What we do know is that the two boys lived quietly in exile for about eight weeks, largely ignorant of what was happening in England. Probably they heard no details of the Lancastrian victory at the Second Battle of St Albans, nor of the Yorkist victory of their elder brother, Edward, Earl of March, at Mortimer’s Cross. They were not present on Monday 2 March, when Edward and Warwick entered London in triumph, nor did they witness their brother’s proclamation as King Edward IV on Wednesday 4 March.
The news of Edward’s accession to the throne on 4 March was known at Bruges on the 9th or slightly earlier, but apparently did not make Philip the Good change his attitude towards the ‘children of York’.21
Only after Edward’s bloody victory in a snowstorm at Towton, on 29 March (Palm Sunday), did the Lancastrian cause finally and obviously lie in ruins. News of the Yorkist victory was ‘rumoured at Calais on 3 April’.22 The rumour reached Duke Philip’s court on the same day (Good Friday), and this did change his attitude to George and Richard. A week later, on Friday 10 April, it was being reported in London ‘that the Duke of Burgundy is treating the brothers of the King with respect’.23
The rumours of a Yorkist triumph had probably been transmitted to the new king’s young brothers very soon after they reached the ducal court – that is to say about Easter – but we have no information about how they received these tidings. Nevertheless, within a few days, George and Richard were transported to Sluys on Duke Philip’s orders, where they arrived on Thursday 9 April, accompanied by an escort of twenty-three attendants. The party was accommodated at an inn called the Teste d’Or, kept by one Baudouin du Moustier.24 By Sunday 12 April, one week after Easter, firm confirmation of their elder brother’s victory finally reached Bruges. About Thursday 16 April George and Richard moved from Sluys to Bruges, where, shortly afterwards (perhaps on Sunday 19 April 1461), Duke Philip the Good finally received the now highly significant young Yorkist princes in person, entertaining them to dinner.
Interestingly, Burgundian observers who encountered George and Richard at about this time made errors in estimating their ages. In reality, George was approximately eleven and a half years old, while Richard was about eight and a half. However, the chronicler Jehan de Wavrin,25 having seen the two young Yorkist princes, guessed their ages as 9 and 8 respectively.26 This suggests that George, who apparently looked at least two years younger than his true chronological age and who only appeared to be about a year older than Richard, was probably of below average height. Richard, on the other hand, whose apparent height had evidently not yet been noticeably affected by his late-onset scoliosis, was perceived in 1461 to be of about the correct average height for his chronological age.
Modern (twenty-first-century) average height measurements for boys are said to be:
8 years 4ft 3in (129.54cm)
9 years 4ft 5in (134.62cm)
10 years 4ft 7in (139.70cm)
11 years 4ft 9in (144.78cm)
12 years 5ft (152.40cm)27
Recent research has indicated that the difference in height between medieval and modern individuals was quite small. ‘Medieval English men and women were only about an inch shorter than those measured in 1984 … indicating that nutritional status was sufficient for near modern height.’28 All this would suggest that in the spring of 1461 George was some five inches below the height expected for a boy of his age, and may have been only an inch or two taller than his younger brother, Richard. The reason for George’s low stature is unknown, but one possibility is that he inherited this characteristic from his mother, who has been described as ‘a woman of small stature but of moche honour and high parentage’.29 Some modern historians have tried to suggest that George’s father was ‘short and small of face’,30 but no contemporary source is cited to support this conjecture. In fact, in a poem of about May 1460, York was described as ‘manly and mytfulle’,31 implying that he had a strapping figure of above average height and build.
The fact that George was of below average height has not really been noted by previous writers, but it may have been a significant factor in determining aspects of George’s personality and conduct. People of below average height are typically reported to encounter problems that include ‘lower social competence, increased behaviour problems, and low self-esteem … there is stigma attached to height, and thus short people are seen as easier to dominate’.32 The last of these points can sometimes engender an over-compensatory reaction, inclining the short man to be particularly self-assertive and possibly even aggressive. These are certainly features that appear to have comprised aspects of George’s character during his adult life.
In the wake of the new-found friendship between the houses of York and Burgundy, there were rumours that there may have been some discussion in 1461 of a possible union between one of the princes – most probably George – and Marie of Burgundy, daughter of the Count of Charolais, and Duke Philip the Good’s granddaughter.33 If so, nothing came of the idea at this point – though, as we shall see, the project was to resurface subsequently – and on more than one occasion.
On Wednesday 22 April the Duke of Burgundy left Bruges to attend the feast of his chivalric Order of the Golden Fleece at St Omer.34 George and Richard remained in Bruges for two more days at the duke’s expense. On Friday 24 April they set off, travelling westwards 22 miles (35.4km) to the coastal town of Nieuwpoort. On Saturday 25 April their party journeyed approximately 18 miles (29km) to the town of Dunkirk. On Sunday 26 April there seems to have been little serious travelling. The two boys and their attendants made no further progress westwards, but instead rode south some 5 miles (8.5km) from Dunkirk to Bergues, possibly to spend their weekly holy day visiting the abbey and shrine of St Winoc. Winoc, the founder of Bergues’ Benedictine abbey, was said to have been a king’s son of the Dark Ages, and of British royal blood. He might, therefore, have been seen as an appropriate local patron whose intercession the two Yorkist princes would do well to seek on the eve of their journey back to England. On Monday the party resumed its westward journey, covering some 20 miles (32km), to Gravelines. Finally, on Tuesday 28 April they completed their land journey by riding the last 15 miles (24km) from Gravelines to the English town of Calais, which they no doubt approached via the English-held outpost of Marck.35
From Calais, in due course George and Richard set sail for England, which they reached about the beginning of May, landing possibly at Margate. A day or so later they were greeted by a feast held in their honour at Canterbury. Seven years later, in 1468, the wedding procession of their sister, Margaret, took approximately a week to travel from London to Margate, spending nights on the way at Stratford, Dartford, Rochester, Sittingbourne and Canterbury.36 It is reasonable to suppose that George and Richard’s journey in May 1461 would have taken about the same length of time – travelling, of course, in the opposite direction. The two princes probably reached London, therefore, about the end of the first week, or the beginning of the second week in May.
NOTES
1. http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/the-death-of-a-parent-healing-childrens-grief/ (May 2013).
2. Authorities vary slightly in setting the age parameters of this middle stage of child development between 6 and 11 (http://kidshealth.org/parent/positive/talk/death.html – consulted February 2013; http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001909.htm – consulted February 2013).
3. http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/the-death-of-a-parent-healing-childrens-grief/ (consulted February 2013), present author’s emphasis.
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiopathic (consulted June 2013).
5. http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/scoliosis/causes.html (consulted June 2013).
6. http://www.scoliosis.org/forum/showthread.php?5810-Scoliosis-caused-by-Injury (consulted February 2013). Also ‘scoliosis can be caused by trauma’ – http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000–12–21/news/0012220023_1_scoliosis-curvature-spinal (consulted June 2013).
7. We are not certain what route wa
s taken on this occasion.
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age (consulted January 2013).
9. In 1483, for example. See J. Ashdown-Hill, Richard III’s ‘Beloved Cousyn’, John Howard and the House of York, (Stroud, 2009), p.163, note 12.
10. My own calculations, based on the published data, show that the date of the fifteenth-century grape harvest (1400–99) was on average 25.56 (twenty-six) days after 1 September. In 1459 the harvest took place thirty-six days after 1 September – ten days later than the average for the century, but in 1460 the harvest was twenty-one days after 1 September – close to the norm. See: Chuine, I., Yiou, P., Viovy, N., Seguin, B., Daux, V., and Le Roy Ladurie, E., Burgundy Grape Harvest Dates and Spring-Summer Temperature Reconstruction IGBP PAGES/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology, Data Contribution Series #2005–007, NOAA/NGDC Paleoclimatology Program, Boulder CO, USA (ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/historical/france/burgundy2004.txt).
11. Kendall, Richard the Third, p.37, citing three contemporary sources.
12. The weather in this current year, 2013, when once again there was snow on the ground on Palm Sunday – 24 March – may help us to imagine the situation.
13. ‘Milan: 1461’, Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts Existing in the Archives and Collections of Milan: vol. 1, 1385–1618 ed. A. B. Hinds (London: HMSO, 1912), pp.37–106 (http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=92248 – consulted May 2013) [MB].
14. Ibid. See also ‘Venice: 1461–1470’, Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts Relating to English Affairs Existing in the Archives of Venice and in Other Libraries of Northern Italy vol. 1: 1202–1509 (London: HMSO, 1864), pp.92–126. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=94096 (consulted May 2013).
15. Possibly including John Skelton – though there is no direct evidence on this point. See Kendall, Richard the Third, p.41.
16. L. Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, Ric. vol. VI, no. 81 (1983), pp.182–9, p.185, translated from the original Latin.
17. Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, p.185.
18. Weightman, Margaret of York, p.19; Kendall, Richard the Third, p.42.
19. Myers/Buck, p.8; Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, p.184.
20. For example, Buck states that George and Richard were sent to the Low Countries to stay with ‘their Aunt the Lady Margaret, Duchesse of Burgundy’!
21. Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, p.187.
22. Ibid, citing CSPM, pp.67–8, no. 83.
23. Ibid, citing CSPM, p.67, no. 82.
24. Ibid, citing M. R. Thielemans, Bourgogne et Angleterre, relations politiques et économiques entre les Pays-Bas Bourguignons et l’Angleterre (Bruxelles, 1966), n.1, p.379, n.80.
25. Traditionally, in English histories his surname has tended to be spelt WAURIN. However, the name is a toponym, and the modern spelling of the town in northern France from which it is derived is WAVRIN. Therefore, this is the spelling that will be used here.
26. Wavrin wrote: ‘le roy Edouard avoit deux jennes frères, lun eagie de neuf ans et lautre de huit ans’ (Wavrin, p.357). Another observer thought George was 12 and Richard 11 (CSP-M, p.73). This also suggests that the two boys were of similar height despite their age difference, that they looked as though there was probably only a year separating them and that Richard was taller for his age than George.
27. See: http://www.fpnotebook.com/endo/exam/hghtmsrmntinchldrn.htm; http://www.teaching-english-in-japan.net/conversion/feet_inches (both consulted February 2013).
28. Felinah Memo Hazara Khan-ad-Din, ‘Old Age, Height and Nutrition: Common Misconceptions about Medieval England’ (2003). Available at: http://sirguillaume.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Old_Age-Height-Nutrition.pdf (consulted February 2013). Present writer’s emphasis.
29. Weightman, Margaret of York, p.168, citing H. Ellis, ed., E. Hall, Chronicle etc., (London, 1809), p.472. Edward Hall was born in about 1498, so he cannot have seen Cecily, who died in 1495, but he could have spoken to people who had seen her.
30. M. K. Jones, Psychology of a Battle, Bosworth 1485 (Stroud, 2002, 2003), p.83.
31. F. Madden, ‘Political Poems of the Reigns of Henry VI and Edward IV’, Archaeologia vol. 29 (1842), p.334.
32. J. Wise, ‘How We Measure Up: Height and Psychology’, http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f03/web2/jwise.html (consulted February 2013). Errors in spelling have been corrected.
33. Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, p.188.
34. Ibid.
35. For details of the princes’ route, see Visser-Fuchs, ‘Richard in Holland, 1461’, p.188. The day-by-day details of the journey have been inferred by the present writer from the towns named on the route, and from the dates of their departure from Bruges and their arrival at Calais.
36. Weightman, Margaret of York, pp.45–7.
HEIR TO THE THRONE
In London, the dowager Duchess of York and her unmarried daughter, Margaret, are thought to have been residing at Baynard’s Castle during the first days of the reign of the new king, Edward IV. Initially, when they arrived home from the Low Countries, George and Richard probably joined their mother and sister there, because the new king, their elder brother, was absent from the capital, and was not therefore on hand to make other arrangements for housing them.
In the long run, however, different arrangements were destined to be put in place. After all, George and Richard were now persons of considerable dynastic significance. Indeed, George, astonishingly, now found himself transformed from a virtually unknown child into a person of national importance. In the new order he was officially recognised as the heir presumptive to the throne of England. Edward IV was as yet unmarried – at least officially – and had not yet fathered an heir apparent to inherit his newly acquired throne.
It was probably shortly after his two younger brothers returned from the Low Countries to England – and before he had welcomed them back – that Edward IV contracted a secret marriage with Lady Eleanor Talbot, daughter of the late Earl of Shrewsbury by his second wife, Lady Margaret Beauchamp. Eleanor, whom evidence suggests was a beautiful brunette,1 had probably been born in February or March 1436. Thus she was a little older than Edward. She had been married at an early age to Sir Thomas Butler, son and heir of Lord Sudeley, but Thomas’s death in 1459 had left her a young and childless widow. Although she maintained a good relationship with her father-in-law,2 Eleanor eventually left the Warwickshire manors she had received from him as her jointure, and moved to East Anglia, where she spent her last years within, or in close proximity to, the household of her sister, Elizabeth.3 Both Eleanor and Elizabeth Talbot appear to have been deeply religious ladies.4
Edward may have first met Eleanor during the summer of 1460, before he gained the crown, as he was with John Howard in Suffolk at that time, and Eleanor may perhaps have been staying with her sister, and with Howard’s cousin the Duke of Norfolk, at Framlingham, in the same county.5 Accounts survive telling us that when Edward met Eleanor, he became infatuated with her, but the virtuous and high-born Eleanor absolutely rejected any idea of becoming Edward’s mistress. As a result, the deeply smitten Edward subsequently contracted a secret marriage with her. This secret wedding must have taken place after Edward became king, because Canon Robert Stillington – previously a servant of Henry VI’s government – was reportedly present.6 One account suggests that Stillington merely witnessed the contract. Another version reports that he acted as the clerical celebrant – clearly implying that although the marriage was secret it employed the church’s formal liturgy.7 The fact of Stillington’s priesthood makes it inherently more likely that he acted as celebrant. Moreover, according to Catholic teaching, the priestly celebrant at a wedding is, in fact, merely a witness. (Since the sacrament is self-conferring, the true celebrants are the couple involved.) Hence there is no contradiction between the two accounts.
Many historians have expressed doubts as to whether a sec
ret marriage between Edward and Eleanor ever really took place. Their attitude has been greatly influenced by Henry VII’s subsequent careful and systematic rewriting of history in the ‘Tudor’ interest. But Henry VII was by no means impartial on this point. His urgent need was to represent his bride, Elizabeth of York (daughter of Edward IV’s later ‘marriage’ to Elizabeth Woodville), as the Yorkist heiress. Therefore Henry made a very determined effort to suppress any evidence that Edward IV had married Eleanor. What motivated him was the fact that the Talbot marriage would have made Edward IV’s subsequent Woodville marriage bigamous – with the result that all Elizabeth Woodville’s children by the king would have been illegitimate.
Despite Henry VII’s later enactments, the fact remains that the marriage of Edward IV and Eleanor Talbot was officially recognised by Parliament in 1484. Indeed, in parts of Europe free from the influence of ‘Tudor’ political correctness, their marriage continued to be recognised until at least the 1530s.8 In this book the marriage of Edward and Eleanor is accepted because, as we shall see, it makes the ultimate execution of George, Duke of Clarence more comprehensible.
The most likely venue for a secret marriage between Edward and Eleanor is somewhere in the vicinity of Warwick – most probably either Eleanor’s manor of Fenny Compton or her manor of Burton Dassett – and the most plausible date is around 8 June 1461.9 It is quite likely that the marriage took place at one of the two manor houses – just as Edward’s subsequent wedding with Elizabeth Woodville was contracted at her family manor (see below).10
Though Edward probably married Eleanor in early June 1461, this was not made public. Also, the king remained without a son and heir. Thus, for the time being, Edward IV’s brother George was unquestionably the heir presumptive to the throne, and therefore a personage of great importance in the eyes of the king. It was perhaps on Tuesday 12 June – or more probably on Wednesday 13 June (approximately one month after their arrival in London) that George and Richard were formally received by their elder brother.11 The delay was simply due to the fact that, up until this point, Edward had been slowly travelling back from Newcastle, riding via Durham, York, Lincoln, Coventry and Warwick, and probably marrying and bedding Eleanor Talbot on the way. On Tuesday 12 June he reached his Palace of Sheen. But it may not have been until the following day that Edward IV had the leisure to send for his two younger brothers.
The Third Plantagenet: George, Duke of Clarence, Richard III's Brother Page 8
