Richard The Chird (74 page)

22 Scofield, I, p. 378 and p. 397; II, p. 26, p. 38, and so on; More, p. 77 and p. 13; Mancini, p. 85; Croy. Chron., p. 479.

23 Although Armstrong follows the contention of Calmette and Perinelle (Louis XI et I'Angleterre, pp. 251-54) that "at the time of Edward's death the scene was set for an immediate war between England and France, which only failed to break out seriously when Louis XI perceived that England was effectually crippled by internal troubles" (Mancini, p. 145), Armstrong himself shows that Louis had launched an intense guerilla warfare at sea (p. 144), which was his only possible mode of attack.

The taxes Parliament voted to Edward, the agreement the King signed with the Duke of Albany in February, 1483, and the tenor of the parliamentary grant to Richard all indicate that England's chief immediate effort was to be directed against Scotland (see Scofield, II, pp. 360-64, and this chapter, below).

enactments of this Parliament, see Rot. Par/., VI, pp. my-oS and pp. 204-0*

25 York Records, p. 142.

261 have based my description of Richard upon the portrait in the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle, painted by an unknown artist who was almost certainly a contemporary of Richard's—perhaps a visiting Flemish painter The painung in the National Portrait Gallery is a copy, probably by the

OTt"ICt~

artist.

Most contemporary descriptions bear out the evidence of these portraits that Richard had no noticeable bodily deformity, and establish him as a thin, frail man of a little less than normal height. Neither the author of the "Second Continuation" of the Croyland Chronicle, who knew Richard well, nor Dominic Mancini, who must have seen him several times and wrote his book but a few months after he had last seen him, mentions any physical irregularity; and Stow talked to old men who, remembering Richard, said "that he was of bodily shape comely enough, only of low stature" (Buc, in White Kennett, Complete History of England, voL I, London, 1710, p. 548). A German traveler, Nicolas von Poppelau, who spent ten days in Richard's household in May of 1484, describes Richard as "three fingers taller than himself . . . also much more lean; he had delicate arms and legs, also a great heart" (Mancini, pp. 162-64). C. A. J. Armstrong, who prints von Poppelau's observation in an appendix of his invaluable edition of Mancini, concludes that since von Poppelau, being noted for immense strength, was likely to be sizable, Richard was "a tall and emaciated man, who not improbably stooped as well" (pp. 163-64). Though it is an ingenious suggestion, von Poppelau was quite possibly squat and barrel-shaped, a short, wide fellow; it seems most likely that Richard was not quite so tall as the run of mankind. The evidence of Stow is strongly supported by a Latin oration delivered before Richard in September of 1484 by Archibald Whitelaw, one of the Scots envoys, in which he said of Richard that nature never enclosed within a smaller frame so great a mind or such remarkable powers (Buc, in Kennett, Complete History of England, I, p. 572).

Six years after Richard's death, an ill-wisher of his in York (York Records, pp. 220-22)—whose remarks were resented by the company in which he made them—said that Richard was a "crouchback," but no one else in the fifteenth century said so. It may well be, however, that the speaker was exaggeratedly describing an actual inequality in Richard's shoulders, perceptible but not sufficiently so to be labeled a deformity or to intrude itself upon the beholder's notice. An inequality of shoulders is mentioned— though without agreement as to which shoulder was the higher!—by Rous, More, and Vergil. In inuring his slight frame to bear easily the weight of armor, in practicing assiduously when still a boy with his sword arm (see text, p. 52), in forcing his frail body to become strong, Richard probably developed an unusually powerful right shoulder and a torso ribbed with muscle, which, in contrast with his thin arms and legs and a less prominent left shoulder, produced a vague r general suggestion of lack of bodily proportion or symmetry.

The monster created by Shakespeare in his Richard the Third represents the zestful elaboration of the zestful elaborations of the later Tudor chroniclers (see Appendix II).

THE KING

PROTECTOR AND DEFENSOR

I

By far the most important single source for a study of Richard's protectorship and reign is Harleian MS, 433, a register or docket book in which Richard's secretariat recorded—sometimes in abbreviated form but often in full—the warrants issued to the Chancellor for grants, writs, pardons, proclamations, and so on, under the Great Seal; instructions to ambassadors, and other state papers, including a number received from foreign envoys; and Richard's correspondence. The first of these documents was registered on May 3 (though later dated May 5), the day before Richard entered London with Edward V, and the last, only a few days before Boswbrth Field. J. G. Nichols has edited a compilation of all the entries in the docket book which fall within the reign of Edward V (April o-June 26, 1483): Grants of King Edward the Ftfth. Most of the important diplomatic correspondence can be found in Foedera, XII; Letters and Papers Illustrative of the Reigns of Richard HI and Henry VII, 2 vols., ed. by James Gairdner; or Original Letters, ed. by Henry Ellis. Many documents of great value have never been printed, however, and the register remains yet to be edited. A catalogue of the contents, Brit. Mus. Additional MS. 11, 269, 2 vols., is of limited worth.

For the period of Richard's protectorship, Mancini's record of these months, which he composed as early as December of 1483, is of first importance: Dominic Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard III, edited by C. A. J. Armstrong, who discovered the manuscript not much more than two decades ago and whose notes are admirable. The only other reliable contemporary source is the Croyland Chronicle ("Second Continuation"). Vergil and More are occasionally useful, but they must be regarded, at best, as only secondary, or supplementary, sources—as C. H. Williams points out in his essay on "England: The Yorkist Kings," in the Cambridge Medieval History, VIIL For a fuller discussion of sources, see Appendix II.

Principal sources for this chapter are Mancini, pp. 71-85; Croy. Chron., pp. 481-84; Vergil, pp. 171-72 and pp. 164-66; More, pp'. 1-18.

iThe precise nature of Edward's fatal illness remains a mystery. Com-mynes (Memoires, I, p. 454; II, p. 63) and Mancini (p. 71) believe that the Treaty of Arras cast him into a profound melancholy from which he never recovered. For the immediate cause of death I have followed Mancini's story of the fishing trip (p. 73). Commynes twice mentions that Edward died of apoplexy (Memoires, II, p. 63 and p. 91). The account of the Croyland chronicler reveals that the court was baffled by Edward's illness: when the King took to his bed, he was "neither worn out with old age nor yet seized with any known kind of malady, the cure of which would not have appeared easy in the case of a person of more humble rank" (p. 483). Vergil says that he "fell sick of an unknown disease" (p. 171), later adding an Itafianate touch by hinting at poison (p. 172). For

the unreliable suppositions of French chroniclers and later Tudor historians see Armstrong s summary of the evidence (Mancini, p. 3, note 5).

For the false report of his death which reached York, see York Records, pp. 142-43.

2 Cray. Chron., pp. 481-82; Mancini, pp. 71-73.

s More, pp. 18-19. For the ordinances and composition of Prince Edward's household and council at Ludlow, see Halliwell, Letters of the Kings of England, 1, pp. 136-44; Grants, pp. vii-viii; Armstrong, in Mancini, p. 130, note 37. r

4 P. 173. Concerning Henry's Welsh lineage, Mackie sums up cautiously: "The obvious 'necessity' of magnifying Henry VIFs ancestry after his ac-cession makes the account of Meredith's descent a little uncertain. . . .'' (The Earlier Tudor s, p. 47, note 2).

5 P. 211.

e Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1461-67, p. 114 (Feb. 3, 1462, and Feb. 12, 1462). See also Scofield, I, pp. 202-03.

7 Pp. 164-66. Vergil is the only source for most of the information about Henry Tudor's life before 1483.

sMore's circumstantial account (pp. 12-18), of how Edward sought to reconcile the two factions cannot be accepted as a literal transcript of what was said, but that Edward made the attempt is confirmed by Mancini, who says that the reconciliation took place two days before Edward died (p. 85 ^Though Mancini's statement is to be preferred, I have taken the liberty, in order to develop the scene, of placing the reconciliation, as More does, only a few hours before Edward died. See also Croy. Chron^ pp. 483-84.

9 Ibid., pp. 483-84; Excerpta Historica, p. 378 for Edward's will of 1475; Collection of Wills, pp. 345-48 for the executors of Edward's last will, which has disappeared, perhaps destroyed by the Woodvilles, That Edward appointed Richard Protector of the Realm is firmly established (Mancini, p. 73 and p. 85; Croy. Chron., pp. 485-86; Vergil, p. 17! and p. 175; Bernard Andre, in Memorials of King Henry VII, ed. by Gairdner, p. 23).

1° Household Books of John, Duke of Norfolk, p. 383.

11 A contemporary account of Edward's obsequies appears in Letters and Papers, I, ed. by Gairdner, pp. 3-10, taken from MS. I, 7, f. 7. College of Arms. See also Household Books of John, Duke of Norfolk, p. 386.

The cost of Edward's funeral services amounted to £1,406 ijs. ^d. (Collection of Wills, p. 348).

II

The primary sources for this chapter are Mancini, pp. 79-91 and Croy. Chron., pp. 484-87; I have, as usual, drawn on Vergil, pp. 173-76 and on More, pp. 18-34 an <* PP- *34-35i as well as on Fabyan, p. 668, for details which conform to the pattern of events developed by the primary sources and which seem to derive from information rather than conjecture.

1 Mancini (p. 85) says that Richard was on his Gloucester estates, by which he undoubtedly means that Richard was at home. None of the other sources specifies Richard's whereabouts. Most authorities agree that he was at Middleham.

2 Vergil, p. 173; Mancini, p. 87.

3 Bearing in mind the limits of time and the speed of travel, I have reconstructed the order of the messages which Richard received and sent by a comparison of the sources, which are far from precise on this subject. For Richard's writing Rivers, see Mancini, p. 91, where, however, the time element is confused. It seems reasonable to suppose that the rendezvous at Northampton (see text, p. 207) was arranged by an inquiry from Richard and a response from Rivers.

4 Ibid., p. 89. For the sake of clarity, I have slightly rearranged the order of topics as given by Mancini. In his paraphrase we seem to be very close to the actual wording of the letter. Though Mancini does not mention Richard's writing to the Queen, the Croyland chronicler makes a point of it (p. 486); compare Vergil, pp. 173-74.

5 Compare Pickthorn, Early Tudor Government, pp. 2-5.

6 Mancini, p. 101; Fabyan, p. 668; More, p. 135; Croy. Chron., p. 486.

7 Though the city records make no mention of the oath-taking at York described by the Croyland chronicler, neither do they mention Richard's arrival in the city. The entry in the records for April 23 that John Brackenbury was to go to London with Richard (York Records, p. 143) does not necessarily mean that Richard had already left York. All that is known about the earlier stages of his journey is that he reached Nottingham on April 26 (see next note).

8 W. H. Stevenson, Records of the Borough of Nottingham, vol. II, London, 1882, p. 394; More, p. 135.

9 See notes 2 and 3, above.

10 Mancini, p. 83; compare Armstrong, Mancini, p. 140, note 41.

11 Mancini, p. 79. The success with which the Marquess at first swayed the council, itself suggests that he and the Queen had been at work behind the scenes. Only two days after hearing the first word of Edward's death, the new King wrote to the city of Lynn that he was coming to London for his crowning "in all convenient haste" (HMC, nth rep., Ill, p. 170). This statement almost certainly reflects orders from the Queen which accompanied the news. Received at Ludlow on April 14, the dispatch must have been written not more than thirty-six hours after Edward's death and therefore before any council meeting (Mancini, p. 87, says the council first assembled "at the completion of the royal obsequies"). She must have considered that the reins of power were already safely in her hands.

12 Turner, History of England, III, pp. 394-97, translated by Turner from Cotton Cleopatra E III, if. 106-16.

13 Ibid., p. 394; compare Grants, p. xxxviii,

14 See note u, above.

« Cal Pat. Rolls, 1476-85, p. 350 (April 21).

l » Mancini, p. 99, p. 103, and p. 105; More, pp. 26-27. For Richard's action against Sir Edward's fleet, see text, p. 221. On June 9 it was reported that Richard was still trying to recover portions of the treasure seized by the Marquess (see text, p. 239).

Louis XI recommended "Lord Cordes" (Philippe de Crevecoeur) to his son as the ablest French commander (Molinet's Scandalous Chronicle in vol. II of Memoirs of Philippe de Conrniines, ed. and trans, by Andrew R.

Scoble, London, 1907, p. 393). For Cordes' harrying English commerce see Letters and Papers, I, ed. by Gairdner, p. 18. *

IT Compare Pickthorn, Early Tudor Government, pp. 28-34 et seq

^ 8 ^ al ^ P rn' R ° llS ! r I476 f 5 ' PP- 352-53 (April 27). Because Gairdner (Richard HI, p. 55) found two documents, one dated April 21 and the other May 2, which styled Richard as Protector of England, he assumes that the protectorship was acknowledged in London before Richard arrived there. In the first document, however—Commissions of the Peace on the Patent Rolls (see Grants, p. xxxii)— all the commissions save Richard's are dated no earlier than May 14, and from the weight of evidence cited above it seems likely that the date April 21 is a clerical error for May 21. The second document—from Harleian MS. 433, f. 2650—itself contains proof that its date of May 2 must be an error since it relates to the disposition, by Richard, of certain of Earl Rivers' lands and must therefore have been drawn up after Richard established his government in London. The date undoubtedly should be June 2.