The Last Days of Richard III and the Fate of His DNA (34 page)

  
5
. There is certainly no source earlier than the 1920s for this unlikely story, which appears to have been invented by the ‘Fellowship of the White Boar' (later the Richard III Society) to provide an ecclesiastical focus for modern commemorations. It is regrettable that Sutton Cheney church was chosen, since nearby Dadlington church has an
authentic
historic connection with the battle. In the words of Henry VIII's chantry licence of 1511, Dadlington is specified as the church ‘to Þe wheche Þe bodyes or bones of the men sleyne in Þe seyde feelde beth broght and beryed': TNA, C 82/367, quoted in Foss,
The Field of Redemore
, p. 40.

  
6
. 
Crowland
, pp. 180–81.

  
7
. BL, Add. MS 12060, ff. 19–20, as quoted in Foss,
The Field of Redemore
, p. 54. See also R.M. Warnicke, ‘Sir Ralph Bigod: a loyal servant to King Richard III',
Ric.
6 (1982–84), pp. 299–303. It should be noted that Morley was an old man in 1554, while Sir Ralph Bigod had died in 1515. It is also worth noting that similar tales exist relating to the losers of other battles, including Agincourt and Coutrai (see, for example, J.W. Verkaik, ‘King Richard's Last Sacrament',
Ric.
9, [1991–93], pp. 359–60).

  
8
. Soc. Ant., accession no. 446. The measurements are those given on the Society of Antiquaries object file, and have not been checked.

  
9
. Sharp's drawing of the crucifix, made in 1793, shows no damage at these extremities, but Sharp may simply have reinstated the missing sections of foliation in his drawing.

10
. Oman describes the decoration on the reverse of the roundels as ‘the Yorkist “sun in splendour”'. C. Oman, ‘English medieval base metal church plate',
Archaeological Journal
, vol. 119, 1962, p. 200. However, the Bosworth Crucifix is not unique in having ‘suns' on the back of its roundels. The very similar Lamport Crucifix (now in the treasury of Peterborough Cathedral) also has them, while other similar crucifixes have single or double roses in these positions.

11
. J. Ashdown-Hill, ‘The Bosworth Crucifix',
Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological & Historical Society
, vol. 78 (2004), pp. 83–96.

12
. TNA, C 82/367 (Henry VIII's licence for a chantry for the battlefield dead at Dadlington church, 24 August 1511) refers to ‘Bosworth feld otherwise called Dadlyngton feld': Foss,
The Field of Redemore
, p. 39. Only a small number of burials has actually so far been discovered at Dadlington.

13
. C. Ross,
The Wars of the Roses, a concise history
, London, 1976, p. 131.

14
. Ross,
The Wars of the Roses
, p. 131.

15
. 
Crowland
, pp. 180–81 implies that he rose at dawn. On 22 August 2009 the sun rose at 5.57 am BST. However, in the fifteenth century the medieval (Julian) calendar then in use was nine days behind the modern (Gregorian) calendar. Thus we actually need to consider the time of sunrise on 31 August, which in 2009 was at 6.12 am BST:
www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/astronomy.html?n=136&month=8&year=2009&obj=sun&afl=-11&day=1
(consulted May 2009).

16
. Fifteenth-century custom may have been less strict regarding the use of correct liturigal colours than has subsequently been the case: see Θ, subsection 5.9.

17
. Of the possible introits for a mass celebrated in honour of martyrs, one included the following words from Psalm 20 (in the enumeration of the Vulgate), which may also have figured in Richard III's coronation service:
Quoniam praevenisti eum in benedictionibus dulcedinis: posuisti in capite eius coronam de lapide pretioso.
[For you have gone before him with blessings of sweetness: you have set on his head a crown of precious stones.]

18
. Ashdown-Hill, ‘Bosworth Crucifix', p. 85.

19
. Ellis/Vergil, p. 223.

20
. Lord Strange undoubtedly survived. However, there is no proof that the execution was ever actually ordered.

21
. See Map 1: The Battle of Bosworth.

22
. About 9 am.

23
. It is doubtful whether Richard could have actually seen Henry's features, and in any case, he had probably never seen him before. He would have recognised him by the standard he was displaying.

24
. 
Il vint a tout sa bataille, lequelle estoit estimee plus de XVM homes, en criant: ces traictres francois aujour'uy sont cause de la perdition de nostre royaume.
Jones,
Bosworth 1485
, p. 222. This evidence does, however, seem to be at variance with the ‘traditional' account of Richard's cavalry charge.

25
. Jones,
Bosworth
1485, pp. 194–95.

26
. Jones,
Bosworth 1485
, pp. 196–97.

27
. Which Stanley was in command depends on whether or not Lord Stanley himself was present (see above). Both Vergil and
Crowland
claim that he was but, as we have seen, Lord Stanley himself suggested otherwise.

28
. Ellis/Vergil, p. 224.

29
. See
Beloved Cousyn
, p. 115.

30
. TNA, C 82/367, 24 August 1511.

31
. Williams, ‘The Portuguese Connection …', p. 142; Vasconcellio,
Anacephalaeoses
, pp. 251–52. Williams refers incorrectly to the page numbers of Vasconcellio's text.

9. ‘A Sorry Spectacle'

  
1
. Polydore Vergil, as quoted in C.J. Billson,
Mediaeval Leicester
, Leicester, 1920, p. 180.

  
2
. The precise distance would depend, of course, on the point of departure.

  
3
. Ellis/Vergil, p. 226.

  
4
.  The sun probably set at about 7.55 pm that evening: see
www.canterbury-weather.co.uk/sun/ukmap.php?d=31&m=8&y=2009
(consulted May 2009).

  
5
. By the late fifteenth century most churches had more than one bell: a small
Sanctus
bell, which was rung at mass to signal the consecration, and also a ‘great bell' for Requiems and anniversaries. Some churches may have had a third bell for ringing the
Angelus.
Those which did not would have used the
Sanctus
bell for this purpose.

  
6
.  Kendall R3, p. 369. See also Speede's account (appendix 4).

  
7
. Kendall was probably misled by the large nineteenth-century stone plaque erected near the river to commemorate Richard III by Benjamin Broadbent.

  
8
. Kendall's account of the exposure of Richard's body is based on the rather casual wording of Vergil (see below).

  
9
. In a subsequent footnote he goes on to recount the very dubious tale of the exhumation of Richard III's remains at the time of the Dissolution as though this were an established fact, which is certainly not the case.

10
. This interpretation is based on
Crowland
, pp. 194–95. However, the relevant passage does not, in fact, say that Henry antedated his accession, and there is no evidence to support such a claim in the surviving acts of attainder against Richard III's supporters.

11
. C.R. Cheney,
Handbook of Dates
, RHS, 1945, reprinted Cambridge, 1996, p. 23.

12
. Ellis/Vergil, pp. 220–26;
Crowland
, pp. 178–83.

13
. Quoted in Billson,
Mediaeval Leicester
, p. 180. See also Ellis/Vergil, p. 226.

14
. 
Crowland
, pp. 182–83. It is possible (but not certain) that there is a gap in the text, as tentatively indicated.

15
. D. Baldwin, ‘King Richard's Grave in Leicester',
Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society
, vol. 60 (1986), pp. 21–24 (p. 21).

16
. For details of John Howard's burial, see
Beloved Cousyn
, pp. 126–30. Also, J. Ashdown-Hill, ‘The opening of the tombs of the Dukes of Richmond and Norfolk, Framlingham, April 1841: Darby's account',
Ric.
18 (2008), pp. 100–07.

17
. 
Eleanor
, p. 184.

18
. 
Crowland, pp.
182–83.

19
. Examination of Richard III's skeleton revealed post mortem injuries to the face and to the right side, and evidence of a sword having been thrust up the anus. Obscene treatment of defeated and dead enemies has occured throughout the history of warfare. Modern examples were reported as recently as 2012.

20
. If this detail is true, it can hardly have been done other than by Henry ‘Tudor”s express command.

21
. Throsby,
Leicester
, p. 62, contends that the fact that
Blanc Sanglier
accompanied Richard's body was at least a concession of some sort on the part of Henry VII.

22
. Although Throsby,
Leicester
, p. 62 (following an earlier writer) suggests that the rope was ‘more to insult the helpless dead than to fasten him to the horse', it is interesting to note that the second possibility had at least been considered.

23
.  C.W.C. Oman,
The Art of War in the Middle Ages, ad 378–1515
, New York, 1953, pp. 78, 103.

24
. C. Weightman,
Margaret of York
, Gloucester, 1989, p. 102.

25
. 
Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII
, vol. 1(i), no. 2246, p. 1006, citing Lambeth MS 306, f. 204.

26
. J. Ridley,
Henry VIII
, London, 1984, p. 72.

27
. ‘The 21st [September], confirmation of the news of the defeat of James IV, by a messenger, who brought the Scotch King's plaid [
paludiamentum seu tunicam
] with the royal arms upon it.'
Letters and Papers … Henry VIII
, vol. 1(i), no. 2391, pp. 1060–61.

28
. Jones,
Bosworth 1485
, p. 160.

29
. Benson, ed.,
The Riverside Chaucer
, p. 39 (G. Chaucer,
The Canterbury Tales
, ‘The Knight's Tale', lines 1001–08).

30
. As with the case of James IV, it has been debated whether the bodies displayed as those of Edward II and Richard II were the authentic remains of those kings, but this point is not particularly significant in the present context.

31
. This part of the plan was by no means always successful, of course, and royal martyr cults did tend to spring up around the royal bodies, in spite of their discreet burials.

10. The Franciscan Priory

  
1
. 
VCH, Leicestershire, vol. 2
, 1954, pp. 33–35.

  
2
. TNA, C1/206/69 recto, lines 4 and 5. For the precise words, see chapter 11 below.

  
3
. Ellis/Vergil, p. 226.

  
4
. For an explanation of the differences, see J. Ashdown-Hill,
Mediaeval Colchester's Lost Landmarks
, Derby, 2009, p. 65.

  
5
. See above: Kendall.

  
6
. As we shall see shortly, Richard was buried in the choir of the priory church: a part of the building normally accessible only to the friars themselves.

  
7
. Ashdown-Hill,
Mediaeval Colchester
, p. 74.

  
8
.  My italics. R. Baker,
Chronicle of the Kings of England
, London, 1684, p. 235. For Speede's text see below, appendix 4.

  
9
. Green,
Legends
, p. 22, asserts that the friars ‘begged for the body', but as usual, she cites no source. The guardian (religious superior) of the Leicester Greyfriars in 1485 may have shared the dead king's name. The guardian in office in 1479 had certainly been called Richard: VCH,
Leicestershire
, vol. 2, pp. 32–35 and n. 19.

10
. Richard III's parents had employed a Franciscan chaplain, and later his sister, Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy, chose to be buried in the Franciscan conventual church in Mechelen.

11
.  Stow,
Annals
(ed. 1615), p. 327, cited in W. Page (ed.),
VCH
, London, vol. 1, Section 12, London 1909.

12
. Accounts suggesting that Richard III was buried in a stone coffin date only from the seventeenth century and are anachronistic (see below). When his body was excavated in 2012, it was clear that he had been buried only in a shroud.

13. See above: description of Queen Anne Neville's funeral rites.

14
. 
Calendar of State Papers – Venetian, vol 1, 1202–1509
, p. 156.

11. ‘King Richard's Tombe'

  
1
. BL, Add. MS 7099, f. 129.

  
2
. By comparison, Henry VI, for example, had had to wait thirteen years for his new tomb.

  
3
. Will of Cecily Neville, dowager Duchess of York: Nicholls and Bruce, eds,
Wills from Doctors' Commons
, p. 8.

  
4
. TNA, C1/206/69
recto
, lines 4 and 5.

  
5
. He witnessed a deed on 10 August 1490: Nottinghamshire Archives, DD/P/CD/13. See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Mayor_of_Nottingham
(consulted June 2009).

  
6
. R. Edwards, ‘King Richard's Tomb at Leicester', Ric. 3 (no. 50, Sept. 1975), pp. 8–9, citing PRO [TNA], C1/206/69. This is a record of a chancery case brought by Rauf Hill of Nottingham against Walter Hylton, alleging the fraudulent insertion of Rauf's name in indentures between Hylton and Sir Reynold Bray and Sir Thomas Lovell, concerning the making of a tomb for Richard III. About one-third of this manuscript is now virtually unreadable. The supposed figure of £50 for the cost of the tomb is an interpretation advanced by a previous researcher – who may indeed have been able to decipher more of the text than is now legible. However, my examination of the manuscript did not succeed in substantiating this figure, though two separate references to ‘xv li' and ‘xx li' respectively were found.