake the allegiance both of Clarence and of Gloucester, and got them down to Cambridge, where the marriage was first arranged between his eldest daughter and Clarence; which coming to Edward's knowledge he was angry at both of them and placed them for some time under the custody of four knights. But Richard could have been little more than a boy at this time, and it is clear that he was always faithful to him afterwards.

2 Fasten Letters^ ii. 357. * lb, 389.

* Rymer, xi. 658.

lO LIFE OF RICHARD HI. CH. L

country people, though they had been attached to the late Duke of York, were up in arms to oppose them, till Edward gave out that he came only to claim his dukedom. Hull refused to open its gates to him and he pushed on to York. At four miles' distance from the city he was met by one Martin De la Mere and the recorder Thomas Conyers, who endeavoured to persuade him that if he entered he was lost. He, however, advanced with fifteen men-at-arms only, leaving the army under Richard's command at three bow-shots' distance fi'om the city, and addressed the mayor at one of the gates ; who said they were willing to receive him and his attendants but not his army. Edward returned to his host and consulted what to do. It was felt that it would not be safe for him to enter only with a few. Nevertheless he did so, and though the multitude were crying "Long live king Henry!" he addressed them so plausibly as the son of their duke who was only come to recover his duchy and avenge his private quarrel against Warwick, whom the citizens of York disliked as much as he did, that he got leave to introduce his army for the night, on condition that they left again within twelve hours.

Next morning, however, at lo o'clock Martin De la Mere ventured to complain that his men made no haste to depart, and told Edward that he should not be allowed to leave himself unless he went to the minster and took a solemn oath never to make any claim to the crown. Edward rebuked him for this insolence. Where, he asked, were the lords of England before whom he should take such an oath ? The citizens must wait till the Earl of Northumberland and other lords of the country could be summoned ; for it would not be honourable in him to take the oath before his own vassals. During this conversation, Gloucester spoke apart to the lords Rivers and Scales, saying he did not see how they could get safely out of the town unless they first killed Martin De la Mere and the recorder there in the chamber ; which they agreed to do if they found it necessary. But Rivers persuaded Edward to keep

A.D. I47I. GETTING FAMILIAR WITH BLOODSHED. II

Martin and the recorder engaged in talk while he got the army ready to leave ; for which he at once gave orders, directing his own men to take possession of one of the gates and keep it open till they all had passed. In this manner Edward and his army were able to quit the city in safety ^

We can understand from all this how Richard, now in his nineteenth year, though displaying great fidelity to his brother, was getting familiarised early with thoughts and deeds of violence. When Edward came to Banbury he was with him at the meeting and reconciliation with Clarence between the two hosts. Shortly afterwards he commanded Edward's vanguard at the battle of Earner. The glory of that day's victory was largely due to him; and when forhimat the scene of action shifted in a few days, he earned Tewkesthe same honour in the field of Tewkesbury. "'^* Here he displayed a capacity of generalship that could hardly have been expected in one so young. For Somerset, who commanded the enemy's van, had taken up a strong position, and entrenched himself on high ground. The Duke of Gloucester attacked his trench, and after some fighting recoiled; on which Somerset, expecting to have been followed by Lord Wenlock, who commanded what was called *the middle ward' of that army, allowed himself to be lured into a pursuit. But Lord Wenlock did not follow, and after a time Gloucester and his men turned round and put the forces of Somerset to shameful rout ; in disgust and indignation at which the Duke of Somerset, after falling back, called Wenlock traitor and dashed his brains out.