The Royal Coup and Mortimer’s Tunnel

“The plotters moved as quietly as they could through a secret underground passage, deep in the bowels of Nottingham castle. There were at least sixteen, and perhaps more than twenty of them: heavily armed, mostly young men, loyal to their king and desperate for their own lives. Above them, the castle was settling down for the night, emptied of the day’s visitors, who had returned to their lodgings in the town outside. The only sounds in the tunnel would have been stifled breath, the dull clank of moving armour, and the crackle of torchlight.”*

The Man Who Would be King
Thomas, 2nd earl of Lancaster, was one of the Lords Ordainers who demanded the banishment of Edward II’s “favourite” Piers Gaveston and generally seen as responsible for Gaveston’s execution in 1312. Ten years later Lancaster was leading a rebellion against Edward II’s new favourites Hugh Despenser the younger and his father, 1st earl of Winchester, of the same name. The rebellion was crushed at the battle of Boroughbridge in March 1322.  Lancaster was imprisoned at Pontefract Castle, apparently held in a tower he had built in anticipation of one day capturing Edward, so the story goes.

Thomas was tried by a panel of judges including Edward II and the Despensers where he was unsurprisingly convicted of treason and sentenced to death. At the trial Thomas was not allowed to speak or have anyone speak on his behalf; his fate had been decided long before the trial even commenced. Many believed Edward II never forgave Lancaster for the execution of his special friend Piers Gaveston and the outcome was a forgone conclusion. Lancaster was executed later that month near Pontefract castle, his lands and titles forfeited.

Kenilworth Castle

Henry, then earl of Leicester, had not taken part in his brother Thomas’s rebellions but in 1326 he joined the revolt of Queen Isabella and Roger Mortimer against Edward II. When Isabella and Mortimer landed in Suffolk the king’s forces quickly deserted him, many nobles came over to Isabella, Edward II fled westward. Henry was sent in pursuit and captured the King in Neath, South Wales. Henry was the younger brother of Thomas, 2nd earl of Lancaster, these were the two sons of Edmund ‘Crouchback’, 1st earl of Lancaster and founder of the House of Lancaster, younger brother to King Edward I of England. Once captured, Henry personally took charge of the King with responsibility for his confinement at Kenilworth Castle. The king’s new favourite Hugh Despenser the younger was captured and executed on the high gallows at Hereford in November 1326. 

In January 1327, after a troubled twenty-year reign, Edward II of England was formally removed from the throne, yet this was presented as an abdication rather than a forced deposition. After several attempts to release Edward II from captivity, Mortimer had the former king moved to the more secure Berkeley Castle where Edward II is said to have died during the night of 21 September 1327 of natural causes it was stated. But foul play was suspected and it is generally accepted today that Edward II was murdered in captivity.

The king’s teenage son Edward of Windsor was proclaimed king Edward III, his mother Queen Isabella led a regency council during his minority years. Isabella’s close companion Roger Mortimer, many claimed he was the Queen's lover, refused to take an official position in the regency but increasingly acted as though he was governing the country.

Berkeley Castle

At the Salisbury parliament in 1328 Mortimer awarded himself the novel title of Earl of March. This was unprecedented, as all earldoms beforehand had been awarded to a specific estate or county; Mortimer’s new title implied he ruled the whole of the Marches, which effectively he did as he continued to acquire new territories in Wales and the Marches, many of which had been confiscated during the rebellion in 1326. Mortimer was now behaving and acting as if he had the full power of the king.

In the autumn of 1328, Edmund of Woodstock, 1st Earl of Kent, and his brother Thomas of Brotherton, 1st Earl of Norfolk, sons of Edward I from his second marriage to Marguerite of France, joined Henry, now 3rd earl of Lancaster, Edward III having returned the earldom to him shortly after his ascension in 1327, in a conspiracy against Isabella and Mortimer but once it became clear that it would fail, they abandoned their plan.

Disillusionment with the new regime continued to grow, England began to divide once more into opposing factions. It was now only a matter of time until a group of nobles would challenge Mortimer who was causing resentment as he continued to enrich himself.

Tensions increased between Henry, earl of Lancaster, and Queen Isabella and Mortimer throughout the summer of 1328. Lancaster must have felt as though he was one of Mortimer’s targets as he refused to attend a royal council at York in July and then the Salisbury parliament in October, claiming he had concerns for his own personal safety. The way Mortimer operated he was right to be cautious. In 1329 armed conflict seemed a very distinct possibility between Lancaster and Mortimer. Lancaster’s revolt came to a conclusion when he confronted Mortimer at Bedford in mid-January but the revolt crumbled when Lancaster surrendered without any blood being shed on either side. Mortimer was for once lenient and issued Lancaster a heavy fine.

By 1330 Mortimer was more unpopular than ever, and had created many bitter enemies, not least Henry of Lancaster, but also the king’s half-uncles Thomas of Brotherton, earl of Norfolk and Edmund of Woodstock, earl of Kent. While they professed their loyalty to the Crown, Mortimer saw the three men as a threat to his own position as protector and governor of the young king.

The earl of Kent had been part of Isabella and Mortimer's invasion fleet to depose Edward II in 1326, indeed the fleet landed on his brother, the earl of Norfolk’s estate, but, like many nobles, had become disillusioned with Mortimer’s governance and manipulation of the young Edward III.

The earl of Kent was convinced by rumours that his half-brother (Edward II) was still alive and made an attempt to break into Corfe castle and release him. It later emerged that Roger Mortimer himself was responsible for leading Edmund into this belief, in a form of entrapment.

Corfe Castle

At the end of the Winchester parliament in March 1330 the earl of Kent was suddenly arrested for treason and accused of plotting to make contact with his (apparently dead) half-brother Edward II at Corfe castle. Mortimer presided over a hastily convened court that found the earl of Kent guilty of treason. His land and titles were confiscated and his wife and children sentenced to imprisonment in Salisbury castle. Kent was executed outside Winchester Castle. 

Edward II’s execution of Thomas, 2nd Earl of Lancaster in 1322, near Pontefract Castle, one of the most powerful barons at the time as son of Edmund Crouchback brother of Edward I, had sent shock waves through the nobility. But the execution of Edmund, earl of Kent, a son of Edward I, proved to be a step too far for the power-crazed Earl of March and would ultimately lead to his downfall. Edward III had not been involved in Mortimer’s court that sentenced the earl of Kent. The king had intended to pardon Kent but had been out-maneuvered by Mortimer. This was the final insult to Edward III; he was king but another man ruled his kingdom. The murder of the earl of Kent was the last straw.

At the Nottingham parliament the autumn of 1330 Mortimer and Isabella received intelligence that the young king was looking for an opportunity to overthrow them. Mortimer and Isabella panicked and moved into the more secure Nottingham Castle. Mortimer then accused Henry Lancaster of plotting against him. Lancaster protested his innocence but was forced to move his entire household three miles away from Nottingham.

Mortimer continued to exert his authority, which all became too much for William Montagu, 1st earl of Salisbury, who now formally accused Mortimer of being directly responsible for the death of Edward II. Montagu was a close companion of Prince Edward of Windsor before his ascension, and considered one of the chief influences behind the early reign of Edward III.

Suspecting a conspiracy Mortimer summoned Edward III, Montagu and several of his companions before him who of course all protested their innocence. Mortimer declared that if anything King Edward III said conflicted with his own instructions then the King was not to be obeyed. Montagu urged the king to act, reportedly saying, “it would be better to eat the dog than let the dog eat us”. Edward III agreed it was time to remove Mortimer and assert his authority as monarch. Montagu is claimed to have suggested the use of a secret entrance into Nottingham Castle which today is still called ‘Mortimer’s Tunnel’ or ‘Mortimer’s Hole’. This secret tunnel emerged in the Middle Bailey and ran for 30-40 metres through the castle rock up to into the apartment block of the castle itself.

The castellan William Eland agreed to force a postern gate in the curtain wall so that Montague and the group of young knights could enter the castle grounds. Once in they would make their way into the castle through the tunnel.

Nottingham Castle

A Royal Coup
On the night of 19th October 1330, Edward III’s knights carried out a coup putting the young king in control of the government for the first time since his ascension in 1327, ending Mortimer’s three years of dominance.

Montagu lead the men into the tunnel, with him were four of the king’s household companions, Edward Bohun, Robert Ufford, William Clinton, all knight bannerets like Montagu and John Neville of Hornby a household knight. The stakes were high; they knew if they failed they were dead men, yet if the succeeded Edward III would take back control of the realm. About 20 young men in total entered the castle grounds after dark. Eland guided them to the tunnel entrance, various gates in the tunnel he had left unlocked.

Mortimer and Queen Isabella, the king’s mother, were in the Queen’s Hall in conference with Mortimer’s two sons Geoffrey and Edmund and Henry Burghersh, bishop of Lincoln, among others. As Montagu and his men entered the apartment complex they encountered a man called Turpington, the steward of the household who John Neville quickly despatched. The noise startled the household guards at the doorway of the hall and Montagu’s men cut them down where they stood. 

Mortimer ran for his sword but was captured and kept alive to be tried as a traitor. At a stroke Mortimer’s reign was over and the 17-year-old king could finally take personal control of his realm. Edward III was eager to execute Mortimer immediately but he was persuaded not to act like a tyrant and have the Earl of March tried by his peers.

King Edward immediately sent message to Henry Lancaster inviting him to bring his troops back to the city. Overjoyed at Mortimer’s fall Lancaster quickly complied. The king duly restored Lancaster’s lands and titles.

Mortimer was sent to the Tower and held until a parliament was convened at Westminster Hall in November 1330 for his trial. Mortimer was accused of fourteen separate charges, including alienating royal lands, creating the earldom of March, making war upon the earl of Lancaster, framing the earl of Kent for treason, and significantly, Mortimer was explicitly accused of being responsible for the murder of Edward II, the first time that it had been officially stated that Edward II was murdered. The charges against the late Earl of Kent were annulled. Mortimer was hung at Tyburn, on 29 November 1330, his naked body left to hang for two days before the friars were permitted to take it down for burial.

Now it was official that king Edward II had been murdered several of the individuals suspected of involvement in his death, including Sir Thomas Gurney, Maltravers and William Ockley, fled from England to the continent.

Mortimer’s Tunnel, Nottingham Castle
Nottingham Castle is famous for the tales of Robin Hood and his nemesis the Sheriff of Nottingham. The castle’s thousand year history has its beginning with a Norman construction in AD 1068 of a wooden motte-and-bailey fortification. The first stone walls appeared during the reign of Henry II in the 12th century. In 1461 the Yorkist prince Edward, earl of March, declared himself king of England while at the castle, later that year he was crowned at Westminster Abbey as Edward IV. Edward made many improvements to the castle including construction of the six-sided tower, known as Richard’s Tower. It was from Nottingham Castle that Richard III departed for the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

The Tudors failed to invest in the castle and it entered a period of slow decline and decay. In the 19th century the castle was left vacant and stripped during local riots against its owner the Duke of Newcastle. The Duke failed to restore the ruins, consequently not much of the original stone works survives above ground today, the site now occupied by modern museum and art galleries. Yet a subterranean world survives beneath the castle.

The caves under Nottingham have been well known for centuries. Writing around AD 900 Asser, the biographer of King Alfred the Great, claims that Nottingham’s ancient name was ‘Tiuogobauc’ which he translates as 'the cave dwellings.' Yet these caves which are found under the whole of the city of Nottingham present unique challenges to archaeologists; some of the caves are natural, others man-made, some created in prehistoric times, others medieval, some are even modern era cellars used for storage.

The secret tunnel leading through the castle rock up to the castle apartments ‘Mortimers Hole' (or Mortimer’s Tunnel) is also known as the Western Passage. Cave tours are available from the castle and the guides will tell you eerie tales that the tunnel is haunted by the footsteps of Roger Mortimer’s ghost as he was bound and gagged and shuffled back down the tunnel to face his certain execution.

Then inside the castle a female spirit is said to haunt the apartment block in the form of a woman’s distressed Norman-French accent saying “Fair son, have pity on the gentle Mortimer.” The voice is believed to be that of the ghost of ‘Isabella of France’, wife of the late King Edward II and lover of Mortimer.

Following a four year restoration program Mortimer’s Tunnel re-opened on 14th October 2022 just days before the 692nd anniversary of King Edward III’s royal coup. The steep and narrow man-made tunnel takes 127 rock-cut steps from Brewhouse Yard, through the sandstone of the Castle Rock, to emerge at the castle terrace. 

Mortimer's Hole

The Real Mortimer’s Hole Discovered
For many years the official entrance to ‘Mortimer's Hole’ has been accepted as next to Brewhouse Yard but archaeologists now believe the real tunnel originates in a garden in the Park Estate. The discovery was made during the Nottingham Caves Survey, a two-year project which began in March 2010 using laser scanners to produce a three-dimensional record of the sandstone caves under Nottingham. Following the survey archaeologist Dr David Walker from the University of Nottingham is confident they have discovered the real “Mortimer's Hole.”

Dr Walker argues that the secret passage mentioned in early documents cannot be the one named as Mortimer’s Tunnel next the Brewhouse Yard because that tunnel was well known as being used for bringing provisions up from the River Leen to the castle. Now they have discovered a blocked cave which runs into a man's garden in the Park Estate known as the North-Western Passage, which Dr Walker considers is the real Mortimer's Hole.

From the house on Castle Grove in the Park Estate, the North-Western Passage runs for 30-40 metres. The passage would have emerged in the former Middle Bailey, now the Castle Green, but it is now blocked, partially filled with rubble. Dr Walker stated that once you get past the debris, the full height of the tunnel is exposed and there are rock cut steps at the bottom and an arch at the top.

Notes & References
*Dan Jones, The Plantagenets, p.454

* * *

Edward II: The First Deposition

 Bosworth: The French Connection Part III

“The twenty-year reign of Edward II is generally seen as a disastrous period in English history. Edward suffered military defeats, encountered political crises and faced civil war. His reliance on his ‘favourites’, Piers Gaveston and Hugh Despenser, rumoured to be his lovers, was seen as playing a large part in the king’s downfall.”

>> Continued from Part II - The Complexity of Succession

The Death of Edward II
Two months before his 15th birthday Prince Edward, the future Edward III (1312-1377), was informed on the 23 September 1327 that his father King Edward II had died at Berkeley Castle during the night of 21 September. Edward II’s body was taken to Gloucester Abbey where he was interred by the high altar. The end to his father’s reign had not been the happiest of times for the young prince and the death of the king was totally unexpected with the suspicion of foul play.

Entrance to Edward II's cell at Berkeley Castle

Edward of Caernarfon (1284 –1327), fourth son of Edward I the ‘Hammer of the Scots’, reigned as Edward II from 1307 until he was deposed in January 1327. After 36 years of marriage Edward I was grief-stricken by the death of his first wife Eleanor of Castile in November 1290. On her journey north to join her husband on military campaign in Scotland she was taken ill and died at the village of Harby, Nottinghamshire, about 7 miles from Lincoln. King Edward had her body gently transported back to London, having twelve stone monuments, known as the Eleanor Crosses, constructed at each location her body rested overnight. 

In 1299 when his father Edward I married Margaret (Marguerite of France), sister of King Philip IV of France (r.1285-1314), the young Prince Edward was betrothed to Isabella, the eldest child of Philip and his wife Joan of Navarre as part of a peace treaty with France. From his second marriage Edward I produced two sons, Thomas of Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk and Edmund of Woodstock, Earl of Kent.

When Edward I died on 7th July 1307 at Burgh by Sands, near Carlisle, one of his last wishes was that Piers Gaveston, whom he had exiled earlier that year owing to concern over his closeness to his son Prince Edward, would not be permitted to return to the country. Edward II duly married Isabella on January 25, 1308, at Boulogne with his coronation taking place the following month. 

Edward II soon came into conflict with his nobles over his favourites, firstly Piers Gaveston and then The Despenser family. One of the first acts as the new, King Edward II recalled Gaveston from exile ignoring his father’s wishes. Gaveston was again exiled after pressure from the nobles but the king soon called him back. Yet this time on his return Gaveston was executed in 1312 by a group of nobles fronted by the king’s cousin Thomas, 2nd Earl of Lancaster, which led to a period of armed conflict with the king. Lancaster (1278-1322), eldest son of Edmund Crouchback, brother of Edward I, was one of the most powerful barons in the country.

Having lost his close companion Gaveston, King Edward began to rely evermore on the Despenser family, with Hugh Despenser the Younger replacing Gaveston as his close friend and personal adviser. The Despenser family held lands and titles in the Marches, the region bordering England and Wales. As Marcher lords they were granted with special legal and military privileges.

The powerful earldoms of Hereford, Shrewsbury and Chester had been created by William the Conqueror shortly after the Norman Conquest to control the Welsh border region. These earldoms were granted the privileged status of ‘County Palatine’ in which the nobleman, or counts palatine, swore allegiance to the monarch yet had the power to rule the county largely independently of the king. The Marcher Lords retained their distinct status until the 16th century and the reign of Henry VIII.

The earls of Hereford started to build Wigmore Castle but when they rebelled in 1075 their lands were confiscated and given to a Ralph Mortimer who made it his chief residence and central lordship of the Mortimer estates. The Mortimers came from Normandy at around the time of the Norman Conquest although it is unclear if a Mortimer actually fought at Hastings in 1066.

The King of Folly
The Mortimer’s gained estates and influence in the Marches through a series of beneficial marriages and inheritance. Wigmore remained the principal residence of the Mortimer family for over 250 years until it was superseded by Ludlow Castle which they acquired in 1301 when Roger Mortimer (1287-1330), married Joan de Geneville. Following their marriage Ludlow became the Mortimer’s primary residence to which Roger made significant changes, completing construction of the western Solar block to the Great Hall, then adding the eastern Solar block, transforming the castle into a Royal palace.

Joan was born at Ludlow Castle on 2nd February 1286, the daughter of wealthy parents Sir Piers de Geneville and Joan of Lusignan, and later inherited the estates of her grandparents, Geoffrey de Geneville and Maud de Lacy, making her one of the wealthiest women in the Welsh Marches, with further estates in Ireland.

Ludlow Castle

Roger and Joan through a seemingly happy marriage produced 12 children, eight daughters and four sons, all of whom survived to adulthood. Yet eventually Roger, a prominent figure in the Marches, became drawn into the politics of the time and came into conflict with King Edward II. 

The Despensers exploited their close relationship with Edward II, strengthening their power by executing their enemies and confiscating estates. Unsurprisingly, the Mortimers joined the other Marcher lords in opposition to the Despensers which effectively put them in direct confrontation with King Edward II. The encroachment of the Despensers into the southern Marches had brought them directly into conflict with the Mortimers at Wigmore. The personal feud between the Despensers and the Mortimers went back to 1265 when a previous Roger Mortimer (d.1282) killed the head of their family at the battle of Evesham.

Resentment continued to grow among the nobles and tensions came to a head in 1321 when a group of barons led by the Earl of Lancaster seized the Despensers' lands and forced the King to exile them. Edward II responded with a short military campaign in which he captured Lancaster and then had him executed in 1322. The King then quickly annulled the exile, the Despensers returned and hostilities recommenced.

The Mortimer's lands

Roger Mortimer (d.1330) led a 5-day rampage through the Despenser estates in the southern Marches. In 1322 Roger was captured at Shrewsbury and taken, with his uncle, Roger Mortimer of Chirk, to the Tower of London. He was sentenced to death and his lands confiscated but this sentence was subsequently reduced to life imprisonment.

On 1st August the following year, Roger escaped the Tower, said to have drugged the guards, or as some stories claim, he escaped through a hole in the kitchen roof, and fled to France where he was hosted by the King of France.

In 1325, Queen Isabella, her reputation earned her the nick-name as the ‘She-Wolf of France’, had been sent to France to negotiate a settlement between her husband, Edward II, and her brother Charles IV, the Fair, King of France (r.1322-1328). Isabella was joined by her son Prince Edward who Edward II had sent to France in his place to pay homage for Gascony and Ponthieu. Isabella refused to return to England, openly criticising her husband and the Despensers. While in France she met Roger Mortimer and it is generally believed they became lovers, although there is no hard evidence for this. They planned to invade England and in September 1326 landed in Suffolk with a small armed force mainly comprised of mercenaries.

The Despensers had become increasingly unpopular and, on their arrival, many of their opponents came to support Queen Isabella and Roger Mortimer who she presented as her military commander. Within weeks their rebellion was successful and by November the King and Hugh Despenser were captured in South Wales. King Edward II was forced to abdicate in favour of his young son Prince Edward and imprisoned at Kenilworth Castle. The Despensers were dealt with ruthlessly Roger Mortimer, overseeing the trials and executions of them and other nobles. The King’s favourite Hugh Despenser was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Hereford. 

Roger was now at the pinnacle of his career, alongside Queen Isabella he became a dominant figure in England for the next three years. In 1328 he gave himself the title of Earl of March, by definition this implied the whole of the Marches region. This was without precedent as all earldoms were specific to estates or counties, never before a whole region. Roger, in addition to re-instatement of his previous estates including Wigmore and Ludlow, now acquired Denbigh, Montgomery, and Clun, Builth and Clifford Castles; he was now totally dominant in the Marches. 

At Wigmore in 1329 Roger organised a ‘Round Table’ event, a chivalric tournament introduced by Edward I, to celebrate the double wedding of his two daughters from his marriage to his wife Joan. At this Arthurian event Roger adorned himself with elaborate clothes and expensive jewellery sitting in the presence of the Queen. Needless to say, his behaviour did not impress people at Wigmore and even his own son is said to have declared Roger as the ‘king of folly’.

Wigmore Castle (Buck, 1732)

Roger never took an official position in the governance of the country and ignored the royal council of regency established to direct the country during Edward III’s minority years. Instead he used his relationship with Queen Isabella and her son to manipulate and control events; Roger was behaving much like the King’s favourites before him, Piers Gaveston and Hugh Despenser, which had caused much resentment in the country and played a big part in King Edward II’s downfall.

Further resentment toward Roger had been growing since the trial and execution of the Earl of Kent for plotting to release his half-brother Edward II from imprisonment and restore him to the throne. Rumours circulated that the Earl of Kent had been set up by Roger, that he was fed false information that led him to believe that Edward II was still alive so that he would react accordingly and then he could be tried for treason.

The Fall of the Earl of March
When Edward III approached the age of 18, although technically still a minor, the resentment of being under Roger’s control grew stronger, to such a degree that he encouraged opposition to him. In October 1330 a group of young nobles close to the king broke into Nottingham castle and captured Roger. He was taken to the Tower of London and condemned without trial for a long list of charges including appropriating royal power and acting as if he was king, enriching himself and his family,  enticing the Earl of Kent into a plot of treason which ensured his death, and having Edward II murdered at Berkeley having removed him illegally from Kenilworth Castle. He was found guilty of treason and sentenced to the traitor’s death, to be hung, drawn and quartered. Yet the King reduced the sentence to being ‘hung by the neck until dead’. On 29 November 1330 Roger Mortimer was dragged through the streets from the Tower to Tyburn where he was executed, his naked body left hanging at Tyburn for several days before being cut down and buried at Greyfriars in Coventry.

The Mortimer family was not treated so harshly and seemed to carry no blame for Roger’s behaviour. His wife Joan and her youngest daughters were initially placed under house arrest at Wickham in Hampshire. Her elder daughters were sent to convents and her other children taken to Windsor Castle. After Roger’s execution she was imprisoned in Skipton Castle. 

Although Roger’s title ‘Earl of March’ was confiscated the family seat at Wigmore with Maelienydd and other Marcher lordships was returned to Roger’s son and heir, Edmund Mortimer (d.1331). Yet Edmund died just one year after his father was executed which threatened the whole Mortimer inheritance as Edmund’s son and heir was only three years old at the time. For the next hundred years after the death of Edmund, the Mortimer male heirs would all die young with their respective sons inheriting as minors between ages 3-8 years.

Five years later in 1336 Roger’s widow Joan was pardoned by King Edward III for any involvement in her late husband’s uprising and all her lands that had been confiscated were restored to her. After she petitioned the king, Roger’s body was also returned to her and buried at Wigmore Abbey. Joan lived on until 1356 when she died aged 70 and was buried alongside him.

Edmund’s son, also named Roger (1327-1360), after his grandfather the 1st Earl of March, was one of the young companions of Edward, the Black Prince, eldest son of Edward III. As such he was knighted by the prince during the invasion of France in 1346 and then fought at the battle of Crécy alongside the King.

Later that year he would rewarded for his services against the French with more of the Mortimer lands restored to him. In 1348 Roger was one of the original Knights of the Garter. Edward III created the Order of the Garter, an exclusive membership limited to just 25 Knights with the first places reserved for those commanders who had helped him to win the Crécy campaign. In 1349 Roger was again alongside the Black Prince in resisting the French attempt to take back Calais  

In 1354 Roger managed to reverse the sentence passed against his grandfather, and succeeded in restoring almost the entirety of the family estates and in doing so became the 2nd Earl of March. His estates grew further when he inherited the property of his grandmother Joan de Genville, widow of the 1st Earl of March. 

The Norman keep at Ludlow Castle 

The Mortimers were now one of the wealthiest family’s in the land and held in such high esteem by the Royal family that Roger’s son Edmund, 3rd Earl of March (1352-1381) was married to Philippa of Clarence, only child of Lionel of Antwerp, Duke of Clarence, and granddaughter of Edward III. As we have seen, Philippa’s granddaughter Anne Mortimer (1388-1411) was the mother of Richard, 3rd Duke of York (1411-1460), also known as Richard Plantagenet.

Richard’s mother Anne Mortimer died in September 1411 at the age of 22 shortly after his birth and then his father, Richard of Conisburgh, 3rd Earl of Cambridge, was executed in 1415 for his part in the Southampton Plot, an attempt to overthrow Henry V. Then within months his uncle Edward, 2nd Duke of York, was killed at the battle of Agincourt. Being without issue Edward’s title and lands passed to the young Richard, becoming 3rd Duke of York. When his uncle Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March died without issue in 1425, Richard inherited the vast estates and titles of the Mortimer family making him the wealthiest and most powerful noble in the country, second only to the king himself. Richard made Ludlow one of his primary residences.

>> Continued in Part IV - Did Edward II Survive?

> CD <

* * *

A Note on the Complexity of Succession

Bosworth: The French Connection Part II

The Complexity of Succession
We saw in Part I: Blood & Roses: Scions how the contest for the throne of England, the Wars of the Roses, has its deep roots with the sons of King Edward III. We traced how the Lancastrian line of succession commenced through Henry of Bolingbroke, the son of John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster (1340–1399), who usurped the throne from Richard II in 1399. Bolingbroke was subsequently crowned as King Henry IV of England and reigned until 1413. 

Bolingbroke challenged Richard’s succession, questioning who was the rightful heir of Edward III? Richard was the son of Edward, the Black Prince, first son of Edward III and Joan, the Fair Maid of Kent, daughter of Edmund of Woodstock, 1st Earl of Kent (1301-1330), the sixth and youngest son of King Edward I of England. When the Black Prince died in 1376 his son Richard of Bordeaux was his nominated heir and then when Edward III died a year later in 1377 the throne passed directly to him as Richard II. There were of course those at the time that believed the throne should have passed to one of Edward III’s other sons as the Black Prince had not been King. 

Richard II was without issue and his presumptive heir was Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March (1391-1425), grandson of Philippa, only daughter of Lionel of Antwerp, 1st Duke of Clarence, second son of Edward III. When Bolingbroke challenged Richard II in 1399 he was able to dismiss the Mortimer claim as Edmund was just seven years old at the time, and his brother Roger six. Their father, Roger, 4th Earl of March (1374-1398), had died the previous year following the trend of the Mortimer male line of dying young.

The conflict of the War of the Roses started in earnest in 1455 when Bolingbroke’s grandson, Henry VI was challenged by Richard, 3rd Duke of York, and continued for over thirty years to 1487. The Lancastrian line from Henry IV became extinct in 1471 when Henry VI and his son Edward of Westminster were both killed. However, the Lancastrian line would later rise again through Katherine Swynford, mistress then second wife to John of Gaunt, which spawned the Beaufort line which later would lead to the reign of the Tudors.

[click to enlarge]

Succession from Edward III
The Wars of the Roses, a dynastic conflict which has its origins in contested succession, was further complicated by the apparent right of male inheritance over female. France had a strict Salic Law, derived from the time of Clovis and the Salian Franks, which not only barred women from the throne, but also refused to recognise any claims through a woman. The French had used this law, among others, to reject England’s claim to the throne of France, which was through a female line.

At this time in England the rules of succession were not so straightforward, and unlike France, there was no clear position; inheritance was rarely a simple matter, done and dusted without question, owing to the death of so many heirs as the Yorkist and Lancastrians seemed determined to wipe each other out. This often led to many young heirs coming to the throne who would be supported by a regency council during their minority years. When the line of succession was not clear cut the Royal Council would make a practical decision as to who was best placed to be King. 

However, the French position was not directly adopted into English law although the concept of male-preference primogeniture gained favour in England, which meant that that the heir to the throne was the first-born son of the monarch. Only when there are no sons would the crown pass to the eldest daughter. This became law and persisted for over 300 years until the laws of succession were amended in 2013 to allow for absolute primogeniture, meaning the firstborn child, regardless of gender, inherits the throne.

Edward III had taken steps to secure the preference for male inheritance, and strongly favoured Richard II inheriting succession from the King’s first born son Edward, the Black Prince, although Edward had not been monarch himself, therefore completely bypassing Philippa of Clarence only daughter of his second son Lionel of Antwerp, and of course all his other sons.

Clearly not all of Edward III’s sons were happy with this decision which would result in the deposition of Richard II, son of an eldest son, but replaced with Henry IV, son of a third son. Henry’s challenge was successful because he had sufficient support from the nobility who had not been impressed with Richard’s reign in which he relied heavily upon his ‘favourites’ the Earl of Suffolk and the Earl of Oxford.

Henry IV's claim to the throne was based on his descent from Edward III through the male line, specifically through John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, and third surviving son of the king. And just to be doubly safe, as we saw in Part I - Blood and Roses: Scions Henry maintained that his claim to the throne through his mother Blanche of Lancaster was superior to that through his father, John of Gaunt. 

To further cement his position as king, Henry IV then barred the Beaufort family from challenging him through a parliamentary act in 1407, which specifically stated that although the Beauforts had been deemed legitimate they were excluded from the line of succession. The Beauforts were in fact the illegitimate children of Henry’s father John of Gaunt and his mistress Katherine Swynford. The Beauforts had been earlier legitimised by the Pope following the marriage of Gaunt and Swynford in 1396. The following year Richard II issued a charter also declaring them legitimate which was confirmed by Parliament. However, Henry clearly still saw them as a threat.

Margaret Beaufort, great-granddaughter of Edward III, would later become a key figure in promoting the Lancastrian claim, her sheer tenacity ensuring the challenge of her son Henry Tudor. It is significant that the Tudor dynasty, whose reign effectively ended the Wars of the Roses, accepted women as heirs to the throne; Henry Tudor gained much support from Yorkists as he had pledged to marry Elizabeth of York, eldest daughter of Edward IV and surviving heir, presuming Edward V and his younger brother Richard of Shrewsbury, the Princes in the Tower, were dead.

As noted above, the War of the Roses started in earnest in 1455 when Henry IV’s grandson, Henry VI was challenged by Richard, 3rd Duke of York (1411-1460). Richard’s strength of position was supported by the fact that he was descended in the female line through Philippa of Clarence, daughter of the second son of Edward III, whereas the Lancastrian kings from Henry IV and his heirs were descended in the male line from the third son of Edward III. If absolute primogeniture had been the precedent then, as it is now, then Richard would have been the rightful heir to the throne.

Female succession then was best avoided as the first time a King’s only surviving heir was his daughter the prospect of a queen regnant reigning suo jure resulted in civil war. Following the "White Ship" disaster in November 1120 when Prince William Adelin, only legitimate son and heir of Henry I, and 300 other souls were lost off the Normandy coast, Henry’s daughter the Empress Matilda became the sole legitimate heir to the throne. When Henry I died in 1135 the succession of Matilda was challenged by Henry's nephew Stephen of Blois who seized the throne resulting in a civil war, known as "The Anarchy". Stephen was eventually succeeded by Matilda’s son Henry "Curtmantle" in 1154 who was crowned as Henry II.

Evidently, when the precedent of succession wasn’t necessarily in one’s favour one could, with sufficient support, remove the reigning monarch as we have seen with Henry of Bolingbroke’s deposition of Richard II, an action that became increasingly common in the Wars of the Roses as the Yorkists and Lancastrians set about eliminating each others nobles with claims to the throne.

It is an odd twist of irony that the man credited with starting the Wars of the Roses was descended from the man who who was responsible for the first deposition of a King of England. Richard, 3rd Duke of York (1411-1460) was descended on his father’s side from Edmund, 1st Duke of York, fourth son of Edward III, and through his mother’s side to Lionel of Antwerp, 1st Duke of Clarence, second son of Edward III. Lionel’s only daughter Philippa of Clarence married Edmund Mortimer, 3rd Earl of March (1352-1381). Although descended from the House of York, Richard heralded his descent from the Mortimer’s as superior in line of succession to that of the House of Lancaster and the descendants of John of Gaunt.

>> Part III – Edward II: The First Deposition

* * * 

Bosworth: The French Connection

Part I

Blood and Roses: Scions
The Wars of the Roses, one of the bloodiest periods in English history, has its roots in the Plantagenet dynasty of King Edward III (1312-1377) of England. During his fifty-year reign Edward III transformed England into one of the most formidable military powers in Europe. 

Edward III

The court of Edward III was a centre of chivalry and in 1343 he announced his intention to found an ‘Order of the Round Table’ with three hundred knights with St George as their Patron, with a corresponding building and chapel, "in the same manner and estate as the Lord Arthur, formerly King of England". However, by 1348 he had abandoned plans for the Round Table and announced the creation of the ‘Order of the Garter’. Membership was exclusive to just 25 Knights, the exact same number of places around King Arthur’s Round Table at Winchester. The early Plantagenets emulated the Great King Arthur in their Round Table tournaments and patronage of Arthurian literature drawing comparison between contemporary figures and the Knights of the Round Table. By emulating Arthur the Plantagenets exhibited an overwhelming desire for his second coming particularly with the hopes for Arthur of Brittany (1187-1203). The age of chivalry came to an end with the death of the last Plantagenent king Richard III at Bosworth. Yet oddly the first Tudor king named his first son Prince Arthur (1486-1502) who was set to rule as King Arthur II.

The marriage of Edward III and his wife, Philippa of Hainault, produced thirteen children, of which five sons survived infancy. The king married his sons to English heiresses and created the first English dukedoms for them. His sons amassed significant wealth and power; Edward had created a dynasty of high-powered magnates.

Edward’s eldest son and heir Edward of Woodstock (1330-1376), the Prince of Wales also known as the ‘Black Prince’, was one of the most prominent warriors of the ‘Hundred Years War’ but never became king as he died before his father. Edward III’s other four sons that reached maturity were Lionel of Antwerp, 1st Duke of Clarence (1338–1368) who also died before his father; John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster (1340–1399); Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York (1341–1402); Thomas of Woodstock, 1st Duke of Gloucester (1355–1397) whose descendants were the Dukes of Buckingham.

John of Gaunt in particular was in a very powerful position becoming Duke of Lancaster through his marriage to Blanche, heiress of the House of Lancaster which had been founded in the 13th century by Edmund Crouchback, second son of Henry III. The Duchy of Lancaster was virtually an independent state. When her older sister Maud died without any surviving children, Blanche and her husband John inherited her father’s titles and estates adding these to their vast holdings including more than 30 castles. As Duke of Lancaster, John was now the most powerful magnate in England.

When Edward III’s eldest son and heir the Black Prince died in 1376 the next in the line of succession was his son Richard of Bordeaux (1367-1400) - his elder brother Edward of Angoulême (1365-70) had died of plague as a young boy. Yet Richard was just 10 years old at the time he became monarch and his minority years were governed by a series of councils without appointment of a nominated regent. There was suspicions at the time that John of Gaunt, now Edward III’s oldest surviving son, would usurp his place in succession, consequently Richard of Bordeaux was hurriedly invested as Prince of Wales and presented with his father's titles. John stayed loyal to his nephew and honoured his father’s wishes and on Edward III’s death in 1377 the throne duly passed to young Richard of Bordeaux who was crowned Richard II.

It is fair to say that Richard II’s reign was not the best, in fact to say it was a disaster would be an understatement. He had come to the throne in the middle of the The Hundred Years' War (1337–1453) and proved to be too young and inexperienced to provide the strong leadership required by a nation at war. Richard’s grandfather Edward III had enlarged his holdings in France but by 1380 only Calais remained in English control. Richard II faced further difficulties at home during the 1380’s: he incurred the Peasants Revolt and then war with Scotland created the need to raise taxes which accelerated his unpopularity.

By the mid-1380’s Richard was relying heavily on Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, and more so on Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, the so-called King’s ‘favourites’, which caused resentment with other nobles. Many were uncomfortable with the succession of the young Richard II in 1377 as his father, the Black Prince, had never attained the crown. In some quarters it was believed that one of Edward III's three surviving sons, John of Gaunt, Edmund of Langley or Thomas of Woodstock, should have succeeded King Edward III.

One in particular was Richard’s cousin Henry of Bolingbroke, Earl of Derby, the son and heir of John Gaunt. Henry along with his uncle Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, youngest surviving son of Edward III, was involved in the revolt of the ‘Lords Appellant’ against the King’s favourites, notably the Earl of Oxford, which resulted in defeat for Richard II at the battle of Radcot Bridge in 1387 and the enforced banishment of Oxford. However, Richard continued to rule and from 1397 tended to act as an absolute monarch without parliament. He them moved against his uncle Thomas of Woodstock who he had never forgiven for his part in the revolt of the Lords Appellant. Richard is thought to have arranged for Woodstock’s murder while he was in Calais. For his part Henry of Bolingbroke went unpunished at the time but the following year was exiled from court in 1398. 

John of Gaunt

When Henry’s father John of Gaunt died in 1399, Richard II blocked Henry’s inheritance as the Duke of Lancaster. Henry assembled a force of his supporters in France and travelled back to England. Henry overthrew Richard and put him in prison. Richard II was forced to abdicate on 29 September 1399 and Henry Bolingbroke was crowned King Henry IV on 13 October 1399. Richard was held in captivity at Pontefract Castle and said to have starved to death in February 1400. 

The succession was further complicated as Richard II died childless, and his presumptive heir Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March (1374-1398), claimed succession as great-grandson of Edward III through his mother Phillipa, the only child of Lionel, Duke of Clarence. When Roger died in Ireland in 1398 his son Edmund, 5th Earl of March, (1391-1425) inherited his title and claim to the throne. 

The legal principle of male primogeniture dictated that Edmund’s claim to the throne was stronger than the descendants of John of Gaunt. Yet Edmund was a young child himself, barely 8-years old at the time of the death of Richard II, it seemed there was little appetite for another minority monarch and Parliament therefore agreed that Henry of Bolingbroke should succeed and his son Henry of Monmouth (1386-1422), the future King Henry V, recognized as heir apparent.

As part of his claim to the throne Henry Bolingbroke used his descent from Edmund Crouchback, 1st earl of Lancaster, son of Henry III (1207-1272), on his mother’s side, Blanche of Lancaster. He argued that Edmund was actually the first son of King Henry but was pushed aside in favour of his brother, the future Edward I, because of his ‘deformity’. 

If correct then Henry Bolingbroke, by line of descent, would be the senior successor to Henry III. However, if accepted this would determine that all the kings since Edward I were usurpers, including Bolingbroke’s own grandfather Edward III. And, significantly for Bolingbroke, it would remove Edmund, 5th Earl of March as heir to the throne. Furthermore, it would also result in any descendants of John of Gaunt through later wives, including the Beauforts through Katherine Swynford, were excluded from the line of succession. Bolingbroke’s claim was rejected by the legal committee that examined it but he maintained his claim to the throne through his mother Blanche of Lancaster was superior to that through his father, John of Gaunt.

To neutralise any threat from the supporters of Edmund, 5th Earl of March, the newly crowned King Henry IV placed the young Edmund and his brother Roger in confinement at Windsor and Berkhamsted castles under the jurisdiction of Sir Hugh Waterton. However, the Mortimer’s claim to the throne would later lead to plots against Henry IV and his son Henry V by the House of York. 

When Edward II was forced to abdicate in favour of his son Edward III a precedent appeared to have been set that reigning monarchs could be deposed by those with strong claims to the throne. However, Henry Bolingbroke, although descended from Edward III's fourth son, John of Gaunt, was not a direct heir to throne as with the case of Edward II. Although many nobles were not happy with the succession of Richard II many were also concerned with the way Henry IV had taken the throne; the first usurpation by the House of Lancaster. 

Henry IV

Indeed, to complicate matters of succession even further Anne de Mortimer, the daughter of Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March, had married Richard, Earl of Cambridge, son of Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, the fifth son of Edward III. The son of Anne and the Earl of Cambridge inherited Edmund of Langley’s title as Richard, 3rd Duke of York (1411-1460), also known as Richard Plantagenent, which he would later use to challenge the House of Lancaster.

Two factions were clearly developing and England had taken the first steps toward the Wars of the Roses. The death of Thomas of Woodstock had left just two sons of Edward III alive, John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster and Edmund of Langley, Duke of York. 

A Family at War
In the following century descendants of the House of Lancaster and the House of York engaged in a lengthy dynastic conflict from 1455 to 1487 challenging each other on the battlefield for the throne of England. During those 32 years the crown changed hands seven times with four kings deposed, three kings murdered and one killed in battle. The period also saw the death of several Royal Princes and many nobles in battles in which the two dynasties came close to destroying each other in some of the bloodiest battles ever fought on English soil.

Over 30 years the Wars of the Roses involved 16 major battles, culminating in Bosworth Field in 1485 which is considered to have brought the conflict to an end with the dawn of the Tudor period. However two years later Henry VII, the first Tudor king, faced a Yorkist challenge that supported the pretender Lambert Simnel as rightful heir to the throne. Henry confronted the rebel army at the battle of Stoke Field in 1487, resulting in a decisive Lancastrian victory that cemented the crown to the House of Tudor for more than a century. 

Tensions between the Lancastrians and Yorkists had been simmering for some time and came to a head during the reign of Henry VI (1421-1471), only son of Henry V and youngest ever king of England, was challenged by Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York. Unlike his father, Henry VI was not a strong king politically or militarily and England’s strong position constructed under Edward III and reinforced by Henry V was in danger of slipping away.

The Hundred Years' War in France, a series of conflicts from 1337 to 1453 between England and France over territorial disputes and claims to the French throne, had not gone well for England under Henry VI and ended with a French victory, resulting in the loss of most of the English territories in France won by Henry V, with only Calais remaining under English rule. Discontent with the reign of Henry VI grew in England resulting in the rebellion of Jack Cade in 1450.

The Yorkists challenge against Henry VI was vigorously opposed by the King’s French wife Margaret of Anjou, who supported by the Lancastrian faction, ultimately led to the outbreak of the conflict we know as the Wars of the Roses. Richard led the Yorkists against Henry VI at the First Battle of St Albans in May 1455. On this occasion the king was not deposed but the Yorkists were now in control.

Edward IV, son of Richard, 3rd Duke of York and Cecily Neville, was undoubtedly the most successful monarch during the Wars of the Roses, reigning for almost 22 years from 1461 to 1483, but for a six month interlude over the winter of 1470-71. Edward IV was a descendant of Lionel, Duke of Clarence, third son of Edward III, and only eighteen when his father Richard, Duke of York, was killed at the Battle of Wakefield in December 1460. The following year he defeated the Lancastrians at Mortimer's Cross and then a month later annihilated them at Towton, said to have been the bloodiest battle fought in England, he deposed King Henry VI and took the crown.

Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, termed ‘the kingmaker’, had supported Edward IV in attaining the throne but fell out with the new Yorkist king. Described as the ‘Universal Spider’ for the political webs he spun, King Louis XI of France persuaded the Earl of Warwick to work with Margaret of Anjou to restore her husband Henry VI to the throne. Warwick and Margaret had been on opposite sides in the conflict but Louis’ scheme was successful and Edward was forced into exile in 1470. He fled to Flanders, a part of the Duchy of Burgundy.

Yet on his return to the throne Henry VI continued to exhibit the same frailties that had plagued his earlier reign and it wasn’t long before Edward IV returned to England and challenged the Lancastrian regime. Louis XI declared war on the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, who responded by providing a military force to Edward IV, in order for him to challenge Henry VI and reclaim the throne. 

Landing at Hull Edward IV then entered London unopposed and took Henry VI captive and locked him in the Tower of London. Edward IV defeated a Lancastrian army at Barnet in April 1471 where Warwick perished on the battlefield, and the following month Edward’s Yorkist army crushed a second Lancastrian force at Tewkesbury, killing Henry’s sixteen year old son Prince Edward of Westminster. A tradition claims the boy took refuge in the abbey but was dragged out and butchered in the street. Edward IV had regained control of the government and within days Henry VI was dead, generally believed to have been murdered in the Wakefield Tower on the orders of the Yorkist king.

With dynastic troubles in England now relatively settled under Edward IV’s rule, the King went on to invade France in 1475, but Louis ‘the spider’ set his diplomacy to work again and negotiated the Treaty of Picquigny, by which the English were paid off to leave France. The Treaty established a seven-year truce between England and France with the English renouncing their claim to lands in Northern France such as Normandy, retaining only Calais; it seemed territorial disputes with France were finally over.

The Burgundian Connection
The treaty also effectively isolated King Louis XI ’s arch-enemy Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, from his Yorkist allies who, as we have seen, had supported Edward IV in opposing King Henry VI. 

Louis spent most of his reign dealing with political disputes with Charles the Bold for which he employed Swiss soldiers, whose military might was renowned across the Continent. Charles invaded Switzerland in 1476 with the intention of creating a kingdom independent of France and the Holy Roman Empire. Charles’ aggression had started a series of battles termed the ‘Burgundian Wars’ (1474-1477). The surprise invasion proved to be a massive error by Charles that ultimately cost him his life. Charles besieged the Swiss fortress at Grandson in early in 1476.When the castle surrendered after just nine days Charles had the entire garrison of four hundred men executed, either hanged or drowned. A few months later in June the Swiss gained their revenge at Murten where they annihilated Charles’ army which at the time was one of the most modern armies in Europe with highly-trained infantry, calvary, with gunpowder weapons and English and Welsh archers. The complete destruction of Charles’ army resulted in the death of 10,000 Burgundian soldiers at Murten and changed military tactics in Europe. 

Swiss pikemen engage with Burgundian cavalry

Yet, Charles rebuilt his army and in October 1476 besieged the city of Nancy hoping for a swift victory as at Grandson earlier in the year. In January 1477 Duke Rene II of Lorraine arrived with a massive army of 10,000-12,000 troops and a compliment of 10,000 Swiss mercenaries to relieve the garrison. Instead of a frontal attack Rene and his Swiss commanding officers opted for an attack on Charles' left flank by the largely Swiss vanguard, while the centre attacked the right. In the ensuing battle Charles was struck on the head by a halberdier and died. The victory marked the end of the Burgundian Wars.

The Swiss became internationally renowned for their expertly-drilled pikemen, who were much in demand as mercenaries for their expertise with the pike and the halberd. Swiss tactics would prove to play an essential part in the outcome of the Wars of the Roses

>> Continued in Part II - The Complexity of Succession

* * *

The Last Charge of the Plantagenets

Following King Richard’s defeat at Bosworth Field accounts of the battle spread throughout the land as survivors of the participating armies returned to their homelands. These stories were muddled and naturally enough varied according to individual perspectives of the battle. To avoid any confusion the Lancastrian victor Henry Tudor, now King Henry VII, issued an official communique the day after the battle and kept Richard’s corpse on display at Leicester for several days so that there was no doubt he was dead:

“. . .  that Richard duke of Gloucester, late called King Richard, was slain at a place called Sandeford, within the shire of Leicester, and brought dead off the field unto the town of Leicester, and there was laid openly, that every man might see and look upon him . . .”

An Act of Attainder issued by Henry’s parliament in November 1485 names “Richard, late duke of Gloucester, calling and naming himself, by usurpation, King Richard the Third” and his nobles who assembled a great host “traitorously intending the destruction of the king’s royal person” and refers to a mighty battle fought with guns, bows, arrows, spears, ‘glaives’, and axes, in a field in Leicestershire. Henry claimed his reign commenced the day before the battle, 21 August, therefore anyone rising against him as monarch would be declared an act of treason.

The mayor and aldermen of York issued a memorandum of a council meeting held the day after the battle that stated that King Richard was murdered “through great treason of the duke of Norfolk and many others that turned against him”  at the field of Redemore.

However, considering the significance placed on the battle in English history very little was written in the way of military accounts of the conflict by contemporary authors or during the reign of Henry VII. The accounts of the battle, other than recording the outcome, provide little detail of the tactics used in the field of combat or the location which has made an accurate reconstruction difficult.

The Second Continuation of the Crowland Chronicle, probably the most contemporary source, probably written the year after the event, possibly by John Russell, Bishop of Lincoln, who was keeper of the privy seal for Edward IV and chancellor under Richard III. The Second Continuation records events leading up to the battle, if Russell was the author being a member of the King’s Council he would be providing a first hand account, and certainly did not approve of Richard III’s usurpation but praises his courageous fighting at Bosworth. However, he was not an eye-witness to the battle. 

It seems the omens were not good on the day of the battle for the King. The Crowland chronicler states that Richard had a bad night before the battle, experiencing visions of demons. There were no chaplains available at day-break to celebrate mass and no one had prepared breakfast to raise the King’s spirits.

The chronicler says that Richard and his army rode out from Leicester and that Tudor, earl of Richmond, and his forces were encamped by the abbey of Merevale near Atherstone, about eight miles away, without providing detail to where the forces came together:

“A most fierce battle thus began between the two sides. The earl of Richmond with his men proceeded directly against King Richard. For his part, the earl of Oxford, the next in rank in the army and a most valiant soldier, drew up of his forces, consisting of a large body of French and English troops, opposite the wing in which the duke of Norfolk had taken up his position. In the place where the earl of Northumberland was posted, with a large company of reasonably good men, no engagement could be discerned, and no battle blows given or received. In the end a glorious victory was given by heaven to the earl of Richmond, now sole king, along with a most precious crown, which King Richard had previously worn on his head. For in the thick of the fight, and not in the act of flight. King Richard fell in the field, struck by many mortal wounds, as a bold and most valiant prince.”

The Crowland account of the battle fought near Merevale concludes with King Richard’s body being found among the slain. “Many other insults were heaped on it, and, not very humanely, a halter was thrown round the neck, and it was carried to Leicester.”

Another early account of the battle was written as a memorandum on English affairs by Diego de Valera which he prepared for the Spanish monarchs in early in 1486. This included an eye-witness account of the battle taken from Juan de Salazar, a Spanish soldier of fortune who had actually fought on the Royalist side. Historians have generally not placed great importance de Salazar’s recollection of the battle claiming it as rather confused and muddled. Valera tells us that Henry Tudor “crossed as far as a town called Coventry, near which King Richard stood in the field.”

In his ‘Historia Johannis Rossi Warwicensis de Regibus Anglie’ (History of the Kings of England), John Rous gives a brief account of the battle: “Landing at Milford Haven in Wales on the Feast of the transfiguration with a relatively small band, Henry gained many followers on the road. When finally he met King Richard and his great army on the eighth day of the feast of the Assumption A.D. 1485, on the border of Warwickshire and Leicestershire, he slew him in the field of battle.”

Two other early accounts of the battle are by Continental writers which is not surprising since Henry’s invasion was a French backed expedition. The Burgundian historian Jean Molinet wrote his account of the battle of Bosworth around 1490 but was not published until around 1504 when it was included with his ‘Chroniques’. He appears to be well informed and his account of Bosworth thought to be based on the first hand accounts provided of French troops returning home after the battle. He provides an authentic report on the death of King Richard.

Molinet does not give a specific location for the battle, however, he notes that to avoid Richard’s artillery fire the French soldiers in Tudor’s army attacked the flank rather than the front line of the vanguard which contained many archers under command of John Howard, duke of Norfolk with his son Thomas, earl of Surrey. The attack to the flank put the King’s vanguard to flight which according to Molinet was then picked off by Lord Stanley. He continues that Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, commanding Richard’s rearguard should have charged the French, but the earl did nothing except to flee and abandon King Richard, as had many others on the Royalist side. Molinet says that the battle came to an end when the king’s horse became stuck in a marsh then a Welshmen came after him and struck him dead with a halberd. Another took his body and put it on a horse and carried it, hair hanging, as one would bear a sheep.

Serpentine cannon

Phillippe de Commines (or Commynes) wrote his Memoirs during the 1490’s. Commines was based at the French court and one of King Louis XI of France’s most trusted advisors. He had met Henry Tudor, and his account shows bias toward the Lancastrian cause. He places much emphasis on the support of the Stanley brothers but nothing on the actual combat and fails to provide a location for the battle.

Both of these French writers were working on larger chronicles which were not to be completed for another decade or so, however it considered that their accounts of the battle of Bosworth were written before 1490.

Fabian's Chronicle, c.1500-13, only records a few sentences from the landing of Henry Tudor, his growing number of supporters and the rapid mobilisation of the King’s army. Fabian states that the armies meet at ‘a village in Leicestershire named Bosworth’ and implies that Richard’s fate was sealed by the large number of his army that turned against him in the field.

The Great Chronicle of London offers rather more, recording that the battle took place near a village called Bosworth near Leicester, adding that Sir William Stanley had come into possession of King Richard’s helmet with the crown upon it. He then crowned Henry as King of England. The account ends describing the treatment of Richard’s body after the battle, being trussed naked over a horse and taken to Leicester.

The Italian Polydore Vergil, offers the fullest account of the battle, accordingly it is often used by historians for reconstructions of Bosworth. Employed by Cardinal Adriano Castelli, a papal tax collector, he was sent to England in 1502 as sub-collector and wrote his account of the battle of Bosworth in his Historiae Anglicae between 1503 and 1513. 

Vergil claims his account is truthful, and being quite detailed is probably based on eyewitness accounts. Although it is said to have been written at the request of Henry VII, Vergil had no allegiance to either side and his account appears unbiased although he does stress Richard’s unpopularity. However, later Tudor chroniclers such as Edward Hall (1548) and Raphael Holinshed (1577-1587) drew heavily from it, frequently paraphrasing Vergil’s account. Shakespeare would later use both Hall’s and Holinshed’s Chronicles to write The Tragedy of Richard the Third.

Vergil recalls Tudor’s journey into Wales after landing at Milford Haven and King Richard’s preparations leading up the battle. He describes a meeting between the Tudor and the Stanley brothers at Atherstone, at which he considers they drew up a common strategy. Meanwhile Richard has moved the royal army out from Leicester and camped near Bosworth. As with the Crowland Chronicle, Vergil records that during the night the king suffered terrible visions, which she considered were due to the king’s guilty conscience. Vergil’s account is the fullest description of the battle, thus it has become the standard narrative of Bosworth for historians and therefore worth repeating. Note the strategic importance of a marsh which seems to have influenced the battle strategy of the earl of Oxford:

'King Richard … arrayed his battle-line, extended at such a wonderful length, and composed of footmen and horsemen packed together in such a way that the mass of armed men struck terror in the hearts of the distant onlookers. In the front he placed the archers, like a most strong bulwark, appointing as their leader John, duke of Norfolk. To the rear of this long battle-line followed the king himself, with a select force of soldiers.

‘Meanwhile . . . early in the morning [Henry Tudor] commanded his soldiery to set to arms, and at the same time sent to Thomas Stanley, who now approached the place of the fight, midway between the two armies, to come in with his forces, so that the men could be put in formation. He answered that Henry should set his own men in line, while he would be at hand with his army in proper array.

'Henry drew up a simple battle-line on account of the fewness of his men. In front of the line he placed archers, putting the earl of Oxford in command; to defend it on the right wing he positioned Gilbert Talbot, and on the left wing in truth he placed John Savage. He himself, relying on the aid of Thomas Stanley, followed with one company of horsemen and a few foot-soldiers. For all in all the number of soldiers was scarcely 5,000, not counting the Stanleyites of whom about 3,000 were in the battle under the leadership of William Stanley. The king’s forces were at least twice as many.

'There was a marsh between them, which Henry deliberately left on his right, to serve his men as a defensive wall. In doing this he simultaneously put the sun behind him. The king, as soon as he saw the enemy advance past the marsh, ordered his men to charge. Suddenly raising a great shout they attacked first with arrows, and their opponents, in no wise holding back from the fight, returned the fire fiercely. When it came to close quarters, however, the dealing was done with swords.

'the earl of Oxford, afraid that in the fighting his men would be surrounded by the multitude, gave out the order through the ranks that no soldier should go more than ten feet from the standards. When in response to the command all the men massed together and drew back a little from the fray, their opponents, suspecting a trick, took fright and broke off from fighting for a while. In truth many, who wished the king damned rather than saved, were not reluctant to do so, and for that reason fought less stoutly. Then the earl of Oxford in the one part, with tightly grouped units, attacked the enemy afresh, and the others in the other part pressing together in wedge formation renewed the battle.

'When Richard learnt, first from spies, that Henry was some way off with a few armed men. . . and then, as the latter drew nearer, recognised him more certainly from his standards. Inflamed with anger, he spurred his horse, and rode against him from the other side, beyond the battle-line. Henry saw Richard come upon him, and since all hope of safety lay in arms, he eagerly offered himself for the contest. In the first charge Richard killed several men; toppled Henry’s standard, along with the standard-bearer William Brandon; contended with John Cheney, a man of surpassing bravery, who stood in his way, and thrust him to the ground with great force; and made a path for himself through the press of steel.

'Then, William Stanley came in support with 3,000 men.. Indeed it was at this point that, with the rest of his men taking to their heels, Richard was slain fighting in the thickest of the press.

'Meanwhile the earl of Oxford, after a brief struggle, likewise quickly put to flight the remainder of the troops who fought in the front line, a great number of whom were killed in the rout. Yet many more, who supported Richard out of fear and not of their own will, purposely held off from the battle, and departed unharmed, as men who desired not the safety but the destruction of the prince whom they detested.

'About 1,000 men were slain, including from the nobility John duke of Norfolk, Walter Lord Ferrers, Robert Brackenbury, Richard Radcliffe and several others. Two days after at Leicester, William Catesby, lawyer, with a few associates, was executed. Among those that took to their heels, Francis Lord Lovell, Humphrey Stafford, with Thomas his brother, and many companions, fled into the sanctuary of St. John, near Colchester.’

Vergil notes King Richard’s troops were fighting feebly, sluggishly, some secretly deserting him, he was not unaware that the people hated him. Richard went into the battle wearing the royal crown over his helmet which made him an obvious target when he made his last desperate charge directly toward Henry. He also states that Richard could have saved himself if he had fled the battlefield but he seemed determine to either defeat Henry or die as king. Vergil concludes his account of the battle with Thomas Stanley crowning Henry.

Michael Bennett considers Polydore Vergil the last historian who can be regarded as a primary source for the events of 1485, a genuine attempt by the Italian to provide a historical account of the battle rather than a Chronicle entry. 

The Stanley Ballads
Poetic accounts of the battle of Bosworth are viewed with suspicion by historians and even considered fictitious by some. A collection of three poems known as ‘The Stanley Ballads’ are thought to have been composed shortly after the battle although they are not found in manuscripts until much later. It is fair to say that these ballads contain details not found elsewhere but also information collaborated by other sources suggesting they were taken from an oral tradition of the battle. The ballads are considered likely to have been composed by someone, possibly an eyewitness to the battle, with close connections to the Stanley family such as Humphrey Brereton, as the brothers Thomas, Lord Stanley, and Sir William Stanley feature as the central characters.

The earliest of these ballads is 'The Rose of England'  which is thought to have been composed shortly after the battle in the late 15th century, although it is only found in a mid- 17th century manuscript. In this account Henry Tudor is described as ‘The Rose’ who wins the crown of England from the ‘white boar’ Richard III, with the support of the Stanley brothers and Sir Rhys ap Thomas among others.

Elizabeth of York

‘The Song of Lady Bessy’ is said to have been written during the reign of Henry VII (1485–1509) with his wife Elizabeth of York the lady of the title. Elizabeth appeals to Lord Stanley to help her avoid marriage to her uncle Richard III. She claims she would rather kill herself than marry the murderer of her brothers (Edward and Richard, The Princes in the Tower). The Stanley brothers agree to support Henry Tudor, the earl of Richmond, on his return to England. Henry makes an oath to marry Elizabeth when he takes the throne. The ballad describes the plotting against Richard in the months leading up to the battle. 

The ballad provides a gory description of the death of Richard III stating his attackers beat his brains out and never left him until he was dead. His battered body was carried to Leicester, where Elizabeth chastises it for the murder of her brothers; “How like you the killing of my brethren dear? Welcome, gentle uncle, home”.

‘The Ballad of Bosworth Field’ provides the fullest poetic recollections of the battle, much of the detail is considered to be authentic. Said to have been written within living memory of the battle yet the earliest surviving copy is found in a mid-17th century manuscript. 

The ballad recalls how Lord Stanley provides the services of four of his best knights, Sir Robert Tunstall, Sir John Savage, Sir Hugh Persall and Sir Humphrey Stanley, to supplement Henry’s forces. The Stanleys withdrew to a mountain where they looked over the plain where the battle took place. On seeing the Stanley banner King Richard orders the execution of Lord Strange, the son of Lord Stanley who he held as hostage. However, the execution is delayed when the fighting commences. The ballad records Richard’s refusal to flee when the battle is lost and ends with the crowning of Henry on a hill. They then ride to Leicester and display the late King’s naked body for all to see.

The Location of the Battle
In his ‘Life of Henry VII’ (Vita Henrici Septimi), the French Augustinian friar, Bernard André, also known as Andreas, left a large blank in place of where his description of the battle of Bosworth should have been.

André followed Henry to England and would later tutor the king’s eldest son and heir Prince Arthur for five years. André wrote that he had heard accounts of the battle but as he had not witnessed the battle himself, presumably due to his blindness, he would not provide the date, the location or the order of battle and left the page blank at that point.

On reading the accounts above of contemporary and near contemporary source it can feel as though we still draw a blank on much of the battle, not least the location, just like André. As we have seen above in his proclamation, Henry VII said the battle was fought at Sandeford, the council of York referred to the field of Redemore, the Crowland account says the battle was fought near Merevale, John Rous tells us it was on the border of Warwickshire and Leicestershire, Valera tells us that it was somewhere near Coventry.

A generation after the event the village of Bosworth was the accepted location. The manuscript edition of Vergil’s Anglia Historia states the battle was fought at a place near Leicester ‘Bosworth’. The manuscript of the Great Chronicle of London claimed the battle happened in the fields at a village called Bosworth. The name Bosworth first occurred in print in Fabian’s Chronicles. Fabian, thought to also be the author of the Great Chronicle, recorded the battle taking place near a village in Leicestershire named Bosworth.

Later sources following the 16th century chroniclers Hollinshed and Hall, who had largely borrowed from Vergil yet corrupted the Italian’s account, established the site of the battle on Ambion Hill, close to the village of Sutton Cheney in Leicestershire. Indeed, the first mention of Ambion does not appear until Hollinshed’s Chronicle of 1577, in which he claimed King Richard pitched his army on a hill called ‘Anne Beame’. Antiquarians went on to identify ‘Richard’s Welll’ nearby and early Chroniclers such as Saxton identified ‘Richard’s Field’ on maps. Leicestershire County Council established a visitor centre and battle trail that grew up around the hill and this has been the accepted location of the battle until relatively recently.

On examining a massive archive on material relating to the battle of Bosworth Peter Foss determined that Ambion Hill had been the site of Richard’s camp and not the battle site. Foss discovered an edition of Fabian’s Chronicle in the National Library of Scotland where a 16th century hand has added a note in the margin correcting the name of the battle to ‘Redesmore heath’ as recorded by the council of York the very day after the battle. Evidently, Redemore was the name that contemporaries recognised as the battle site. But where was Redemore? 

On reassessing the documentation Foss argued that the battle site was a flat, formerly marshy area over a mile to the south-west, around Dadlington. However, the County Council insisted their visitor centre was in the correct location.

To resolve the situation the Battlefields Trust carried out a major archaeological project surveying the site over a four year period using field-walking, metal detecting and soil-sampling. The team leader Glenn Foard announced in 2010 that the actual site of the battle was nearly 2 miles from Ambion Hill, at a point close to the line of the old Roman road known as Fenn Lanes where the four parishes of Dadlington, Stoke Golding, Shenton and Upton come together, slightly further west than Foss had argued. 

The area of marsh, found in contemporary accounts as indicated by the name ‘Redemore’, identified by Foss as the location of the battle had dried up centuries before the battle. Using pollen analysis of the peat and Carbon-14 dating Foard identified another area of marsh that was extant in the medieval period on the next stream along Fenn Lanes, where the bulk of the archaeology was found. Was this Henry’s ‘Sandeford’?

The Bosworth Collection

The most significant finds were of cannonballs and lead shot, plus a silver boar emblem, that convinced Foard that he had identified the site of the battle. The 33 (possibly 34) projectiles ranging from 20mm to 97mm diameter unearthed across Fenn Lanes is the largest number ever found on a medieval battlefield.

Apart from The Act of Attainder issued by Henry’s parliament in November 1485 which states Richard’s army used guns among their weaponry, the only other authority on the battle that mentions artillery is Molinet who notes that to avoid Richard’s artillery fire Tudor’s army attacked the flank of Richard’s vanguard.

The apparently unreliable Stanley ballads also mention the artillery used at Bosworth; ‘The Song of Lady Bessy’ references the fierce guns and ‘The Ballad of Bosworth Field’ claims that Richard had 7 score Serpentines chained together with a similar number of Bombards and harquebusiers, soldiers equipped with a portable type of long gun.

The Bosworth Boar

The silver boar emblem, barely an inch across, was likely worn by a member of Richard’s close retinue, perhaps a member of his personal bodyguard, and has been associated with the King’s last charge, reported as indicating ‘the exact spot where Richard died’. 

Works Consulted:
Michael Bennett, The Battle of Bosworth, Sutton, 1993.
David Cohen, Battles of the Wars of the Roses, Pen & Sword, 2022.
Glenn Foard and Anne Curry Bosworth 1485: A Battlefield Rediscovered, Oxbow, 2022
Peter Foss, The Field of Redemore: Battle of Bosworth, 1485, Kairos Press, 1998.
Peter Hammond, Richard II and the Bosworth Campaign, Pen & Sword, 2013.
Mike Ingram, Bosworth 1485: A Battle of Steel, The History Press, 2022.
Michael Jones, Bosworth: Psychology of a Battle, John Murray publishers, 2014.
A L Rowse, Bosworth Field and the Wars of The Roses, Wordsworth, 1998.
Chris Skidmore, Bosworth: The Birth of the Tudors, Phoenix, 2014.

* * *