Richard III and the Murder in the Tower (33 page)

41. For the baseline of Catesby’s rise following Hastings’ execution, we should note that Roskell (1959), p. 158 observed that at the time of the death of Edward IV, ‘[Catesby] held no proper office by Crown appointment.’

42. This is indirectly confirmed by Ross (1981),
op. cit.
(p. 156), who observed that: ‘William Catesby, who, as “the Cat,” was the second member of Collingbourne’s notorious lampoon, was given lands chiefly in the Midlands. Lands to the annual value of 323-11-8d, which made him wealthier than most knights, no mean achievement for an aspiring lawyer.’

43. See Dickson, J. M.
William Catesby
(pp20–28). Richard III Foundation, 2007.

44. The antithesis here is that Rivers actually did receive news of Hastings’ execution and thus named Catesby in light of the understanding of his role in that event and his expectation of Catesby’s coming elevation in legal and political matters. This interpretation is supported by the suggestions that Rivers named Richard, Duke of Gloucester as overseer, if he would act in that capacity (see Roskell (1959), p. 162). The third alternative is that Rivers knew of Catesby only in terms of his legal abilities and appointed him as a known and competent lawyer. The possibility that somehow news of Hastings’ execution reached Sheriff Hutton should not however be quickly dismissed. After all, we know that this news reached Kirby Muxloe on the outskirts of Leicester, most probably some time on 16 June. It would present no difficulty to thus reach Sheriff Hutton just north of York some time in the remaining seven days.

45. As reported by Dickson (2007),
op. cit.
, p. 21.

46. As noted, the spatial distributions of the lands that Catesby looked to accumulate are very evidently designed to achieve a cohesive block of properties centered on Ashby St Ledgers in the county of Northamptonshire. It is clear from plotting his holdings and acquisitions that Catesby was well on the way to achieving his aspiration at the time of his execution. Welton was vital for this consolidation.

47. There is a note on a contemporary website by Mark Burgess that indicates that Catesby was involved in similarly shady dealings to secure the Malory manor of Swinford. Evidently this was part of Catesby overall strategy of creating a contiguous area of influence around Ashby St Ledgers.

48. And see A. F. Sutton and P. W. Hammond (eds).
The Coronation of Richard III
. Sutton: Gloucester, 1983.

49. See Puplick, C. ‘The Parliament of Richard III.’
The Ricardian
, 36 (1972), 27-29.

50. And see Horrox, R. ‘British Library Harleian Manuscript 433.’
The Ricardian
, 66 (1979), 87-91.

51. The lands were distributed across the Buckingham estates in Essex, Gloucestershire, Surrey, Huntingdon, Warwickshire and, of course, Northamptonshire (and see Dickson, (2007), p. 23).

52. Here, a quotation from Ross is certainly pertinent, he comments: ‘Another indication that Richard had managed to assemble a complacent House of Commons lay in its choice of speaker. From the beginning of the Yorkist period at least it had become usual for the Commons to select a man who was acceptable to the King, who was generally a royal councillor, who was paid a fee for his labours and who therefore tended to be rather more a Government spokesman, rather like a modern leader of the House, than a defender of the Commons interest. In choosing William Catesby they provided a man who had all these qualifications, perhaps to an unusual degree, given the high favour in which he stood with the King. What was most unusual, for a speaker, was that he had never sat in parliament before, and therefore had no experience of its procedures. His selection was so politically convenient as to suggest that Richard had indeed been at pains to procure a biddable assembly. Certainly, it proceeded to execute his wishes without notable signs of dissent.’ (Ross (1981), p. 185).

53. Richardson puts this event some twelve days after Richard’s coronation in 1483 (G. Richardson ‘The Cat, the Rat and the Dog.’
Ricardian Register
, 23 (4) (1983), 4-10), whereas Kendall (1955),
op. cit.
, p. 362, seems to suggest that this was in 1484. In this he is confirmed by Gairdner (
History of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1898), who has a most interesting account on p 188, and see footnote 1 on the same page, as well as Horrox, R.. ‘Richard III and London.’
The Ricardian
, 85 (1984), 322-329. I think it safer to follow the latter authorities.

54. For an account of Colyngbourne see K. Hillier. ‘William Colyngbourne.’
The Ricardian
, 49 (1975), 5-9.

55. The rhyme itself and possible subsequent extensions and explanations have been discussed in P. W. Hammond ‘The cat, the rat, etc.’
The Ricardian
, 50 (1975), 31. A further sequence of six lines sometimes appended to the opening couplet has been traced by Hammond to the creation of a person named Fogg (not Sir John Fogg), whose words appear in a play by Thomas Heywood published in 1600. See P. W. Hammond. ‘Colyngbourne’s rhyme.’
The Ricardian
, 67 (1979), 145-146.

56. And see Hillier, K. ‘William Colyngbourne.’
The Ricardian
, 49 (1975), 5-9.

57. Very much like Kendall (1955),
op. cit
., p. 363, I have been unable to resist quoting this gruesome but fascinating end to this man who is the quintessential footnote to history.

58. William Catesby was directly related to Ratcliffe. His wife (Margaret) was the half-sister of Ratcliffe’s wife. Thus the ‘Cat’ and the ‘Rat’ were relatively closely related. From the information we have concerning land transactions, it appears, however, that Catesby was actually closer to Lovell in affiliation.

59. The quotation is from Croyland, but there seems to be something very personal and a wry and bitter sense of satisfaction in the words. It suggests to me a rather personal antagonism; almost a professional jealousy.

60. Indeed, in Hammond’s article in Volume 50 of
The Ricardian
we read a supposed ‘key’ to the rhyme, which was purportedly also written by Colyngbourne, it read:

It is also postulated that the attribution is heraldic in nature, with Richard’s known badge of the white boar and Lovell’s reported crest as a silver wolf-dog, while Catesby’s badge is given as a white cat.

61.
Croyland Chroinicle
(Pronay & Cox,
op. cit
., pp 175, 177).

62. The quotation is from Henry VI Part II (IV. ii) and apparently refers to Jack Cade’s Rebellion.

63. Hancock, P.A. ‘Solem a tergio reliquit: The troublesome Battle of Bosworth.’
Ricardian Register
, 27 (2) (2002), 4-10.

64. However, as we shall see, this is not the date given on his tomb.

65. Richardson, G. ‘The Cat, the Rat and the Dog.’
Ricardian Register
, 23 (4) (1998), p. 6.

66. Payling, S. (2006),
op. cit.
, p. 14. The Brechers, father and son, two West Country yeoman, were apparently also executed after the battle. Kendall records that they were also hanged. These words very much echo Roskell’s sentiment that: ‘… he alone of men of importance in the royal army who were so captured was executed after the battle.’ (Roskell,
op. cit
., p. 170).

67. See Badham, S. & Saul, N. ‘The Catesby’s taste in brasses.’ In J. Bertram (ed.).
The Catesby family and their brasses at Ashby St Ledgers
(pp 36-75). London: Monumental Brass Society, 2006.

68. Kendall (1955),
op. cit
., p. 444.

69. See Bertram, J. (2006). ‘Nearly headless Bill: The mutilation of the brasses in Ashby St Ledgers’ (pp 24-26), In Bertram,
op. cit
. Commentary on the ‘frivolus’ suggestion by Bertram that the defacement was actually a posthumous treatment of a traitor has been provided by Kleineke, who is fairly adamant that Bertram’s interpretation here is incorrect. See Kleineke, H. ‘The Catesby family and their brasses at Ashby St Ledgers: Book Review.’
The Ricardian
, XVII (2007), 108-109.

70. Serjeantson, R. M. ‘The restoration of the long-lost brass of Sir William Catesby [at Ashby St Legers],’
Association of Architectural Societies
, XXXI (1912), 519-24.

71. Badham, S. & Saul, P. (2006),
op. cit
., p. 69.

72. See Badham, S. & Saul, P. (2006),
op. cit
., p. 69.

73. See Bertram (2006),
op. cit
., pp 24-26.

74. If he took this action, Catesby actually deposed someone of his close affiliation. His mother-in-law, Lady Scrope, had earlier attended Elizabeth Woodville during her confinement in the sanctuary of Westminster Abbey. There she had stood godmother to the future Edward V when he was born there in 1470 (see Roskell (1959), p. 153).

1.  For more extended discussion of Hastings in wider contexts see: Rowney, I. ‘Resources and retaining in Yorkist England: William, Lord Hastings and the honour of Tutbury.’ In A. J. Pollard (ed.).
Property and politics: Essays in later Medieval English History
(pp 139-155). Macmillan: London, 1984; and Hicks. M. A. ‘Lord Hastings’ indentured retainers.’ In:
Richard III and his rivals
(pp 229-246). Hambledon: London, 1991. And of course, Dunham, W. H. ‘Lord Hastings’ indentured retainers 1461-1483.’
Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences
, 39 (1955), 1-175. And see also, Turner D.H (1983)
The Hastings Hours.
Thames and Hudson: London

2.  
Dictionary of National Biography
. See:
www.oxforddnb.com

3.  In 1436 Richard, Duke of York granted Sir Leonard Hastings a £15 annuity for life and later in 1442 made him his ‘beloved councilor.’ It may well be York’s influence that gained Sir Leonard his knighthood in 1448 (see Dunham, W. H. ‘Lord Hastings’ indentured retainers 1461-1483.’
Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences
, 39 (1955), 1-175. (p. 19).

4.  The Duke of York was equally generous to Sir William Hastings as to his father granting him a £10 annuity in 1458, some three years after his father’s death.

5.  In July 1461 Hastings was appointed steward of the honour of Leicester, which controlled manors throughout Leicestershire, Warwickshire, Northamptonshire and parts of Nottinghamshire. It may well be that many of these properties were those which were coveted by William Catesby, and see Seward, D.
The Wars of the Roses
(p. 98). Penguin: New York, 1995.

6.  Dunham (1955),
op. cit
., p. 21.

7.  It appears that Hastings had previously been married himself to one Elizabeth Walden. It is possible that he presented the living of the church of Kyngesbury (most probably modern-day Kingsbury Episcopi) to one of his own sons or perhaps a near relation on 26 August 1467. See Maxwell-Lyte H.C(1937),
The Registers of Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells 1466-1491,
Somerset Records Society, Taunton, Somerset, p. 11, although the living was later resigned by the same Master William Hastynges to Sir Thomas Warson on 3 September 1473 (see
op. cit
., p. 50).

8.  For the act of attainder against Henry VI and his Lancastrian supporters see Document MS. X.d. 114, Great Britain Sovereigns, etc, February 15th, 1572/1573, at the request of Sir John Cutte, Exemplification of the Act of 1461. Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, DC.

9.  
Dictionary of National Biography
(pp 148-149).

10. This is a rather bold statement and the issue over the dating of the Council meeting itself and whether it was quite such a spectacular revelation in open council is dealt with in much more detail by Ross, C.
Edward IV
. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1974 (p. 91, n.2, n.3). Ross favours a more gradualist decline in Warwick’s influence over Edward and a more fatalistic acceptance of Elizabeth Woodville by the ‘Kingmaker.’ The truth may well lie between these extremes.

11. Dunham (1955) indicates that it was Hastings who managed Edward’s eventual escape to Holland from Lynn in Norfolk. Craig, J. (1953),
op. cit
., p. 93, notes that: ‘When Warwick the Kingmaker struck in 1470 it was Lord Hastings who held the front of a Doncaster house till Edward IV could slip away at the back; he overtook the flying king and escaped in the same ship with him to Holland.’ (and see Seward (1995),
op. cit
., p. 158). Hastings further helped engineer the exiled king’s return and indeed landed with him in Ravenspur near Hull in March 1471.

12. In this he was successful and the meeting took place at Banbury. 13. And see Hillier, K. ‘William, Lord Hastings and Ashby-de-la-Zouch.’
The Ricardian
, 100 (1988), 13-17.

14. See Hancock, P. A. ‘Kirby Muxloe Castle: The embodiment of the disembodiment of William, Lord Hastings.’
Ricardian Register
, 36 (1/2) (2006), 4-13.

15. See De Commines.
op. cit
.

16. See Grummitt, D. ‘William. Lord Hastings, the Calais Garrison and the politics of Yorkist England.’
The Ricardian
, 153 (2001), 262-274.

17. For example, in 1474 he had assumed the wardship of George Talbot, the 4th Earl of Shrewsbury, being a later member of Eleanor Talbot’s family. Hastings later married him to his own daughter Anne. His administration of the Talbot estates further permitted him to expand his hegemony in the Midlands area. And see Seward (1995),
op. cit
., p. 201.

18. And see Freeman, J. ‘The moneyers of the Tower of London and William Lord Hastings in 1472.’
The Ricardian
, XVI (2006), 59-65.

19. Woodhead, P.
The Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles: Schneider Collection, English Gold Coins and their Imitations
(p. 33). Spink & Sons: London, 1996.