ISSN 0308 4337

Ricardian Bulletin

Magazine of the Richard III Society

March 2013

2 From our Royal Patron2 From the Chairman4 Lesley Boatwright: obituary, tributes and

legacy8 Society news and notices12 Future Society events13 Society reviews14 Contributions to the Bulletin15 Other news, reviews and events20 Research news23–45 Looking for Richard:23 The evidence from the Greyfriars dig27 Who killed Richard III? The debate

continues Lynda Pidgeon29 In at the death Ragnar Magnusson30 Leicester City Council and the search for

King Richard III Sarah Levitt32 Celebrations down under Rob Smith and

Dorothea Preis33 The discovery of Richard III– a review of

Channel 4’s ‘The King in the Car Park’Kenneth Hillier

34 Flavour of the month Richard Van Allen35 That was the week that was Wendy

Moorhen37 A day in Leicester Kay Fletcher38 The king in the car park crowned: initial

reflections on the press and televisioncoverage Bruce Watson and GeoffreyWheeler

44 On the lighter side? Satirical swipes andgraveyard humour Geoffrey Wheeler

Centre colour section (between pp 40 and 41)i. The face of a king; A tomb fit for a kingii The skeletoniii The remains at the Greyfriars digiv The Blue Boar Inn; Recent Ricardian

finds46 The Man Himself:

Richard III – a psychological portrait Mark Lansdale and Julian Boon

57 Aymer Vallance: an early Ricardian John Saunders

60 A series of remarkable ladies. 3. JadwigaJagellonka, Duchess of Bavaria Rita Diefenhart-Schmitt

61 A character reference for Richard III froman unlikely source Mark Dobson

63 The Thameside Boar – another ‘dubiousdevice’ Geoffrey Wheeler

66 Ricardian crossword 3 by Sanglier67 Correspondence70 Book reviews and notices72 The Barton Library73 Branches and Groups77 New members79 Recently deceased members79 Obituaries80 Calendar80 Late news

The Ricardian Bulletin is produced by the Bulletin Editorial Committee. © Richard III Society 2013.Individual contributions and illustrations © the contributors except where otherwise stated.

Printed by Micropress Printers Ltd. For details on submitting future contributions, please see p. 14

Bulletin and Ricardian Back NumbersBack issues of The Ricardian and the Bulletin are available from Judith Ridley. If you are interested in obtaining any

back numbers, please contact Mrs Ridley to establish whether she holds the issue(s) in which you are interested. For contact details see inside back cover of the Bulletin

RRiiccaarrddiiaannBBuulllleettiinn

Contents

March 2013

1

From the Chairman

Since we have been on tenterhooks following last September’s discoveryof human remains on the site of the Greyfriars dig, to say that these past

months have been momentous is something of an understatement. However,in February, the remains were confirmed as being those of King Richard and,as I wrote in the Bulletin Extra, this is historic and poignant. Once again, Ithank all involved in the project to find Richard III and all those involved inthe dig and its aftermath.

The Society has received much publicity as a result of these events as well as a goodly influx ofnew members. Let me take this opportunity to give a warm welcome to those who have recentlyjoined us. Welcome to you all.

The events of the past six months have inevitably created a lot of work for the voluntary officersof the Society who, in many instances, have been working almost full time on Society business. Asfor me, my wife is beginning to forget what I look like; I’m either at work or at the computer! I mustthank everyone for their commitment and seemingly tireless work.

Some members have suggested that we have been ‘keeping you in the dark’, by not telling youeverything we knew when we knew it. I’m sorry if people do think this but I can assure you it isn’tso. Unfortunately, while the dig was happening and while the scientific testing was being done, wewere left uninformed, too – Channel 4 made everyone directly involved sign non-disclosureagreements – even I wasn’t allowed to be told and in that respect, I was as frustrated as you. WhenI was allowed to be told of some of things towards the end, I was also made to sign a ‘gagging order’.Be assured, as soon as we know anything, we are passing it on – that’s why we issued the BulletinExtra as soon as we knew the results last month.

This issue of the Bulletin proper is another bumper one at 80 pages, the maximum that can be heldwithin the covers. There is full coverage of the results of the Greyfriars dig and the media frenzy thataccompanied it, including another colour insert. (I now know the meaning of the expression ‘a mediacircus’, by the way!) For The Man Himself we have an important piece from Leicester Universitygiving a psychological portrait of King Richard. It’s a long article but given its significance, we thinkthis is justified. It helps us to understand a little better the man behind the facial reconstruction. Wealso have our usual extensive range of news, reviews, comment and other features.

The obituary and tributes to Lesley Boatwright are a reminder that evidence-based research has

2

From our Royal Patron

The death of King Richard III marked the end of the era of thePlantagenets and the beginning of the Tudors. The exact fate of the

monarch’s body was open to speculation. Today it would seem thatspeculation can be laid to rest and the newly-identified remains can beexamined forensically and scientifically and conclusions reached as to themanner of the king’s death. Although such study cannot verify the storiesthat have been handed down to us over the centuries, it can at least give us

a clearer picture of the man for whom there have been many varied judgements, both biased andotherwise. The technical skill of those involved in this project should not be overlooked and specialpraise should go to the team of professionals who have brought more clarity to an important story inthe long history of the monarchy.

HRH Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, KG GCVO

3

always been the bedrock of the Society’s mission. At a time when Richard III’s reputation isreceiving so much attention, it is even more important to retain this balanced focus and, indeed, tostrengthen it. To this end, we are supporting the Research Committee in its endeavours to see throughto publication the many projects on which Lesley was working.

We now have a splendid new website which is the result of a lot of hard work by the teamresponsible and I would like to thank everyone involved. It has a fresh new look and considerablyimproved navigation and content; and there will be further improvements over the coming months.

Whilst recent months have, in many respects, been exhilarating, they have also been challenging,not least over where the king’s remains will be reinterred. The arguments have aroused much passionand have not been without controversy and misunderstanding. However, the decision has been madeand Leicester Cathedral will be the king’s final resting place, a decision that we must now respect.The choice of Leicester Cathedral will not please everyone, and I understand the feelings of thosewho said it should be York Minster. However, it is important that King Richard’s reinterment is notsurrounded by continuing controversy. His posthumous reputation has had more than enough of thatfor the past 500 years. The Society must not be seen to be squabbling over King Richard’s remains.Instead, we must all be grateful that he has been found and is now to receive the honour and dignitythat is due to an anointed English king. The Chapter of York Minster made its position clear with itsstatement that: ‘The Chapter supports the terms of the Ministry of Justice licence and the wish of theChapter of Leicester that Richard should be reinterred in Leicester Cathedral. The Chapter of Yorkcommends Richard to Leicester’s care and to the cathedral community’s prayers.’

The Society has put forward proposals and a design for a suitable tomb for King Richard inLeicester Cathedral (see the colour section in this issue, p. i) and, as we go to press, these are beingconsidered by the Cathedral Chapter and the Cathedral Fabric Advisory Committee, though the finaldecision will be made by the Cathedral Fabric Commission for England. The design commissionedfor the Society is for a free-standing table tomb and features Richard’s boar, the white rose for theHouse of York and the cross of St Cuthbert, this being a symbol of Richard’s piety. If built, the tombwill be made in a pale honey-coloured stone, the colour representing Richard’s emergence from theobscurity of the unknown grave into the light of recognition and honour. To date we have receivedenough donations to cover the costs involved and in the June Bulletin we will provide a full updateon the funding position together with news of any further developments.

As I write we are looking forward to the Leicester conference which we promoted in the BulletinExtra and is now fully booked. There will be a full report with photographs in June’s Bulletin.

An exceptional year lies ahead, with the prospect in the spring of 2014 of the reinterment of KingRichard’s remains. I promise we will try to keep members informed about the arrangements for thisevent. Unfortunately, at the moment, we know as much as the rest of you, i.e. nothing! In themeantime, I look forward to meeting many of you throughout the coming year.

Phil Stone

Arms of England lapel badge

An enamelled lapel badge, 24mm wide and 30mm long,depicting the Arms of England as used by Richard III. Thesearms are quarterly France Modern and England, i.e. showingthree golden fleurs-de-lys of France on a blue background andthree golden lions of England on a red background. Each badgeis in a presentation box.

Price £6.00 Postage UK £2.00, EU £3.00, RoW £3.50

Orders to our Sales Liaison Officer (details on inside backcover)

4

Lesley Boatwright: obituary,tributes and legacy

The obituaryThe death of Lesley Boatwright on 4 Octoberlast year left the Society bereft of a much-valuedmember and officer, and many bereft of a friend.

Lesley was born in Whitechapel in 1932 andgrew up in Watford, where she attended the localgrammar school. She was not encouraged to goon to university and so trained as a secretary,acquiring touch-typing and shorthand skills thatwere to be so valuable in later life. Hersecretarial career included a stint with the BBC,but it was learning that she really saw as herlife’s path and later in her 20s she secured aplace at King’s College London to read Classics.It was here that she honed her skills in Latin,building on a love for the language that shehadacquired through studying it at school. FromKing’s she went on to teach Latin and ancienthistory at Haberdashers’ Aske’s Hatcham Girl’sschool, where she remained for the rest of herworking life. She was popular with bothcolleagues and students, who appreciated herscholarly but far from conventional teachingstyle.

Her early historical interest was focused on the classical world and prehistory; only in later lifedid she come to study the medieval period. This interest blossomed following her retirement in 1989,and was greatly helped by a role she took up with The National Archives as their co-ordinator ofvolunteers, a role that was central to her post-retirement life and a contribution recognised with theaward of an MBE in 2002.

With her developing interest in medieval history it was perhaps inevitable that she would seek toimprove her skills by studying for relevant qualifications. This culminated in 2005 when she wasawarded a PhD in Medieval History for her study of the Chief Justice’s Roll of the 1286 Eyre toBuckinghamshire. The county had long been a focus of her interest, not least for family historyconnections which she researched with her usual accuracy and thoroughness. She also found time toedit transactions for the Buckinghamshire Record Society and to teach every summer at the KeeleUniversity Latin and Palaeography School, where her skills were admired and valued by fellowteachers and students alike.

Lesley was an active member of the Richard III Society for nearly 30 years, and in that timeinfluenced in a positive and enhancing way most aspects of our work. She was an excellent chair ofour visits committee, and a regular and enthusiastic participant on trips. A long-standing member ofthe London Branch, for many years up until her death she sat on the Executive Committee andbrought to it wisdom and ambition for the Society.

Most importantly Lesley was a key member of our research team, which benefited greatly fromher impeccable research standards, learning and organisational skills. Her learning was neverconceited; it was kind and generous, and willingly shared. Her first-class Latin and palaeographyskills have been indispensable to research initiatives such as the Wills Project; indeed her skills were

Lesley at her 80th birthday party: ‘a lovely lady,extremely knowledgeable, kind, witty and simplyfun to be with’.

5

often called upon by other historians of our period, so highly were they valued. Her work on wills,Eyres, and other records was motivated in part by her fascination with human behaviour asdocumented in archive material. This was also a reflection of her own humanity and interest in thelives of ordinary people as much as the better-known.

Lesley took over the editorship of the Ricardian Bulletin in 2006 and brought to it her usual highstandards and enthusiasm. It was a testament to her commitment and determination that shecompleted her work on last September’s issue despite being in the early stages of her illness.

Few Society events over the past 30 years were without Lesley’s presence, indeed she oftencommented that her Ricardian friends were more like family, and many would have reciprocated thatfeeling. Every year she helped out at our Bosworth marquee, spending hours a day on her feethappily engaging with the public and recruiting new members. In her final days she was made a vice-president of the Society: a small recognition for an immense contribution.

To her many friends she was the best of companions, particularly for those lucky enough to shareforeign holidays with her. She was a dedicated traveller, enjoying at least three overseas trips a year,and many of us will have happy memories of being with Lesley in museums, galleries and historicalruins of all kinds, and even happier ones of convivial meals with flowing conversation and theobligatorily good-quality red wine.

No record of Lesley’s life would be complete without mentioning her love of cats, her own andall others; a quality shared with many of her close friends. She was unashamedly a cat person.

One of her oldest friends recalled Lesley as ‘a lovely lady, extremely knowledgeable, kind, wittyand simply fun to be with.’ She will be deeply missed by all who knew her; but her memory andlegacy live on through her many friendships and scholarly achievements. Lesley lived a rich life, andin so doing enriched the lives of many others.

John Saunders

The tributes These are a selection of the tributes and messages received since Lesley passed away.

Peter Hammond, President of the Richard III Society, and vice-president Carolyn Hammond: I thinkthe most important thing to say about Lesley is that she was a friend, a mate as she would have put it. Shewas someone who was always good company; there was never any problem in finding things to talk aboutand going to see her or having her for a meal was always a pleasure. She was also of course a valuedcolleague on the Research Committee from the time I asked her to become a member – ‘I thought you wouldnever ask me’ she said. Her expertise was in palaeography and Latin, she read and translated Latin as the restof us read English, and such people are few and far between. Knowing she was there to help in this way gavea great sense of security and she always gladly gave help no matter how many other things she had to do. Itis difficult to think that we will not be able to ask her help again. In her memory her friends will make everyeffort to finish all her many projects as she would have wished. She will be greatly missed.Phil Stone, Chairman of the Richard III Society: None of us are irreplaceable, of course, but I think we allfeel that there is a significant gap amongst those of us sitting around the table at Executive Committeemeetings. As someone put in an e-mail when it was sent to all of us, how strange it was not to be includingLesley in the mailing list. As chairman, I will miss her wisdom and advice. I could always ask her for help ifI had a particular problem. I didn’t always like the advice she gave, but it was always good advice. She willbe missed. With the passing of Lesley, we have lost a very good Ricardian and many of us have lost a verygood friend.Lynda Pidgeon, Research Officer of the Richard III Society: Lesley had remarkable energy andenthusiasm, always looking for the next research project or, more accurately, projects. Her next was goingto be a translation of Polydore Vergil’s Latin text relating to Richard’s reign. She was also finishing off theYork Wills, working on the Middleham accounts and on Buckinghamshire records. If that were not enough,she was also giving assistance to other researchers. How she found the time still amazes me, as a wholecommittee is now trying to pick up what Lesley started. With so many plans for the future it was easy tothink that there was always going to be time to meet up with Lesley at The National Archives and takeadvantage of her Latin and palaeography skills. Sadly that day never came. Her sense of humour and

friendship will be greatly missed, as will her presenceat the Leeds Medieval Congress, study weekends andtriennials to which she contributed so much.David and Sue Wells: To us, she was simply ourmate Lesley, who had a wonderfully cheerful outlookon life. She enjoyed good food and wine and lovednothing better than a long, convivial lunch with agroup of friends. We recall that at the York banquet in2005 Executive Committee members each hosted atable and Lesley asked us to join hers; she wanted thetable that laughed loudest and longest, and thanksmainly to her this was achieved. We generally walkedaround together on Ricardian trips and were amazedat her energy; she thought nothing of climbingdifficult medieval stairs or walking long distanceseven when others were flagging. We also shared herlove of cats and swapped many stories about ourrespective moggies. She was an excellent cook andwe were always delighted to receive an invitation tolunch. Lesley – we will miss your company andfriendship as well as your huge input into the Society.It won’t be the same without you.Nicky Bland: Lesley was to me a very dear friend anda true embodiment of the saying ‘you can choose yourfriends but not your family’. I find it quite strange thatI remember so well the first time she came to mynotice. Where? The tutorial room, in Keele Hall,allocated to Nigel Saul for the 1989 Keele SummerSchool in Latin and Medieval Palæography. Havingfinished reading the passage that she was asked toread she then, without being asked, followed up with the translation. My thoughts ‘Wow! Latin brilliant butpalaeography definitely needs more work’. This, over the years, she did, though she would have been thefirst to admit that she was not ‘au fait’ with all hands. Several years after this, hearing me moan about theearly start I would have from Nottingham when I was due to lecture in London, she offered me a bed. Withmy love of cats my diary soon became peppered with ‘LB away, LB back’: this was cat-sitting time. Thisyear’s diary looks empty with just meetings to attend. I did also stay with her when she was at home and onsuch occasions we would pay visits to various places and events, El Greco and Caravaggio exhibitions beingmost memorable. I decided last year that her Christmas present would be something she had never done – atrip to the ballet – but sadly it was not to be. I must admit I miss my bolthole in London but even more so Imiss Lesley.Wendy Moorhen: I first spoke to Lesley at the York study weekend in 1994 and gradually over the yearswe became, to use Lesley’s word, mates. Although we met at EC meetings during 2012 our last social outingwas in March, when together with Jane Trump we went to Oxford for a celebration of Lesley’s 80th birthdaywhich culminated in a happy and leisurely lunch at the Ashmolean Museum’s rooftop restaurant. Lesley waswell known for her love of animals, especially cats, but perhaps not so well known was her interest in theTitanic and in particular the fate of the pets that were on board the liner. She e-mailed during last year’s 100thanniversary of the ship’s sinking, detailing some accounts of passengers and their pets, including the legendthat one woman refused to go in the lifeboat and leave her Great Dane, their bodies later found floating withher arms round the dog. Typical that Lesley should delve so deeply into the subject and bring out the smallbut vital detail. And finally a classic piece of Lesleyian advice: ‘The Persians always used to take majordecisions twice, once drunk and once sober.’Heather Falvey: Lesley always had several projects in hand, each requiring her excellent palaeographical

6

Lesley on a visit, camera and guidebook tohand

skills. She was nothing if not tenacious when seeking to decipher seemingly illegible, and unintelligible,words (remember theofonoforium in the Logge Wills?). Regrettably one of her unfinished projects was a newEnglish edition of the miracles of Henry VI, going back to the original manuscript, a task that Lesley, withher flair for translating medieval Latin into accurate but readable modern English, was well equipped toundertake. The only earlier edition of the miracles in English was edited in 1923 by Father Ronald Knox.The miracles provide fascinating details of daily life in late fifteenth-century England, so Lesley kindlyagreed to translate several for me to use as teaching aids. One that we selected was miracle 91, the story ofWilliam Bartram’s recovery from a rather personal injury sustained whilst playing football. Lesley had awicked sense of humour and was amused by the highly suggestive Latin, full of double entendres, employedby the medieval chronicler when recounting the extent of Bartram’s discomfort; she was even more amusedby Knox’s coy translation. She is sadly missed. Chris Skidmore, author, historian and Member of Parliament: When I unearthed Polydore Vergil’soriginal manuscript of his history, which had been languishing in the Vatican Archives in Rome, LesleyBoatwright from the Society tirelessly helped to translate the original Latin of the document, helping todemonstrate that what Vergil had originally written was often different from his printed work, published 30years later, often to Richard’s detriment – demonstrating the protracted nature of the campaign to deface thedead king’s memory. I am only sorry that Lesley died suddenly a few months ago and will be unable to seethe fruits of her kind and dedicated help.Marion Moulton, West Mercia Group: I met Lesley a few times, the last one being the Christmas lunchat Fotheringhay in 2011. She sat opposite me and we shared a few anecdotes while sipping our wine. Shewas a lovely lady, with a keen sense of humour and gentle and considerate. I was surprised to learn she was80. She certainly did not look it, which must reflect her attitude to life. She was also a very able scholar andwill be a great loss to the academic world. I wish to include all the members of the North Mercia Group inthis tribute.Jean Townsend, Lincolnshire Branch: I am so sorry to hear about Lesley. I liked her very much; she hadhelped me out with Latin translations many times. Julia Redlich, New South Wales Branch: On a personal level I shall miss Lesley, with whom I had severalconnections regarding the Society and items for the Bulletin, and the NSW Branch joins me in sympathy andregret for the loss of a great Ricardian and invaluable member of the Executive.Carolyn West: I have very happy memories of Lesley and enjoyed all the trips she arranged with the visitsteam. I will miss her very much as, I am sure, will everyone who knew her.Jane Grenfell: I was so saddened to hear of Lesley’s death. I never had the opportunity to meet her in personbut I did exchange e-mails with her. She always came across as encouraging, enthusiastic and fun.

The legacyLesley left a large number of books and other research material to the Society; amongst the booksare some important works of reference. These will all form the nucleus of a new research referencelibrary to be set up in her name. It will be managed by the Research Committee under the auspicesof the Barton Library. We will be cataloguing these items over the coming months and will report onprogress in a future edition of the Bulletin. We are also having a special bookplate designed toidentify the books as originating from Lesley’s library. Lesley was engaged in a number of researchprojects which remained unfinished at the time of her death. Chief amongst these are the York Wills,the miracles of Henry VI, an itinerary of Richard’s life to 1483, a translation of the original Latinversion of Polydore Vergil’s History of Richard III (see Chris Skidmore’s tribute above), E404(Exchequer Grants) and the final editing of the Middleham Accounts. It is the intention of theResearch Committee to carry on these projects and to see the results published. They will be anenduring legacy and a lasting testament to the scholarship of Lesley Boatwright.

Postscript When told late in September that her illness was terminal Lesley expressed the hope she would livelong enough to see President Obama re-elected and the Greyfriars human remains confirmed as KingRichard’s. Sadly she was not to know either; but how pleased she would have been with both results.

7

8

The Robert Hamblin Award for service to the Richard III SocietyNominations for 2013

The award was established in 2002 as a means of recognisingmembers who have given significant long-term service and made acontribution of particular merit to the work of the Richard III Society.Our late Chairman, Robert Hamblin, was always conscious of thevoluntary service and commitment that members give and washimself a fine example of such service. Following Robert’s death inAugust 2002 the Executive Committee decided to initiate and namethe award in his memory. Nominations are now sought frombranches, groups and individual members for the 2013 award. Theaward is open to all members, apart from those serving on theExecutive Committee, the President or the vice-Presidents.Nominations must include full details of the nominee, the reasons

why you think they qualify for the award and any relevant background information about them andtheir service to the Richard III Society. Nominations should be sent to the Joint Secretaries by eithere-mail or letter – please see contact details on the back inside cover of the Bulletin. The closing datefor nominations is 31 July and the final selection will be made by the Executive Committee. Therecipient of the 2013 award will be announced at this year’s Annual General Meeting.

Society events – introduction of cancellation chargeTo take account of the additional work involved when members cancel and where deposits for visitsor events have to be refunded, the Executive Committee has agreed to the introduction of a smalladministrative charge. This will apply to all events and visits organised by the main Society. Theterms are as follows:1. A deposit of £x* will be required on booking. Final payment will be required by (the nominated

date*). Any cancellation before that date will incur an administration charge of £3.00 on refundof deposit.

2. Any refund for cancellation after (the nominated date*) can be made only if there is a waitinglist and this, too, will incur an administration charge of £3.00.

3. Members are advised to arrange their own insurance to cover any loss that may arise through acancellation.

This charge will not be applied retrospectively or to events for which bookings are already inprogress before 1 April 2013.

* Details will be defined by the organisers of individual events.

Notice of the 2013 Annual General Meeting of the Richard III Society

This year the Society’s AGM and Members’ Day will take place on: Saturday, 5 October 2013

at Senate House, University of London, Russell Square.Further details will be given in the June Bulletin but, in the meantime, please

put this date in your diary.

Society news and notices

9

Successful launch of new website On 4 February the Society’s new website went live – the day when the world knew that the remainsof King Richard III had been found. The importance of our website cannot be underestimated: it’sthe public’s main source of information about the Society, and crucially it’s our primary source ofnew members. So we have to invest both time and resources in its maintenance and continuingdevelopment. The old site was launched in 2006 and has served us well over the years; however, thedigital revolution goes on at an alarming pace, and websites in particular quickly become outdated.

The Greyfriars dig had a considerable impact on the number of people visiting the site: forexample, in September last year we received over 140,000 page hits. To take advantage of thisgrowing interest the Executive Committee decided to engage professional website designers to helpmodernise and improve our website. Wendy Moorhen managed the project and we asked her toexplain some of the thinking behind the development plans:

‘The re-design of the website had been on the Website Committee’s agenda for over a year.However, events last September in Leicester made it an urgent priority. We asked the question “Whatwill the impact be when next year’s Channel 4 documentary is broadcast?” We had to be ready toreceive thousands and thousands of new visitors. Were we up for the challenge? Yes! The old sitehad taken 13 months to develop, but this time we had only a few short weeks. Earlier discussionshad concluded that we needed to broaden the site’s scope and to appeal to a wider spectrum ofvisitors. However, we also recognised that it couldn’t be all things to all people, therefore we wouldassume visitors came with some pre-knowledge of King Richard and our task would be to provide

Would you like to receive e-mail alerts from the Society?In the December 2012 edition of the Bulletin we said that, although we normally communicate

with members via the Bulletin, or notices on the website, we thought it would be useful to be ableto send you e-mails too. This was particularly important when events were fast moving followingthe press conference at the University of Leicester on 4 February. The idea behind the e-mail listis to supplement information that we send via the postal network. By using e-mails we can alertmembers to events and news that are particularly time-sensitive, where printing and postingwould take too long, because the event would be over by the time it was received. We stress thatthe list of e-mail addresses will not be made available to anyone outside the Society, and we takesuitable security precautions to avoid disclosure by using the BCC option in e-mails and keepingour virus checkers up to date on the computers we use. The e-mails that we send are carefullyconsidered and researched – we do not want to inundate you with messages and intend that everye-mail we send informs you of something relevant. Likewise, if you have events that you want topublicise to a wider audience, or ideas for future messages, please send an e-mail toRIII.mailings@gmail.com and we will consider your request.

We have been sending e-mails to the members who have contacted us, and to new and existingmembers where we have addresses. However, we have received quite a few ‘bounce back’messages from e-mail addresses that are not recognised by the e-mail providers. There are anynumber of reasons for this, but the key thing that we are asking now is that if you haven’t had anye-mails from RIII.mailings@gmail.com about Society matters, and you would like to hear fromus, please send an e-mail to our address and we will register you to receive future messages. Wealways send an acknowledgement when you request to join the mailing list – this response isusually fairly quick, but please allow up to a week to receive this. There is an ‘unsubscribe’ linkon all our e-mails, so you can change your mind at any time. If you would like to receive e-mailsfrom the Society please send a message to RIII.mailings@gmail.com (capital letter ‘I’ for RIII)giving your name, membership number (if known), e-mail address and postcode.

Finally, we do not wish to disenfranchise those members who do not have e-mail addressesand where it is necessary to communicate directly with all members a letter will be sent throughthe postal system.

Helen Challinor and Wendy Moorhen

10

the detail and promote the work of the Society. Timescales were tight and we quickly realised thatnot everything could be done at once, so we prioritised information specific to Richard III, whichwould be the likely focus of those visiting in the aftermath of the Channel 4 documentary. DuringApril there will be a second phase, including background information about the Wars of the Rosesand the fifteenth century in general. Looking further ahead, there will be a third phase, focusing onthe long-awaited online shop, and hopefully other initiatives’.

Ziona Arcari designed the new site and Stewart Armstrong provided the technical expertise. Weasked them to explain their approach ‘Our primary focus in designing and developing the RichardIII Society website was simplicity. Logical, straightforward site navigation is always fundamentalbut in this case it needed to be combined with a clean, clear and visually uncomplicated design;ensuring that attention could remain focused on the messages and wealth of stimulating articles andinformation. We wanted to project a contemporary feel that nevertheless acknowledged the heritageand period involved. Articles have been supported with relevant visuals and presented in a consistentmanner, whether it is viewed on a PC, Pad-style computer or smartphone, allowing the site to flowand blend as a whole.’

The launch of the new site was inevitably not trouble-free, but all the glitches were quicklyresolved. One particular glitch provided a staggering statistic; during the first couple of days we hadexceeded our bandwidth capacity – this is the amount of data we can accommodate within a specifiedperiod. The company that hosts our website advised that over the period 4–6 February we werereceiving an average of 1.4 million hits per day, and that’s why we were over our limit!

The Society’s website now has a professional new look, easier navigation, improved content andinnovations such as turn-page technology for the popular online ‘Ricardian Britain’, making it easierand more enjoyable to use. We are sure members and visitors will find the site refreshing,informative and ready to meet future challenges and opportunities.

Photo caption competitionIn the December issue we featured this photo of Society JointSecretary, Dave Wells, and Chairman, Phil Stone, enjoying thetask of clearing cowpats from the site of the Society’s marqueeat the Bosworth weekend in August, and invited Bulletin readersto supply a suitable caption. Whether out of respect for theSociety’s distinguished officers, or because the exciting newsfrom Leicester distracted readers’ attention, entries for thecompetition were few in number. Special mentions should go toMary Tetlow’s entry, the only one to pick up on the ‘cowpat’angle: ‘What a let-down if it only produces red roses!’ and to thatfrom Patricia Payne, the only reader who managed to introducea pun: ‘The stone marks the spot’. Most of the other offeringsfocused, predictably, on the Leicester dig. Bearing in mind thatat the time of Bosworth the result of the dig was unknown, theone we chose as the winning entry was from Elsie Watson: ‘Then again, he may be down here’.

The Chairman goes westMid December, and the frost lay thickly on the ground at 5 a.m. when the taxi came to take me tothe station, as I set out for a day trip to Redruth to give a talk to a group of ‘A’ level history studentsat the Cornwall College, Camborne. Some months before, the Society had been approached by thecollege for a speaker, but it had taken time for them to agree to paying for me to travel all that wayfrom north Kent. At Redruth, I was met by the lecturer, Nick Worley, and taken to the college, where,after lunch, I met the group, nine youngsters keen to learn more about Richard III. They had all beenstudying with Nick and were looking forward to hearing the story from a different point of view. Mytalk went well, though it was difficult to tell at the time. Feedback afterwards was to the effect thatthey had all enjoyed it, especially as I had added a few extras and nuances that they hadn’t heard

11

before. From the talk, Nick said that thestudents had learnt ‘about the lack of evidenceto link Richard III to the murders of the Princesin the Tower as well as the many successfulachievements of his short reign, such asimproved poor relief and more efficientgovernment administration.’

I understand that the other topic they arestudying in history at the moment is NaziGermany, which makes for an interesting mix– Ian McKellen, eat your heart out!

After the talk, a group picture was taken,with my last slide – a portrait of Richard III –still showing in the background. No one shouldbe alarmed by the dreadful disfigurement of theyoung lady in the front row – she was playingFrankenstein’s monster in a college productionand had been trying out her make-up!

I must admit that I wouldn’t normally recommend a day visit to Cornwall just to spend four hoursin the county – not on a train, and especially not in December – but I was made so very welcome byeveryone that it was all worth it and, who knows, we might even get a new member or two out of it!

Phil Stone

A new group for south Wales Hayley James, a new member living in Port Talbot, would like to establish a new group coveringsouth Wales. If any members in this area are interested in joining such a group please contact Hayleyby e-mail at Hayley-james1@hotmail.co.uk or by mobile number 07941476810.

Do you have a question about our network of branches and groups? If you have any queries about branches or groups or are thinking about establishing a new one inyour area the first person you need to contact is our Branches and Groups Liaison Officer, JacquiEmerson; she will be able to give you the advice and help you need. Her contact details are on theinside back cover.

York Wills updateAs we go to press the book of the York Wills is nearing completion and we anticipate it being readyfor publication in April, with a formal launch at the study weekend in York. This book is an editionof English wills proved at the Prerogative Court of York for the period 1476 to 1499 and has beenedited by Heather Falvey, Peter Hammond and the late Lesley Boatwright, to whom the volume willbe dedicated. Once publication and cost details are to hand, they will be available from the SalesOfficer and posted on the Society’s website.

Media retrospective materialMany thanks to all who have sent in items for the media retrospective section over the past coupleof months; due to our extensive coverage of the Greyfriars dig we have not been able to include othermedia items submitted. However we hope to catch-up with some of these in future issues.

Lincoln connectionsSteven Spielberg’s new film Lincoln, based on the life of the great American president and starringthe British actor Daniel Day-Lewis, is winning many plaudits. Members, especially those in theUnited States, might be interested to know that in the latter half of the 1950s we had a member bythe name of J. Abraham Lincoln who was the president’s great-nephew.

The Chairman with history students of CornwallCollege, Cambourne

12

Future Society events

Visit to Beaulieu and Buckler’s Hard on Saturday 18 May 2013 (places stillavailable)Beaulieu Abbey was founded in 1204, when King John made a gift of land there to the Cistercianmonks. The abbey was built by lay brothers and hired craftsmen to a uniform plan, based on theparent abbey at Cîteaux. The Great Gatehouse was not finished until the fourteenth century. On 2April 1538 the abbot formally surrendered the abbey to the crown. The church was the first to bedemolished, closely followed by the cloisters and chapter house. Until the Dissolution Beaulieu wasthe only place in central southern England which offered permanent sanctuary for criminals andfugitives, the most famous of whom was Perkin Warbeck. Beaulieu passed into the ownership of SirThomas Wriothesley, later earl of Southampton, after the Dissolution, and the estate passed, after theCivil War to the Montagu family. Available to visit: Beaulieu Abbey and exhibition; the PalaceHouse; and the National Motor Museum. The grounds are very extensive. Travel around on foot, bymonorail or by veteran bus. There is a large restaurant in the grounds. Everywhere is included in theentrance ticket. Buckler’s Hard is a maritime village, on the banks of the Beaulieu River. There area Maritime Museum, Shipwright’s Cottage, Chapel and woodland walk. Refreshments and facilitiesare available. Buckler’s Hard is a short journey from Beaulieu. Everywhere is included in theentrance ticket. A booking form was included with the Bulletin Extra; however, if further forms areneeded please contact the Bulletin Team

Programme09.00 Depart from outside Embankment Tube Station (riverside) on our Plan-it Coach.11.30 approximately, arrive at Beaulieu. Free day at Beaulieu site. Lunch own arrangements.15.30 Travel by our coach to Bucklers Hard from Beaulieu. Free time at Bucklers Hard.17.00 Depart back to Embankment. Approximate arrival time 19.30.

PracticalitiesWe will need a minimum of 30 coach bookings to make this visit viable. Cost per person £36 (coachand entrance to both sites). Cost £16 per person (entrance to both sites only) for those travelling byown transport. Replies to the recent Visits Committee survey indicated that these costs arereasonable. Please send one or two 9 x 4in. self-addressed and stamped envelopes: one for a receiptif you do not want an e-mail receipt, and one (everyone) for the final joining letter. Those travellingby own transport will also be sent travelling directions and a map.

Cheques to be drawn in favour of Richard III Society, endorsed ‘Beaulieu’, and sent to RosemaryWaxman, 37 Chewton Road, Walthamstow, London E17 7DW. Tel: 0208 521 4261. E-mail:rwaxman@btinternet.com. Closing date Saturday 27 April 2013.

Norfolk Branch Study Day 2013This will take place on Saturday 9 November at the Assembly House, Theatre Street, Norwich on thetheme ‘The Sun in Splendour: Edward IV in Peace and War’, and speakers will include JulianHumphries and David Watts. There will be full details in the June Bulletin. If you would like furtherdetails, or to book now, please phone Annmarie Hayek on 01603 664021, or e-mailannmarie@talktalk.net.

Stop press Please note for your diaries that the Norfolk Branch will be holding a ‘Looking for Richard’ day asits 2014 study day. This will give the whole story, plus any updates. Anyone disappointed at beingunable to get to this year’s conference might want to attend. The date is 8 November 2014.

13

Society reviews

A Feast of Fotheringhay – the 2012 Christmas lunch and carol service Saturday 15 December in this annus mirabilis delivered another miracle, whereby the day dawnedbright, sunny and, most importantly, dry, after a truly dreadful preceding week or more. The journeytaken by the satisfyingly full London coach was a smooth progress through the sunlit countryside toour annual site of pilgrimage and feasting.

The Fotheringhay Village Hall was already well populated with members who had travelled undertheir own steam, and a pleasant mingling of old and new, local and far-flung members was thusachieved. For instance, on my table there were only three ‘old hands’, including Julia from Paris, andfive new members. It’s so heartening to see how we are burgeoning. In fact, for the first time, an extratable had to be brought into service though, as it turned, out a handful of unfortunate cancellationsallowed the extra table to be used for displaying the copious amount (almost a tombola!) of desirableraffle prizes brilliantly organised, as ever, by Kitty Bristow.

The meal was soon under way and we were tucking into the usual sumptuous goodies, after graceby our old friend the Revd Brian Rogers, who always breaks bread with us, so to speak, before takingthe carol service at St Mary the Virgin and All Saints, Fotheringhay, across the road (one of his fivechurches!). After a delicious bowl of soup we could choose from salmon, ham or beef, but wereencouraged to have all three, and the many attendant vegetables and salads and otheraccompaniments. So nice to be free of the mandatory poultries that would probably feature all toofrequently for most of us in the next few weeks. The pud course was also a matter of choice or, betterstill, mixtures thereof . . . traditional Christmas pudding, mince pies, trifle and even rhubarb crumble,which I think was a new kid on the block this year.

Now please don’t run away with the idea that all we do is eat! There is also wine available! Livelyconversation between friends old and new, sometimes those who haven’t seen each other for a yearor more, cracker-pulling and the ensuing joke reading/groaning, and paper hat donning. I do spare aguilty thought about Richard of York on Micklegate Bar at this point but never mind, we visit him,hatless, later. The highest point of hilarity was, as usual, the drawing of the raffle, with itsanticipation and for most, disappointment. Sad to say, cries of ‘Fix, fix!’ could even be heard, butnevertheless everyone got a hearty clap.

An unbearably sad difference this year was that there was no Lesley Boatwright to weave hergregarious way between the tables with her camera, cajoling us to ‘Smile, please’ and then takingeven more candid shots when one wasn’t looking! Some of these photos would find their way intothe Bulletin and I can’t help wondering what happened to the others.

The few hundred yards walk to the church, usually on the cold side of bracing, was pleasantlywarm and sunny this day, and a few of us decided that this, of all years, was the opportunity to makea flying visit to the castle. It was good to offset the sad feelings engendered, a few weeks earlier,gazing upon that shallow shroud-shaped hollow at the bottom of a trench, that served as a ‘cradle’for half a millennium, to breathe and feel the cool clean air where Richard first drew breath. A stiffclimb up the motte aided by wooden steps cut into the grass (which I didn’t remember previously,but perhaps I didn’t need them then!) rewarded us with a beautiful sunlit view across theNorthamptonshire countryside and its wonderful skyscape. A perfect day, but not over yet.

We attained the church in good time, taking almost the last of the auxiliary seats at the back. Itwas packed and for the first time, to my knowledge, the service sheets had actually run out andpeople were doubling up. We are indeed going from strength to strength! There is still more room tobe occupied in the future, if necessary (and I’m sure it will be), as there are side aisles, even if it hasto be standing room only.

The service of Nine Lessons and Carols followed its time-honoured and well-loved pattern, withhearty renderings of the rousing old favourites, not the least of which is ‘While Shepherds Watched’sung to its original tune, better known for the last century or so as the tune for ‘On Ilkla Moor Bah’t

14

’at’. The readings are shared equally between parishioners and Society members and, perhapsuniquely to us, the penultimate reading is ‘The Journey of the Magi’ by T. S. Eliot, read by ourChairman Phil Stone, carrying on the tradition set by the late Arthur Cockerill of Yorkshire Branch.We were also delightfully entertained once again by the beautiful singing of the St Peter’s Singersand their musical director, George Haynes. This year their eagerly anticipated contributions includedWilliam Walton, Benjamin Britten and John Rutter.

Always an emotional experience, I found this year the service was especially poignant, with thetombs of Richard’s parents and big brother beside the altar. Of course, they have always been therewith us but I for one have kind of taken it for granted. Not so our sorely missed Lesley. She wrotein 2008 ‘. . . they at least have a last resting place in a fitting spot. We can enfold them in our musicand cheerfulness for Christmas, even if it doesn’t reach as far as their son Richard under a car parkor whatever in Leicester.’ Thank goodness Lesley lived to hear of the discovery just before she leftus. I am heartbroken, though, when I think of all our other dear departed who never lived to see thisincredible dream come true.

The last and most rousing carol of all is, to me, Adeste Fideles, especially as we sing it in Latin,after which we are treated to an organ voluntary, this year by Mr Ivan Linford, as Revd Brianprocesses down the aisle resplendent in the Society cope, which he wears well. Joyce Melhuishwould be proud. It only remains for us to wander around the church visiting all the old familiar items,including the famous pulpit displaying its white boar, the Society’s window in the south chapel, andall our lovingly worked hassocks inter alia. I couldn’t help noticing this year’s Christmas tree,tastefully decorated in angels, stars and white roses as ever, had rather a sideways kink in its mainstem. I wonder if it was deliberate?

The last treat of the day, after we left St Mary’s in the dark, was the breathtaking sight of the towerand chancel (well, there isn’t anything else now!) splendidly floodlit as we faded into the distance inour diverse directions. It can be seen for miles, as of course, it was built to do.

Thank you very much, Phil, for organising yet another triumphant day, which for many of us isthe highlight of our Christmas season. Long may you continue and I’m already looking forward to2013.

Joan Cooksley

In the sad absence of Lesley Boatwright we do not have any photos of this year’s Fotheringhay visit;however, Joan’s excellent and vivid review makes up for this omission. The Society has made variousgifts to Fotheringhay over the years, including the York window, dedicated in 1975, and theFotheringhay cope, given in 1990. The late Joyce Melhuish started the annual FotheringhayChristmas lunch and carol service visit in 1985, and was the Society’s main contact with the churchuntil her death in 1995, when our Chairman, Phil Stone, took over the role.

Contributions to the Bulletin

Contributions are welcomed from all members. All articles and other items for theRicardian Bulletin should be sent to the new dedicated Bulletin e-mail address:ricardian.bulletin@gmail.com. Alternatively, the contact details on the back inside covercan be used.

The editorial team would prefer to receive contributions as Word file attachments to e-mails wherever possible, since we have limited capacity to transcribe and type up writtensubmissions and there may be delays in using them.

Bulletin Press Dates15 January for March issue; 15 April for June issue; 15 July for September issue; 15 October for December issue. Articles should be sent well in advance.

The Bulletin Editorial Committee

15

Other news, reviews and events

A ‘Grand Hotel’ of Richard III’s timeOn his way to the battle of Bosworth, Richard III spent anight in Leicester – according to tradition at the Blue BoarInn located on Leicester’s medieval high street, nowHighcross Street. It was built in the fifteenth century and sowould have been considered modern in Richard’s day. Thenit was one of the premier inns in the county, offering themedieval equivalent of five-star accommodation, which iswhy it has been called the ‘Grand Hotel’ of its time, withseveral wings surrounding a courtyard, a hall, a kitchen andstabling for horses.

Though the Blue Boar Inn has gone, the purpose of thesite has not changed; part of it is now occupied by aTravelodge. However, the status of the accommodationmight have changed a bit – it’s difficult to imagine amedieval king staying like the rest of us at a Travelodge.

The building remained at the site for 400 years, buteventually fell into disrepair and was demolished in March1836. Up to now the only information on what it looked likeconsisted of two engravings, which had been made by JohnFlower, an artist from Leicestershire, ten years before itsdemolition. This was until Richard Buckley of theUniversity of Leicester happened to look through thenotebooks of a nineteenth-century architect, HenryGoddard. In one of them he discovered notes and measurements of a large timber-frame building,which he immediately recognised as the Blue Boar Inn. The notes show exactly how the buildingwas put together, with all the details such as the timber framing, the joints, peg holes, together withexact measurements. He approached an architect, Steffan Davies, who has experience with drawingsof historic buildings, to make a series of computer-aided design images based on these notes. Steffanput together a series of drawings and a 3D computer model. This information was then fed into a 3Dprinter at the university, which converted it into a 1:50 scale model. The model is so detailed that itshows all the timber framing, the jointing, the moulding of the timbers, the fireplaces and even thefirst floor chamber in which Richard III was said to have slept. See colour section, p. iv.

There is a short video on the website of the University of Leicester showing all the information:Flower’s drawing, the notebooks and eventually the 3D print out. Don’t miss this, it’s fascinating:www2.le.ac.uk/news/blog/2012/december/richard-iii-search-team-recreates-model-of-kings-final-abode

Dorothea Preis

Richard III Requiem 2012A large group of Ricardians, their friends and guests gathered on 22 August at the Royal ChantryChapel of St Edmund at Spital in the Street, north of Lincoln, once again for the Annual Mass ofRequiem of King Richard III, for his beloved Queen Anne and their son, Edward Prince of Walesand for all those who fell on that momentous day in 1485. As ever, the Trustees of the Royal ChantryChapel had been generous beyond measure and had handed over the building to Bishop HowardWeston-Smart and his assistants and, as ever, all agreed that they had created an illumination from amedieval manuscript, with the nave dominated by its catafalque and surrounding 7-foot high tapersbearing shields with the arms of the king. This year Mgr Weston-Smart had commissioned a new pall

The Blue Boar Inn in J. Flower, Viewsof Ancient Buildings, in the Town andCounty of Leicester (Leicester,[?1825]). By permission of Universityof Leicester Library

16

to cover the catafalque, bearing once again the arms of the late medieval kings of England. Paid forby a wide group of supporters and friends, it is an exquisite piece of work, as you will see in thephotograph, and added beauty as well as an air of authenticity to the scene, which was now preparedfor the Pontifical High Mass – celebrated by Archbishop Douglas Lewins, who is a member of theCollege of Chaplains of the Chapel, assisted by Fr Paul Bagott (who also preached a sermon whichwas greatly appreciated by all present) and Fr Victor Bullock, who is once again a member of theCollege of Chaplains.

As always, at the foot of the catafalque, resting upon a piece of medieval sculpture provided bythe Trustees, was a floral tribute with 33 white roses: one for each year of the king’s age. The shrineof the Blessed Virgin Mary was graced by a tribute with 29 roses, one for each year of Queen Anne’sage at the time of her death, whilst the shrine of King St Edmund had nine, one for each year of theage of Edward, prince of Wales. Needless to say, the Mass conformed to the Rite just coming intouse in the Western Church at the end of the fifteenth century and with which King Richard wouldhave been highly familiar, albeit in English, though there were several motets in Latin at the time of

Communion and at the conclusion a solemn Salve wassung and the shrine of the Virgin incensed. The wholeceremony was brought to an end with the Absolutions ofthe Dead, solemnly sung by Bishop Weston-Smart andall present. ‘A most devout and inspiring occasion’ wasthe universal sentiment of all present.

An excellent reception followed, with superbrefreshments prepared by the Trustees but funded by theLincolnshire Branch of the Richard III Society. The daywas brought to an end with a thought provoking lecturedelivered by the Senior Trustee, Dr David Marcombe, onthe subject of ‘Sir John Neville of Liversedge, aforgotten Yorkist’. We are all grateful to David for histhought-provoking and insightful words. We all felt thatwe had once again recalled the king’s memory in anappropriate and seemly fashion with suffrage for therepose of his soul, along with his family and those whofell at Bosworth, be they friend or foe.

Once again, I must record my personal gratitudeinitially to the Trustees, my good friends Anne andDavid for their unstinting kindness and generosity in

entrusting their wonderful treasure-house to my care, albeit just for few hours – how very envious ofthem we all are. To Jean Townsend and to the members of the Lincolnshire Branch of the RichardIII Society, to Phil Stone and the national Richard III Society, to Andy Smith (who had intended tobe with us but was prevented at the last minute from attending) and other members of the RichardIII Foundation, to my fellow chaplains and priestly assistants, to the servers, who came from all overEngland to support us, and to everyone else who helped prepare for the day, during the day and afterthe day, but specially to everyone who came to the Mass just to join their prayers with ours for thatmost unfairly and unjustly maligned of kings, for his wife and his son and for all who fell this dayupon Bosworth Field. We look forward to seeing you all next year.

Susan Weston-Smart

Richard III – a musical tributeSinger and composer Richard Smolowik has sent us a copy of his latest CD, entitled A Tribute toRichard III. It comprises a prelude and three songs and has recently received a favourable reviewfrom the Essex Folk Magazine. We asked Richard what inspired him to compose the pieces and herecalled that his English Literature teacher at grammar school had always reminded them that whilstShakespeare’s play was based on historical figures it was a work of fiction. However, it was the

The catafalque

17

doctoring of Richard’s portraits, natural sympathy for a man who lost so rapidly his son, wife andown life, and the 1984 Trial of Richard III not guilty verdict, that motivated him to make his ownmusical contribution to the king’s rehabilitation.

The opening track is called ‘The Carrion Crow of Richard III’ and is inspired by John Heath-Stubbs’ poem about Bosworth, The Carrion Crow, and is in the genre of a traditional English folksong. This is followed by ‘In Defence of Richard III’, which is a riposte to Shakespeare’s play.‘Prelude to Richard III’ is next and this is a guitar tribute to King Richard based on the galliard styleof early English music. The last track is entitled ‘Plantagenet Pomegranate’, a lament for KingRichard, with the finger-plucking guitar style evoking the sound of horses riding to battle.

Copies of the CD are available from Richard at a cost of £10, including postage and packing. Hecan be contacted on 07787 887270 or by e-mail: ryzardsmolowik19@btinternet.com

Recent Ricardian findsThe year 2012 proved a remarkable one for reports of Ricardian finds, and not just those in a car parkin Leicester. On 15 November 2012 the Leicester Mercury reported the find of a gold coin datingfrom 1484, found some ten or so miles from Bosworth. The coin depicts a ship on one side, with anR and a boar to either side of the mast, while on the other side St Michael is spearing a dragon. This

depiction of St Michael gives the coin its common name of an angel. While it wasworth 6s 8d in 1484, it sold at auction for £36,000. Because of its location it has

been speculated that it was lost by someone on their way to or from the battle ofBosworth, although all that can safely be said is that it was lost sometime duringor after 1484. (Illustrated in the colour section, p. iv.)

This might also be said to be the year of theboar, as two boars were discovered. In October2012 a copper alloy boar mount was found on theThames foreshore near the Tower of London. Thisis the subject of an article by Geoffrey Wheeleron p. 63 of this issue.

Also last year, a boar badge found atStillingfleet in Yorkshire in 2010 was purchasedby the Yorkshire Museum to add to theircollection of medieval finds. This badge wassilver gilt and resembles the one found atBosworth. What is particularly interesting is thatStillingfleet manor passed to Francis, Lord Lovellin 1474 after the death of his grandmother AliceDeincourt, wife of William, Lord Lovell.

Above: The Thames boar, with crescent detailmagnified (see p. 63) Image courtesy of thePortable Antiquities Scheme (reference LON-A33FF5)Below: The Stillingfleet boar. © York MuseumsTrust (Yorkshire Museum)

18

The final object of interest was reported on 22 December 2012 in The Guardian. This was a 500-year-old reliquary which had been found in Hockley, Essex. Diamond-shaped and engraved with thenames of the Magi and images of Christ and St Helena, the reliquary or locket had a back panelwhich slid off. The description and picture was reminiscent of the Middleham jewel; however, abetter picture on the British Museum website shows it to be rather less fine, and dates it to the earlysixteenth century. More detail is given on the finds web site at http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/256636.

Lynda Pidgeon

Monumental Brass Society 2013 ConferenceThe Monumental Brass Society is holding its 2013 Conference at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, 12–14April 2013. The theme of the conference is ‘Town and Gown’ and as well as several visits to the parishchurches and college chapels of Cambridge, a series of lectures will examine differing aspects ofcommemoration for the University men and for the parishioners of medieval Cambridge. Speakersare: John Lee, Nicholas Rogers, Sir John Baker, Rebecca Oakes, Robert Kinsey, Elizabeth New, RhunEmlyn, Sue Powell and Rosemary Horrox. Residential and non-residential rates are available and fulldetails are available on the MBS web page, www.mbs-brasses.co.uk/mbs%20conference.html,together with a booking form. Alternatively, contact Christian Steer, Hon. Secretary, MonumentalBrass Society, 8 Shefford Lodge, Link Road, Newbury, Berkshire, RG14 7LR, e-mail:christianosteer@yahoo.co.uk.

Never a clean way to slay a king [or a prime minster]This was the title of a recent opinion piece in our daily broadsheet, the Sydney Morning Herald. Whatthe author Peter Hartcher goes on to tell his readers will resonate with any Ricardian:

‘Regicide is such a serious crime that the usurper is tempted to go to extremes to rewrite therecord. The new regime blackened the character of the fallen king. And it insisted that theascendant [ruler] had the barest possible amount of blood on her hands. The legitimacy of ananointed ruler can’t be snatched by his assassins. It has to be bestowed.’

However, Mr Hartcher is not writing about what happened more than 500 years ago in 1485. Therecently published memoirs of a former Australian member of parliament, Maxine McKew, were thereason for his comments on Australian affairs only two years ago, when the prime minister KevinRudd was toppled by his deputy, Australia’s current prime minister Julia Gillard. Plus ça change,plus c’est la même chose.

If you would like to read the full article see: Peter Hartcher, ‘Never a clean way to slay a king’,Sydney Morning Herald (27 October 2012), www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/never-a-clean-way-to-slay-a-king-20121026-28b3q.html.

Dorothea Preis

Blue plaque for Richard III cottages I have been alerted to an article in The Cowbridge Gem newspaper from 20 December 2012 entitled‘“Christmas Cottages” get coveted blue plaque’. Numbers 6–7 Church Street, Cowbridge (in the Valeof Glamorgan, Wales) have been known for many years as the ‘Christmas Cottages.’The blue plaquestates:

6–7 CHURCH STREETORIGINALLY ONE HOUSE PREVIOUSLY THE TOWN HOUSE (1738) BELIEVED TO BE THE HOUSE OF THE CHAPLAIN SANCTIONED BYRICHARD III 27 FEB 1484

Robert Cope, who lives at number 6 Church Street, has researched the history of the house, along

19

with other members of the Cowbridge Record Society. According to the article, evidence suggeststhat it is the oldest house in Cowbridge. Apparently Cowbridge had campaigned for some yearsduring the 1480s for Holy Cross Church to have its own chaplaincy, despite opposition fromLlanblethian. King Richard himself ruled that Cowbridge should have a chaplain and the house wasbuilt for him with present day number 6 as the house and number 7 as the stable. There is evidenceof a path that led from the house to Holy Cross Church and the house still has a ground-floorfireplace with a span of 7 feet which dates back to the fifteenth century.

Margaret Byrne

Battle of Northampton site savedThe battle of Northampton was one of the decisive encounters of the Wars of the Roses and cameless than a year after the Yorkist rout at Ludford Bridge the previous October. It may also have beenthe first battle in Britain where artillery was used. On 10 July 1460 an army under the command ofthe Earl of Warwick approached the defensive encampment of Henry VI’s army to the south ofNorthampton. The Yorkists were triumphant and a number of leading Lancastrians were either killedor captured. Henry VI himself was taken prisoner after the battle and shortly thereafter Richard, dukeof York, was able to return from Ireland and make his claim for the throne.

The site of this important battle is to become a protected area, following the recent announcementby Northampton Borough Council that a conservation management plan is to be developed. The siteis undefined at present and has been under threat from plans to use it for sports pitches and trainingareas. The Battlefields Trust has campaigned for many years for the survey of the 85-acre site in theDelapré Park area of the town.

A Macbeth Society?With all the media interest that has been generated over the search for Richard’s remains, togetherwith the Society’s vigorous PR efforts to publicise the true facts, hopefully this will overturn the oldShakespearean view of Richard. Possibly it is now time for the Scots to look at trying to dosomething similar to resurrect the reputation of Macbeth, another monarch whose reputation wasassassinated by Shakespeare?

In fact a few years ago I was contacted by the office of one of the Scottish Nationalist membersof parliament enquiring as to how we ran our society and managed to generate public interest inRichard, bearing in mind that this was long before the current Ricardian media furore. I wonder ifwe will see a Macbeth Society arise to counteract the Shakespearean view of this much malignedScottish monarch.?

Richard Van Allen

Richard III Boar and BannerSociety member and artist Mary Kelly, in partnership with Carol Sandy, has established a newwebsite, which sells a range of Mary’s colourful artwork and commemorative memorabilia from thetime of Richard III and the medieval period. The site can be visited at www.boarandbanner.com.

Stop press – the Leicester Conference, 2 March 2013We will have a full coverage of the conference in the June Bulletin. In the meantime, JointSecretaries, Sue and Dave Wells, report that is was a highly successful event and they would liketo acknowledge the contribution of all those who helped on the day, particularly with registrationand sales. They will record their thanks in more detail in June’s issue.

20

Research newsWe are introducing a Research news section to the Bulletin so that we can keep members informedof progress with the Society’s research projects and to bring to their attention any helpful researchresources.

Anglo American Legal Tradition (AALT): http://aalt.law.uh.edu/AALT.htmlDocuments from Medieval and Early Modern England from The National Archives, Kew[The following text has been taken from the website and altered slightly.]

The purpose of the AALT website is to make the resources of The National Archives (TNA) moreaccessible to the general scholarly audience at no charge. The website comprises photographs oflegal documents held at TNA dated between 1272 and 1800 and covers the major legal and financialseries of documents. As at January 2012 there were 7,000,000 frames of historical material availableon the site, and more is constantly being added.

The documents are being digitised and displayed through the O’Quinn Law Library of theUniversity of Houston Law Center by licence of The National Archives, sponsored by the Universityof Houston Law Center and by the University of Houston Department of History. The website isfinancially well endowed and run through the O’Quinn Law Library, and so its continuance does notdepend on an individual or the annual allocation of funds. It should therefore be a stable anddependable academic research resource.

The cameras used are standard, readily available versions of the Canon camera line, at first thePowershot S70, then the Powershot S80 with a better range of resolution. Scanning the images wouldhave produced very high-quality images, but at an enormous, indeed prohibitive, cost. The argumentfrom the beginning has been that such projects should aim to produce images that are of sufficientquality to enable research, not perfect images: resources should be arranged to increase the overallpossibilities for research.

Using the siteFinding a particular page Most documents on AALT are separated into two sides, fronts and backs, because the documents arenot unbound. The blue and red markers (designating page numbers of multiples of 10 and 50) helpusers match up corresponding fronts and backs. Furthermore, the thumbnail pages are now limitedto 200 thumbnails per page, and since on average each side of a plea roll takes two pictures, one canestimate which thumbnail page to access. The limitation of 200 thumbnails per page also makes eachthumbnail larger, so that the blue and red markers are more easily seen.Browsing documents If you are not looking for a particular page, but rather working through a document, arrows at the topof each page allow you to progress from one image to the next in a single folder without returningto the thumbnail page.

Another good strategy for reading the document as a whole is to use two browser windows. Thefirst window contains the folder with the images of the fronts; the second window contains the folderfor the backs. You can alternate between windows and thus work your way through the documentwithout laborious searching. This procedure works equally well whether you are working throughthe document online or on your computer after downloading documents.

For the reign of Richard III, there are photographs of the following document series:Common Pleas, Plea Rolls: CP40/885B–893King’s Bench Plea Rolls: KB27/888–896; KB29/114–115Exchequer of Pleas Plea Rolls: E13/169–170King’s Remembrancer: Memoranda Rolls E159/260–261Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer: Memoranda Rolls E368/256–258

21

Pipe Foreign Accounts: E364/117, 118 and some 119 and 120Pipe Rolls: E372/328–330Early Chancery Proceedings: C1Feet of Fines: CP25(1) Fines Duchy (of Lancaster) Orders and Decrees: DL5/2Kings Remembrancer Accounts Various: E101

Of course, these documents are easy to access, but not necessarily easy to read. Some documents arein Latin and some very dirty. Do have a look.

Heather Falvey

The Ricardian Chronicle 2013 – opportunities to research the fifteenth-centuryworldRemember our Ricardian Chronicle project? Our aim is to compile a diary of everyday events inEngland. It is relatively easy to find out what kings and noblemen were up to, but for this project wehope to uncover what was happening to the ordinary folk, not just in the towns and cities but in thevillages too. Think of it as combining the medieval stories from Eastenders, Coronation Street andThe Archers, all the scandal and gossip. As always, the Society is happy to have more researchers forthe project. We have 25 members to date, looking into local history archives, discovering what folkwere up to across the country during the reigns of Edward V, Richard III and Henry Tudor, from 1483up to 1500.

If you have recently joined the Society, or have been a member for a while, and want to take anactive part in an ongoing project, something which will be of benefit to future researchers, as well asintriguing us in the present, join us now. If you like the idea of searching dusty documents but don’tthink you would be able to read the ancient handwriting, we have an excellent correspondence courseto help you. The course is ‘in-house’, run by our own Heather Falvey, and can be done as and whenyou wish, at your own pace, and would be ideal for family history researchers too. Don’t be shy anddon’t feel you are committing yourself to too much work – a single entry from your local archive toour fifteenth-century diary would be greatly appreciated.

If you wish to join us in our quest or would like to do the palaeography (reading dodgy oldwriting) course, please contact me on toni.m6@blueyonder.co.uk for further information. Happyresearching!

Toni Mount

Some useful research resources: medieval credit and Inquisitions Post MortemThanks to funding from a variety of sources, universities are now carrying out research on documentsin the National Archives which they are then making available to the wider public via the internet.This opens up a whole new area for us to research and explore from the comfort of a computer.Searchable resources such as the Inquisitions Post Mortem are especially useful, as you could, forexample, look for all references to books or beds.

At Reading University the ICMA centre which is involved in business and finance is also thehome for researchers working on medieval credit. Professor Adrian Bell, who is leading thisparticular project, was also involved in the Medieval Soldier project, which was a joint collaborationwith Professor Anne Curry at Southampton University. This new project looks at documents in theNational Archives relating to loans to the English crown c. 1272–1340. While this is outside ourperiod it has some interesting information on currency and monetary values and gives a link toexchange rates over time, so that you can find out how much 1d in 1485 would be worth today. Thereis also an interest rate calculator that enables you to work out just how much that £5 loan to the kingwould have actually cost. To follow this up, go to:http://apps.icmacentre.ac.uk/medievalcredit/ CreditFinance_seminar_2010.asp

Inquisitions Post Mortem (IPMs) are another useful resource and these are gradually being madeavailable via a project at Winchester University under the leadership of Professor Michael Hicks.

22

Entitled ‘Mapping the Medieval Countryside’, the aim is to publish searchable English translationsof inquisitions for the periods 1236–1447 and 1485–1509. Sadly, funding ran out before those for thereign of Richard III were transcribed and translated. At the moment the site provides backgroundinformation on inquisitions and details of those which have been printed. There is also a ‘featuredinquisition’ section, which looks at an individual inquisition. Over time more information willbecome available and so it is worth visiting it from time to time to see who is featured and how manymore IPMs have become available to search. The site can be found at:http://www.inquistionspostmortemac.uk

What is an Inquisition Post Mortem?Inquisitions were inquiries made into what lands were held by a tenant-in-chief of the crown whenthey died. It determined the land held, by whom and for what service. The value of the land wasgiven and the heir identified and their age. If the heir was of age then an assessment was made ofhow much the king was owed between the tenant’s death and the succession of the heir. If the heirwas a minor then the right to their wardship and marriage was established as well as the annual valueof the estate. Inquisitions would be held in every county in which the deceased had held land of theking.

Lynda Pidgeon

The International Medieval Congress 2013 (IMC)The IMC is the largest annual gathering of medievalists in Europe, with a focus on all aspects of theMiddle Ages (c. 300–1500). Last year the IMC was attended by a record 1751 participants from 40countries worldwide, with over half coming from outside the UK. The 20th annual IMC will takeplace 1–4 July 2013 in Leeds on the University of Leeds main campus and will focus on the specialthematic strand, ‘Pleasure’. For more information on IMC 2013 visit www.leeds.ac.uk/ims/imc/index.html

Members of the Research Committee will again be in attendance, and we will also be having astall at the IMC's Historical and Archaeological Societies Fair which takes place on Wednesday 3July from 1 to 5 p.m.

Coming in the June BulletinFollowing the confirmation that Richard III's remains had been found, the Bulletin’spostbag has been a lot fuller than normal. We have not been able to include all the lettersand comments received in this issue, but we hope to catch up in June’s Bulletin. There willalso be features on scoliosis, King Richard’s diet and the facial reconstruction. We willalso carry news of any further developments in the plans for King Richard’s reintermentand the Greyfriars visitors centre. Other items to look forward to include:

• Phillipa Langley will be paying tribute to the unsung heroes who helped make theLooking for Richard III project such a success.

• Annette Carson reflects on the Greyfriars excavation and what it might mean forRichard’s reputation.

• Stephen Cooper looks at the role played at Agincourt by Richard III’s great-uncle,Edward, duke of York, who was an important figure in the history of House of York.

• Geoffrey Wheeler’s article about Claire Bloom’s role as Anne Neville in Olivier’sfilm version of Shakespeare’s Richard III (initially planned for this issue but due tolack of space held over till June.)

23

Looking for Richard

Leicester’s Greyfriars dig: the result

The evidence from the Greyfriars digIn the Bulletin Extra we provided a summary of the finds; here we provide Leicester University’skey supporting evidence behind the identification of the human remains as belonging to Richard III.The text is copyright of the University of Leicester. For further information visitwww.le.ac.uk/richardiii.

Evidence from DNA analysis The modern DNA work was carried out by DrTuri King at the University of Leicester. DrKing carried out the ancient DNA analysis indedicated ancient DNA facilities at theUniversity of York, in the lab of ProfessorMichael Hofreiter with Gloria Gonzales Fortes,and travelled to the Université Paul Sabatier inToulouse – to work with Dr Patricia Balaresqueand Laure Tonasso – where the work wasindependently verified. This was checked withmitochondrial DNA from the two female-linedescendents – Canadian-born furniture makerMichael Ibsen and a second person who wishesto remain anonymous. Their link with RichardIII was verified by a genealogical study led byUniversity Pro-Vice-Chancellor ProfessorKevin Schürer.

Dr Turi King said: ‘The aim of our part ofthe project is to use DNA evidence to helpidentify the skeletal remains found at theGreyfriars site: does the DNA analysiscorroborate the archaeological evidence andpoint to these being the remains of Richard III?The first step was to determine if the twofemale-line relatives – Michael Ibsen and asecond person who wishes to remainanonymous – shared the same mitochondrialDNA sequences. The analysis showed thatthese two individuals shared the samerelatively rare mitochondrial DNA sequence.We then had to see if it was even possible toretrieve ancient DNA from the Greyfriarsskeleton. DNA breaks down over time and howquickly this happens is very dependent on theburial conditions. Therefore, we wereextremely pleased to find that we could obtaina DNA sample from the skeletal remains.

Finally, the DNA sequence obtained from theGreyfriars skeletal remains was compared withthe two maternal line relatives of Richard III.We were very excited to find that there is aDNA match between the maternal DNA fromthe family of Richard III and the skeletalremains we found at the Greyfriars dig.

‘As in a forensic case, the DNA evidencemust be assessed alongside the other evidence.Here the results of the archaeological andosteological analysis, combined with thegenealogical and genetic evidence, make for astrong and compelling case that these areindeed the remains of Richard III.

‘In addition, the researchers are hoping tocompare the skeleton’s DNA with descendantsdown the male line. To do this, they will needto obtain Y chromosome data – the male sexchromosome. Preliminary analysis of the DNAconfirmed that these are indeed the remains of

Michael Ibsen gives a DNA sample to Dr TuriKing

a male and so researchers are hopeful that theywill be able to analyse the Y chromosome. Anumber of the men identified as descendants ofEdward III through his son John of Gaunt –who would both have shared the same Ychromosome as Richard III – have been kindenough to donate their DNA to our project. Theanalysis of their DNA is complete and I nowhave a consensus Y chromosome type of theseindividuals. As such, this side of the work is inits early stages, and may indeed proveinconclusive, but we are hopeful that, if it’spossible to conduct a full analysis, it willprovide a complete picture on both the maleand female lines.’

Evidence from bone analysis Dr Jo Appleby, an osteoarchaeologist based atthe University’s School of Archaeology andAncient History, conducted an extensiveexamination of the Greyfriars skeleton. Hermain findings were:

• The individual was male, in his late 20s tolate 30s, and had gracile or feminine build.

• He had severe scoliosis – perhaps with anonset at the time of puberty.

• Although he was around 5ft 8in. (1.61m)tall, his condition meant he would havestood up to 1ft (0.3m) shorter and his rightshoulder would have been higher than theleft.

• Trauma to the skeleton suggests deathfollowing a significant blow to the rear ofthe skull.

• Other injuries may have occurred ataround the time of death. These includeseveral injuries to the head, one to the riband one to the pelvis – thought to havebeen caused by a wound through the rightbuttock.

• Evidence suggests significant post-mortem mutilation – ‘insult wounds’ –although the face may have beendeliberately left intact to ensure he wasstill recognisable.

Dr Appleby said: ‘Taken as a whole, the skeletalevidence provides a highly convincing case foridentification as Richard III. The analysis of theskeleton proved that it was an adult male, butwith an unusually slender, almost feminine,build for a man. This is in keeping with

historical sources which describe Richard asbeing of very slender build. There is, however,no indication that he had a withered arm – botharms were of a similar size and both were usednormally during life. The skeleton is that of anindividual aged between the late 20s and late30s. We know that Richard III was 32 when hedied, and this is entirely consistent with theGreyfriars skeleton. Without the spinalabnormality, the Greyfriars skeleton wouldhave stood roughly 5ft 8in. (1.72m) high. Thiswould have been above average height for amedieval male; however, the curve in the spinewould have taken a significant amount off hisapparent height when standing. This individualwas not born with scoliosis, but it developedafter the age of ten. The condition would haveput additional strain on the heart and lungs, andit may have caused pain, but we cannot bespecific about this.

Our work has shown that a large wound tothe base of the skull at the back represents a‘slice’ cut off the skull by a bladed weapon. Wecannot say for certain exactly what weaponcaused this injury, but it is consistent withsomething similar to a halberd. A smallerinjury, also on the base of the skull, was causedby a bladed weapon which penetrated throughto the inner surface of the skull opposite theentry point, a distance of 10.5cm. Both of theseinjuries would have caused almost instant lossof consciousness, and death would havefollowed quickly afterwards. A further threewounds have been identified on the outersurface of the vault of the skull. In addition tothese, there is a small rectangular injury on thecheekbone.

Finally on the skull, there is a cut mark onthe lower jaw, caused by a bladed weapon,consistent with a knife or dagger. We speculatethat the helmet had been lost by this stage in thebattle. This has led us to speculate that theymay reflect attacks on the body after death,although we cannot confirm this directly fromthe bones. Examples of such ‘humiliationinjuries’ are well known from the historical andforensic literature, and historical sources havesuggested that Richard’s body was mistreatedafter the battle. In addition, there is a cut markon a rib which did not penetrate the ribcage andan injury on the right pelvis. This is highlyconsistent with being a blade wound from a

24

knife or dagger, which came from behind in anupward movement. Detailed three-dimensionalreconstruction of the pelvis has indicated thatthis injury was caused by a thrust through theright buttock, not far from the midline of thebody. These two wounds are also likely to havebeen inflicted after armour had been removedfrom the body. This leads us to speculate thatthey may also represent post-mortemhumiliation injuries inflicted on this individualafter death.’

Evidence from the genealogical study Professor Kevin Schürer, the University’s Pro-Vice-Chancellor with special responsibility forResearch and Enterprise, led a genealogicalstudy to verify the connection betweenCanadian-born furniture maker Michael Ibsenand Richard III. They also aimed to find otherdescendents of the king by exploring both themale and female lines of descent. The teamincluded David Annal, previously PrincipalFamily History Specialist at the FamilyRecords Centre, The National Archives, and DrMorris Bierbrier, a Fellow of the Society ofGenealogists, specialising in royal lineage. Theteam found:

• confirmation of the maternal link betweenAnne of York – Richard III’s sister – andMichael Ibsen’s mother Joy;

• documentary evidence for each ‘link’ ofthe chain between Anne of York and JoyIbsen;

• a second maternal descendent – whowishes to remain anonymous – whoseDNA has been used to verify the linkbetween the skeleton and Michael Ibsen.

Professor Kevin Schürer said ‘We wanted totry and verify the identity of the skeletonagainst present DNA. We wanted to both lookon the male line of direct descent and thefemale line of direct descent to match bothaspects of the DNA. What we have done is tolook at the line from Anne of York to MichaelIbsen and accurately checked every link of thechain. This was to ensure that we can givedocumentary evidence that the daughters andthe mothers match up all the way to Joy Ibsenand Michael Ibsen. We have been successful inproving that link, and I think that’s animportant part of the scientific experiment.

There is always a risk that you may have amatch between ‘A’ and ‘B’ – but withouthaving all the links in the chain, the link maybe spurious. Right from the start of the project,we did not want to rely entirely on the DNAbetween Michael and the skeleton. We alwayswanted – for scientific reasons – to triangulatethat wherever possible. We set about trying tosecure a second maternal line, and after severalweeks of research we actually did discover thisperson. The documentary evidence again isthere to support this.’

Evidence from archaeological dig Archaeologists from University of LeicesterArchaeological Services (ULAS) carried out adig at the site of the Grey Friars church inLeicester – where Richard III is believed tohave been buried – in August. The teamuncovered a fully articulated skeleton, withpossible battle injuries and scoliosis of thespine. The initial archaeological investigationshowed:

• The burial is in the choir of the church, asrecorded by the chronicler of the time,John Rous

• The grave has apparently been hastily dugand was not quite long enough

• There is no evidence for a coffin, shroudor clothing as might be expected for ahigh-status burial.

• The disposition of the arms is unusual,raising the possibility that the hands couldhave been tied.

• The skeletal remains show that the personsuffered from severe scoliosis and haddied as a result of wounds received inbattle.

Experts from the East Midlands ForensicPathology Unit (EMFPU), based at theUniversity of Leicester, and the Department ofEngineering, conducted a radiological examin-ation of the human remains. The group, led byEMFPU chief forensic pathologist ProfessorGuy Rutty, aimed to help identify the remains– as well as to determine the cause of theindividual’s death. The group found:

• The dental evidence suggests theindividual was 35, while bone evidencesuggests he was 30 to 39.

25

• There are multiple estimates for his height,ranging from 5ft 3in. to 6ft – with themeans for each calculation ranging from5ft 7in. to 5ft 9in.

• He was white.• The cause of death – on a balance of

probabilities – has been given as a headinjury, with the proviso that the remainswould only show injuries to the bone andnot other organs. For instance, he couldhave been stabbed in the heart and therewould be no mark on the skeleton.

• The pelvic injury was potentially fataldepending upon when it was inflicted –which cannot be determined from askeleton. However, history suggests hedied from a head injury and not pelvicinjury.

• The individual had also sustained non-fatal injuries to the head and one rib.

Professor Guy Rutty said: ‘We used computedtomography (CT) scanning to look at the bonesand determine the age, stature and ethnicity ofthe individual. We also used the CT to also lookat the injuries, natural disease and aging of theindividual. It was very important to our work. Itwas the best bone CT we have ever done. Thereare potentially fatal injuries to his head – andwe won’t dispute the possibility that it was oneof these wounds that killed him. There are alsoa number of other injuries to his head as well asan injury to his rib cage and injury to his pelviswhich were not fatal and may be post mortem.’

Professor Sarah Hainsworth, an expert intool mark analysis, Professor of MaterialsEngineering at the University’s Department ofEngineering and forensic engineer at theEMFPU, carried out micro-computed X-raytomography (micro-CT) scanning on the skull.This was critical in helping to determine thetypes of weapon that were used to create theinjuries as the resolution of the images showsdetail that helps us to interpret the way inwhich the damage was inflicted.

Evidence from radiocarbon dating The University of Leicester commissionedanalysis from the Universities of Oxford andGlasgow, which carried out radiocarbon datinganalysis of the skeleton to help determine thetime period in which the individual would have

died. Radiocarbon dating is also useful fortelling us about the individual’s diet – whichcan be an indicator of their social status. Theradiocarbon dating shows:

• The individual had a high protein diet –including significant amounts of seafood –meaning he was likely to be of high status.

• The individual died in the second half ofthe fifteenth or in the early sixteenthcentury – consistent with Richard’s deathin 1485.

Comparison with historical sources There are a several contemporary accountswhich claim to tell us about Richard III’sappearance and character – but it can bedifficult to know how much their represent-ations were affected by contemporary or laterevents, including the Tudor ascent. Fifteenth-century scholar John Rous completed hisHistory of England in 1486, which containedsome unflattering but not entirely derogatorymaterial about Richard III. John Rous said:

• Richard was ‘slight in body and weak instrength’ – which corresponds with Dr JoAppleby’s description of the skeleton as‘gracile’.

• He was buried among the Friars Minor(Franciscans) of Leicester in the choir ofthe church. This was the part of the churchwhere the search team discovered theremains.

Similarly, fifteenth-century Silesian noblemanNicolas von Poppelau – who met and clearlyliked Richard III – said Richard was taller andslimmer than himself, not so solid and farleaner, with delicate arms and legs.

Professor Lin Foxhall, Head of theUniversity of Leicester’s School ofArchaeology and Ancient History, said: ‘Jo’sdiscoveries about the delicate, ‘gracile’character of the skeleton and some of itsgender-ambivalent characteristics mightencourage us now to see these historicaldescriptions in a new light, and to read thesedescriptions rather differently than I suspecttranslators have done in the past.

‘In Latin, “vis”, “strength, vigour”, is oftena characteristically masculine quality. If wehave identified this skeleton as the right

26

27

Who killed Richard III? The debatecontinues Following on from the article in the DecemberBulletin, two further names can be added tothose claiming responsibility for the death ofRichard III. An e-mail from Mark Dobsonprovided the name of Rhys Fawr apMaredudd,1 while Raymond Skinner sentinformation on Thomas Woodshawe.2

Rhys Fawr ap Maredudd’s claim comesdown from family tradition, which claims hedelivered the final blow with his halberd. Thefamily coat of arms is said to confirm this: itdisplays a white lion holding ‘an uprootedwhite rose with royal purple leaves’, which issaid to symbolise the death of Richard. Furtherinformation on Rhys Fawr (Rhys the Great),can be found in John Leland’s Itinerary.3

Rhys lived in the township of Tir Ifan, in athree-storeyed tower house at Plas Iolyn thatoverlooked the Merddwr valley. Following thedeath of William Brandon at Bosworth, Rhystook up Henry’s standard and ‘according totradition’ killed Richard. In gratitude for hissupport Henry added to his estates and wealth.Rhys’ son Robert became chaplain to Wolseyand benefited further from Tudor favour. In thechurch at Ysbyty Ifan there are alabastereffigies of Rhys and his wife Lowri, probablyplaced there by his grandson Ellis Price.4

Leland provides interesting background onthose who supported Tudor. He became HenryVIII’s librarian in 1530, then in 1536 he wasappointed King’s Antiquarian and commiss-ioned to ‘peruse and diligently search out allthe libraries belonging to the religious houses,to make a survey of the books and manuscriptsand find texts that would emphasise thesupremacy of the King in his contest withRome’.5 Over the summers of 1536 to 1539 hetravelled the counties of England and Wales,with the names of local gentry who couldprovide him with accommodation while on hisjourney.

Part of Leland’s mission was to ‘visitfamilies who had helped to establish the Tudordynasty. He was visiting the first-generationdescendants of the men who had taken part inthe Battle of Bosworth and Leland had a list oftheir names’.6 Three knights connected to theroyal household came from North Wales.Interestingly, given Rhys’ role at Bosworth,two of them, Sir Richard Puleston and SirWilliam Griffith, had served with CharlesBrandon, and supplied Leland with details forWales.

Of the many families visited by Leland it isonly Rhys Fawr who was said to have claimedresponsibility for killing Richard, whileanother of those visited, Elis ap Richard ofAlthrey Hall in Maelor Saesneg (parish ofBangor, Overton and Hanmer), was able toshow Leland a room in his hall where the nameRichmond had been scrawled on the wall toshow its owner’s support of Tudor. This wasElis’ father Richard ap Howell, whose supportat Bosworth had been rewarded with the king’ssword and belt.7 Therefore, while manyclaimed to be supporters, not all claimed to bea regicide.

Succeeding generations of the Welsh gentrywho had supported Tudor appear to havemaintained their connections to the Tudorcourt, receiving rewards of further land andoffices in Wales. Many of those supportingTudor came from North Wales and were to befound amongst the lesser gentry. With Tudor’sown family coming from Anglesey this isunsurprising. Much of the support for Tudorhad been encouraged by the poets who sawHenry as the prophesied king of the Britons,with whose coming the Welsh would beresurgent and the Saxons overcome.

Despite Welsh support things did not quiteturn out as the Welsh hoped, and theGlamorgan poet Llywelyn ap Hywel becamecritical of Henry VII and his choice of Englishcouncillors. ‘The Welsh’, he said, ‘had become

individual, Rous’ and von Poppelau’s accountscould actually have been more acute andprecise descriptions of the living person thananyone has realised. Our archaeologicalresearch does not tell us anything about thecharacter of Richard III, and of course hisphysical condition and appearance were not a

manifestation of his character. Texts also don’talways tell us “the facts” in a straightforwardway. But, now that we may be able to set thesetexts against the archaeological finds, we couldend up rewriting a little bit of history in a bigway.’

28

mere servants of the Tudors, “the men fromAnglesey”, whilst base weeds were promotedlords. Jasper and Henry preferred the men ofthe north, the hated northern English, to “ourmen”’.8 This is an interesting echo of thecomplaints made against Richard and hisnorthern support.

While Tudor support might be expected inNorth Wales, what of the Englishman ThomasWoodshawe? Described as ‘grasiour ofTamworth’, he appears to have been a tenant ofthe Willoughby family.9 The claim forWoodshawe as a regicide is to be found in adocument called The Declaracion of theFamily of Ley. This is a history of the Leyfamily written in the early seventeenth centuryfor James Ley, first Earl of Marlborough.James Ley’s great-great-grandfather Henryfought at Bosworth for Tudor.10 Henry Ley wasa tenant and man-at-arms of Sir RobertWilloughby, hence the link to Woodshawe,who also seems to have been a distant relativeof Henry. Henry was said to have witnessedWoodshawe’s action. As Henry Tudor headedtowards Bosworth he gathered men fromShropshire and Staffordshire. At Tamworth hewas joined by John Savage the younger andothers. It is possible that this is whereWoodshawe also joined Henry. WhetherWoodshawe actually killed Richard or not, hewas rewarded by Henry: on ‘20 September1485, he was made bailiff of the lordship ofBerkeswell, Warwickshire, and keeper of thepark there for life, during pleasure’.11

What can we make of these various claimsto have killed Richard? The source for bothWoodshawe and Rhys ap Thomas is a familyhistory written in the early seventeenth century.Antiquarianism had been on the rise during thesixteenth century and James Ley had been afounder member of the Society of Antiquarieswhen it was first founded in 1586.12 As well asan increasing interest in history, new arrivals atthe Tudor court felt the need to prove theirancestry, which may also explain an addedinterest in demonstrating early support for theTudors. Interestingly, of the family histories sofar known to mention a link to Bosworth, it isonly George Buck, in his family history, whoclaims to have had an ancestor who fought forthe losing side.13

For the moment we therefore have Ralph

Rudyard and Thomas Woodshawe, both fromStaffordshire, and Rhys ap Thomas and Rhysap Maredudd from Wales. All of the familiesclaiming a regicide are reliant on familytradition, but can this be relied upon? Some ofthe men were rewarded, but this could justhave been because they were there in the closefighting around Henry and Richard. Theirpresence in the final mêlée would appear toconfirm that Richard was struck down by amob consisting of Welshmen and Stanleysupporters. While no one person can reallyclaim to be responsible for Richard’s death weare perhaps getting the names of some of thosein the mob who delivered the barrage of blowson Richard’s prostrate body. But it should beremembered that none of the accounts ofBosworth name any one individual, and therewards given out by Henry after Bosworth donot say they were given for killing a king.

Lynda Pidgeon

1. I am grateful to Mark for providinginformation which he found in a bookletproduced by Denbighshire CountyCouncil, Denbighshire People and Places,by Dr Charles Kightly (http://tinyurl.com/Denbighshire-People-and-Places).

2. Mr Skinner very kindly sent me a copy ofhis book A Retiring Collection (2003),which contains a collection of articles thathe had written. The relevant one onWoodshawe had originally been publishedin The Ricardian, vol. 9, no. 121, June1993, ‘Thomas Woodshawe, “Grasiour”and Regicide’.

3. Derek Williams, An Epic Tudor Journey:John Leland’s Itinerary of Northern Wales,Pwllheli, 2008.

4. Ibid, pp.16–19.5. Ibid, p. 25.6. Ibid, p. 417. Ibid, pp. 31–2.8. Gruffydd Aled Williams, ‘The Bardic road

to Bosworth’, Transactions of theHonourable Society of Cymmrodorion,1986, pp. 7–31.

9. Raymond Skinner, A Retiring Collection,p. 195.

10. Ibid, pp. 195–6. The Declaracion is heldin the Wiltshire and Swindon RecordOffice (Chippenham), ref 366/1.

29

In at the deathI would like to propose a different scenario tothe one currently suggested for the death ofKing Richard III. At this stage, please note thatI am working from photographic evidenceonly, with no exact measurements of thewounds present on the bones, but with aworking knowledge of the weapons likely tohave been involved, and the wounds they caninflict. I acknowledge with thanks thecontribution to my thinking from osteo-archaeologist and forensic anthropologist DrCorinne Duhig,1 with whom I have pored overthe available photographs of the wounds, anddiscussed the different scenarios which mighthave caused them. Corinne would be the firstto point out there is no way to exactly tell whathappened, or the order in which the blows fell.I am also making an educated guess about thetype of armour Richard would be wearing.

On 22 August 1485, King Richard presseshome his attack on the rebel Henry Tudor.Mounted and supported by a small band ofloyal knights, he charges directly at HenryTudor and his personal entourage. He killsseveral of Henry’s bodyguard and unhorses hisstandard bearer. At around this point Richard’shorse either becomes stuck in boggy ground, oris injured, and the king is unhorsed. He’s nowcut off, on foot, and surrounded by enemytroops. He is well aware that losing his mountplaces him in mortal danger. He is still not aneasy target for Henry’s foot soldiers: he isencased in the best-quality plate armour,sculpted and engineered to resist blows frommost battlefield hand weapons. But on foot,and surrounded, the odds are rapidly stackingup against him. No doubt he receives manyviolent blows, resulting in bruising and internaltrauma: injuries to the body which will not ofcourse be visible once the soft tissue decays.

Most of the foot soldiers surrounding himare armed with polearms such as halberds orpoleaxes, bills and glaives, as well as swords

and daggers. Following common individualcombat tactics of the day, the points ofpolearms are jabbed towards his face. (It takesa man of exceptional courage and training notto flinch when sharp points are thrust at hisface, even if he is wearing full plate armour.)This could explain the square-profiled stabwound to his face (which matches the top spikeof many polearms), especially if Richard’svisor has been knocked open, or the king hasopened it himself, to see better and to breathemore easily. It is very probable that Richardreceives a concussive blow to the head, forcinghim down to the ground, in a staggeredkneeling or all-fours position. This blow couldeven be the cause of the small squarish-profiledwound on the top of his head. A strike from thespike at the rear of a halberd/poleaxe/warhammer could conceivably pierce his helm anddamage his skull in this manner. Once he’sdown, the end is not far away: he is vulnerableto attack on all sides.

Scenario: Richard is forced to his knees bymany violent blows and thrusts to his face,head and body, while trying to keep his footingon uneven ground. He’s already bleeding fromat least one facial injury; now almostdefenceless, he receives more blows to thehead. If it has not already happened while hewas standing, a crashing blow from the beak ofa polearm or war hammer penetrates his helmetand damages his skull. In the process of itbeing wrenched free, it pulls back the flakes ofbone that have been pushed into his skull. Hishead falls forward, exposing the base of hisskull to a powerful scything blow from apolearm such as a halberd or poleaxe, whichslices into his skull and brain. The blade’sprogress is probably hindered by the stiff mailecollar he wears, hence the smooth cutinterrupted by a ragged edge. He now fallsunconscious almost instantly due to massiveblood loss from one of the major blood vesselsof the skull base, and dies very shortly

11. Ibid, p. 197; CPR 1485–94, p. 4.12. Arthur Noel Kincaid, ed., The History of

King Richard the Third by George Buck,1982, p. xliv. The Society of Antiquarieswas founded in 1586 and dissolved in1607; attempts were made to revive it in1614.

13. George Buck is best known for his bookThe History of King Richard the Third(1619). In the history he traces his owngenealogy and claims that his grandfather,John Buck, was attainted after Bosworth.As with the other histories, he relied onfamily tradition.

30

Leicester City Council and the searchfor King Richard III

In March 2011 I was asked to attend a high-level meeting in the council with someone whohad an unusual request. Philippa Langley hadalready been put in touch with RichardBuckley, of the University of LeicesterArchaeological Service, and had enlisted hishelp to demonstrate that the council’s car parkfor its Social Services offices might – just

might – lie over the remains of King RichardIII. Philippa was convinced it was worth a try,even though the chances were remote. TheArchaeology Service was also keen becauseyears of excavations related to city centreredevelopment meant they had a wealth ofinformation about medieval Leicester, and thiscar park, tantalisingly in a place calledGreyfriars, between Greyfriars and Friar Lane,was one of the last important remaining piecesof the jigsaw. Philippa had not dealt with a

afterwards. His helmet can now be wrenchedor cut off, and he receives more blows abouthis head and body, at least one from a sharpblade that glances off his head, scooping out asection of the skull and scalp. A thrust from asword or bladed polearm, again to the base ofthe skull, penetrates deeply, ensuring the kingis well and truly dead.

This is just one scenario for the death ofKing Richard. Exactly which weapons wereinvolved is hard to tell. It is sometimes quiteeasy to identify blade shapes from injuries inbone, the angles of the cutting-edge, theamount of trauma delivered, and indeed theangle of the cut itself. But on the medievalbattlefield there were many pointed, sharpobjects that could be responsible for theseinjuries. The order in which they weredelivered is almost impossible to interpret,apart from what appears to be a stab or cut tothe back, and the wound to the pelvic bonewhich could only have occurred after Richard’sarmour and clothes were being – or had been –removed. When the body was stripped of itsarmour, it would probably have been cut away,and it is easy to see how wounds would havebeen generated in battlefield conditions, byslips from knife or dagger when trying to cutthrough a plethora of leather straps andbuckles.

The suggestion of ‘humiliation wounds’ is,of course, also entirely plausible. But the newKing Henry VII would want Richard’s corpseto be recognisable to one and all, and certainlynot so badly disfigured by facial wounds so asto hinder recognition. He probably gave strictinstructions as to the condition in which hewished the body to be delivered. Humiliated,yes, but unrecognisable, no!

The common notion that the medieval

battlefield was full of knights encased in platearmour is a false one. By the date of the battleof Bosworth, full plate armour was prohibit-ively expensive; indeed, some notablemembers of the aristocracy preferred to fight inlimited plate and a brigandine rather than fullplate, although this was probably down topersonal preference rather than cost. Theaverage foot soldier would have worn acombination of different styles of armour. Theweapons preferred by these men were thehalberd, bill and glaive, polearms that gavethem the ability to strike powerful blows andthrusts while retaining some distance betweenthemselves and their combatants: a very usefulfeature, when engaging a fully-armouredknight or man-at-arms.

Many of these polearms seem to overlap intheir designs, causing a little difficulty in theircategorisation. Indeed, some halberds could beclassed as poleaxes, and vice versa. Quite oftenthe type of weapon carried by a man wascategorised by his social rank: foot soldierscarried halberds, knights and men-at-armscarried poleaxes. So it looks as if the writtenaccounts are correct, and the authors knew howto distinguish between the weapons and thesocial class of the wielders, since some of thewounds suggests the use of weapons such asthe halberd. The death of Richard III can beplaced at the feet of a minor member of thegentry or a commoner; at least one, possiblyseveral. Which explains why there was no greatmagnate leaping up and down, shouting ‘I didit!’ and waiting for a rich reward from the newking.

Ragnar Magnusson1. Dr Duhig is affiliated to the McDonald

Institute for Archaeological Research,Cambridge.

31

council or commissioned anexcavation before, and what shewas suggesting was a tall order,since the car park was heavily usedfor essential council business and itwas hard to see where the moneycould come from. Nevertheless, shemade a good case and as a result Iwas asked to be the lead councilcontact.

And so we set out on our longjourney. There were many setbacks,which Philippa unfailinglyapproached with charm, commonsense, a willingness to learn,relentless determination, and a spiritof co-operation, all of which,encouraged people along the way toshare her enthusiasm and want to beinvolved. The crucial support of onecouncil colleague in particularshines out – this was Mick Bowers,who was responsible for theGreyfriars council offices and thecar park arrangements for all itsstaff. Mick kept everyone informed.The excavation attracted muchinterest from the teams based thereand was even accompanied by amini-exhibition about Richard III.

We really thought the dig would happen inApril 2012, just after the Queen had sat inLeicester Cathedral right next to KingRichard’s memorial stone, on her Jubilee visit,but it didn’t. A few weeks later, there wasPhilippa on the phone to me again with anotherplan, and this time with support from RichardTaylor, the University of Leicester’s Directorof Development. Then at the last minuteanother source of support reduced. ‘You’ll justhave to fund-raise’ I said. So Philippa got onwith it. The council agreed to underwrite partof the shortfall. Thanks to the Richard IIISociety’s generosity, this was not needed, butthe council and university eventually sharedthe costs of an extra week’s excavation. Ifinally gave Philippa permission to start theexcavation just over three weeks before itstarted, on Saturday 25 August.

It stopped raining, the sun shone, theOlympics morphed into the Paralympics andthen one morning Philippa rushed into my

office with a story an hour in the telling. SirPeter Soulsby, our City Mayor, opened our newVisit Leicester Centre that day, and RichardTaylor and I walked up and down the streetoutside, telling him this incredible news.

On 12 September the University’s pressconference at the Guildhall gave the story tothe world. It has remained in the news eversince, such is the interest in this man and theamazing story of how his grave was lost in adecaying friary church, forgotten under a townhouse garden, and found again, after half amillennium, under a council car park.

Since Sir Peter Soulsby became City Mayorin May 2011 he has promoted Leicester’sheritage as a way of bringing its citizenstogether, by encouraging a shared sense ofpride and belonging. Valuing their heritage alsohelps to make places more attractive to visit,work in and live in. The King Richard IIIdiscovery is therefore very important, and sothe council has responded in the followingways:

Victorian school adjacent to the Greyfriars car park, location ofthe of the proposed visitors' centre. Note the new tarmac overone of the filled-in excavation trenches.

32

Celebrations down underIt has been a very exciting few days in NewZealand. On Sunday 3 February the NZ Branchheld its annual summer picnic at branchsecretary Rob Smith and Helen’s country homein Greytown. Twenty-eight members andguests were determined to be in celebratorymood, anticipating what was to prove a red-letter day for the Society.

Being 13 hours ahead of UK time, thefollowing day several members stayed up lateto tune into the University press conferenceand when the results were announced thephones started ringing, even from Australia.

Reportedly, large quantities of bubbly andchocolate were consumed into the early hours,with one member even indulging in a hot bathwhile doing so!

The NZ media gave full coverage to theannouncement, which was front page news inboth national and local papers and alsohighlighted in radio and television newsreports. Both branch chair Deirdre Drysdaleand secretary Rob Smith have beeninterviewed by local press, with morescheduled. Past chair Annette Parry, who is thelast holder of the NZ Mastermind title (andtherefore the reigning champion), was asked to

• Immediately after the announcement weorganised a series of open days. Around10,000 people in total came to see theexcavations, finds and grave site.

• Although most of the trenches had to bebackfilled and the car park returned to use,we erected a large and very weatherprooftent over the grave site and it hascontinued to attract a great deal of interest.We plan to resume weekend tours of thegrave site once spring comes and theweather improves.

• On 7 February we opened a temporaryexhibition at the Guildhall about thearchaeological excavation and subsequentresearch, called ‘Richard III: Leicester’ssearch for a king.’ A full eventsprogramme will be provided during thisexhibition. We hope this will includescreenings of the Channel 4 documentary.

• Following this we will open a permanentvisitor centre in the Victorian schoolbuildings adjacent to Greyfriars car park,dedicated to telling the story of KingRichard III’s life and death. This willinclude access to the grave site, and is nextto the cathedral. The Richard III Societyhave generously funded a reconstructionof King Richard III’s head, vividlyshowing how he would have appeared inlife, and we are delighted that the Societyhas offered this as an exhibit in the newvisitor centre.

• A King Richard III walking trail will soonbe published, and information provided onour ‘Story of Leicester’ website. Our

council offices are already embellishedwith window vinyl displays about thesearch for King Richard III and more areplanned across the city.

It was wonderful to meet so many Richard IIISociety members during the course of theexcavation and open days. The Society’s helpin promoting this important chapter inLeicester’s story over the years is very muchappreciated. We look forward to welcomingSociety members to Leicester on 2 March foryour conference at the University of Leicester,and we hope you enjoy our temporaryexhibition. We would value your commentsabout it, because these will help to shape ourplans for the permanent visitor centre, and wewill soon be discussing with the Richard IIISociety ways in which the Society and itsmembers can become involved in this majornew project.

Finally, Leicester City Council would liketo thank one extraordinary lady, PhilippaLangley, who followed her dream and nevergave up. She was a joy to work with and thegood she has done for the people of Leicester,as well as for the world’s understanding ofKing Richard III, can never be underestimated.

Sarah Levitt

Sarah Levitt is Head of Arts and Museums atLeicester City Council.For more details of exhibitions, events andopening times visit the Leicester Museums &Arts Service website:www.leicester.gov.uk/museums.

33

The discovery of Richard III – areview of Channel 4’s The King in theCar ParkChannel 4’s ‘world exclusive’ on the Mondayevening was hardly that. They had given thegame away nearly two weeks earlier, with theirpress release entitled ‘Richard III: The King inthe Car Park’. The weekend print media hadalso had a field day, which was then capped bythe morning conference in the CouncilChamber of Leicester University, whichrevealed what most of us had already assumed.

Notwithstanding the immensely irritatingadvert punctuations, the programme was ableto project the narrative quite effectively.Excerpts from Olivier’s film (still my favouriteslice of ‘ham’); assured cameos by TonyPollard and Pamela Tudor-Craig; and thepositive use of the Richard III Society’swebsite were meshed with animated scenesand visits to Bosworth Field. Visual high-points for me were the expressions on PhilippaLangley’s face when she realised the bodysuffered from a spinal abnormality, when shewas told the DNA matched, and when she

gazed on the craniofacial ‘reconstruction’ ofRichard III – ‘so full of joy’. Philippa, withJohn Ashdown-Hill, must take her fair share ofcredit for the chain of events. Equallymemorable was the reaction of Michael Ibsento the news that he, indeed, was a nephew ofthe 17th generation.

Truth may well be the daughter of time; butit is often also the offspring of rigorous,academic investigation. The cross-disciplinarycollaboration which was engaged inestablishing the ‘truth’ in this instance must beheartily commended. Those of us well versedin programmes such as Cold Case, and theAmerican series CSI and Body of Evidenceknew what to expect – radiocarbon dating,radiological evidence, bone analysis and otherarchaeological results. Gradually the evidencebuilt up: the ‘arrow’ found lodged in the backproved to be a ‘Roman nail’; the scoliosisprobably did not start until the age of ten; thehigh protein diet, with plenty of fish; the‘gender shocker’ (Farnaby) in the laboratorywhich revealed the skeleton had some femininecharacteristics; the trauma and armour

appear on National Radio’s major afternoonprogramme and, during a lengthy interview,impressed with her encyclopaedic knowledgeof Richard’s times and ensured the Society’srole was to the fore. Subsequently thepublishing of the facial reconstruction re-ignited the story and it would be difficult toimagine the average New Zealander not beingaware of both Richard and hence the Society’sexistence. Roll on 2014 and the reburial!

Rob Smith, New Zealand Branch

For members in Australia the situation wassimilar. On Monday morning my day beganwith phone calls from two radio stations inBrisbane asking about my feelings on theupcoming announcement. Being only 11 hoursahead of the UK, for us in Australia the pressconference started at the much more civilisedtime of 9 p.m., compared to New Zealand.Many of us tuned in to follow it live and therewere quite a few homes where the clapping andcheering might have woken neighbours when itwas finally announced that the skeleton wasindeed Richard’s. Then telephone and e-mail

lines started up as the bubbly was flowing.There has been widespread media coverage

during the following days, in print, radio andTV, some very well researched, but unfortun-ately also some less so.

The Sydney Morning Herald interviewedme for an article on what the finds might meanfor performances of Shakespeare’s play. Ourbranch member Karen Clark was alsointerviewed by the Australian BroadcastingCorporation’s (ABC) Overnights programme.Various other interviews have also beenscheduled. Most of the coverage, even the lesswell-researched, emphasised the importance ofthe find.

Unfortunately there were also a few lesssavoury remarks. The ABC News Breakfastprogramme included a feature on Richard,which also mentioned the dispute over whetherRichard should be reburied in Leicester orYork. Then one of the hosts made a flippant,rather tasteless remark that maybe they shouldshare the bones, with each getting some, as ifhe was a bag of sweets.

Dorothea Preis, NSW Branch

Flavour of the monthAfter decades of being ignored by the media,except for the odd ‘pot shot’ at Richard fromtime to time or a review of a Shakespeare play,there has been little media interest in the king.Now suddenly with Philippa Langley’s‘Looking for Richard III’ project and the dig atLeicester we find that both Richard and theSociety are, as the saying goes, ‘the flavour ofthe month’ with the media falling overthemselves trying to get an interview.

During the week of the dig I found that Iliterally spent the whole time in my little officeat home answering media requests forinterviews coming in both by phone and e-mail. As an indication of how widespread thesemedia contacts were, and to follow on fromGeoffrey Wheeler’s media retrospective in theDecember edition, we received calls from notonly the national television stations but alsocontacts from local BBC television stations aswell as the BBC’s local radio stations.

In addition to this calls came in from allover the world. To list just a few, I fielded anearly morning call from the AustralianBroadcasting Commission’s Sydney radiostation, wanting to do an interview within thenext hour; this went out to Wendy Moorhen,who did the interview. Next was a call from aJohannesburg radio station in South Africa,

which also wanted an interview as soon aspossible; I think that Philippa got this one.Later I received a call from a television stationin Canada that wanted to do an interview on-airwithin half an hour for their early morningbreakfast show – this one I picked up.

The calls just kept coming from far andwide, including contact from Ukraine NationalTelevision, which wanted to send a cameracrew over to film the dig. A request from theFrench National Radio for an interview inLondon – this one went to our Chairman, whospent over three hours with the interviewer.Major US newspapers were also keen to get inon the act, with requests from the New YorkTimes, Washington Post and the Los AngelesTimes, all of which visited the dig site and wealso arranged for them to talk to Philippa.

I must say just how surprised I was at theamount of interest that this project hasgenerated worldwide, and now we are awaitingthe next avalanche as the DNA results areannounced and inevitably the question ofreinterment. Before finishing, thanks go toJohn Ashdown-Hill, Wendy Moorhen, LyndaPidgeon, Philippa Langley, Annette Carson andPhil Stone for doing these interviews, many ata moment’s notice.

Richard Van Allen

specialists who surmised that several blowswere delivered after any helmet had gone, andwho pointed out two fatal blows to the skull,one from a halberd and one from a sword,either of which would be fatal.

The DNA findings (apparently the ‘killerpiece’ of evidence), was presented by Dr TuriKing of the University of Leicester’s eminentgenetics department. It is interesting, howeverto read the view of Mark Thomas, a professorof evolutionary genetics at University CollegeLondon: “People tend to privilege DNAbecause they see it as firm science [but onlywhen] you put it together with the spinedeformation, the wounds and so on, it makesfor a more persuasive case.” Still compellingwas the moment it was revealed that the so-called ‘mtDNA’ from the skeleton matched thatfrom Michael Ibsen.

The programme’s presenter, mercifully notthe ubiquitous Tony Robinson, was actor and

writer Simon Farnaby, perhaps best known toyounger viewers for playing William Burke (ofBurke & Hare), Caligula and the Grim Reaperin CBBC’s Horrible Histories series – notanother ‘determined to prove a villain’? Once Igot past the ‘big hair’, I warmed to Simon’sunderstated but genuine involvement in thecase: “He could have been a hunchback butstill been a nice guy”. One highlight came atthe end, when he announced: ‘My name isSimon Farnaby and I am a Ricardian’. We musthope for many more, who viewed theprogramme and who have read and will readabout the discovery, to join him and join theSociety.

The last couple of years have now provedthat the battle of Bosworth was in the wrongplace and that Richard III was in the correctplace (and will now, rightly, be reburied inconsecrated ground nearby).

Kenneth Hillier

34

35

That was the week that wasThe signature tune of the iconic 1960stelevision satirical review, sung by MillicentMartin, and remembered by those of a certainage, continued with the line ‘It’s over, let it go’.Week commencing 4 February 2013 is a weekthat Ricardians will not let go. This articletakes a look at our press campaign leading upto the most exciting of weeks for Ricardiansand how the media reacted to the news thatKing Richard III had been found.

Our newly appointed Press Officer, PeterSecchi, wrote in December’s Bulletin aboutmanaging the opportunities in light of thediscovery of the Greyfriars human remains.Since coming on board he has been planningour PR campaign with a small team from theExecutive Committee, a plan which wouldpeak with the announcement of the test resultsand the transmission of the Channel 4documentary.

Initially we did not have ‘news’ but weneeded to raise the Society’s profile, so weissued a series of focused press releasesdesigned to keep the media aware of ourpresence. On 8 October we issued a tribute tothe exemplary archaeological research whichled to the Greyfriars discovery and anotherlater in the month stressed that scoliosis was acondition and not a deformity. Christmasoffered a more seasonal approach and a pressrelease about celebrating a medieval Christmasled to Research Officer Lynda Pidgeon beinginterviewed on the radio. In late December wewere able to announce that the Society wasfunding the facial reconstruction of theGreyfriars skull (which of course we alwayshoped would be Richard’s) and in order topromote a balanced image of the king we tookout advertorials (these are paid features) inBBC History magazine and History Today. Forthe BBC magazine we looked at the positiveaspects of Richard’s parliament, and HistoryToday examined his military career. Wefollowed these up with a press release on 8January emphasising Richard III’s manyachievements as king of England. However, allthis was just a dress rehearsal of the big day –D-Day – 4 February 2013.

A number of members had been identifiedas spokespersons: the key players in theLooking for Richard III project – Philippa

Langley, John Ashdown-Hill and AnnetteCarson – as well as the Society Chairman,Deputy Chairman and Research Officer. Ouranchor man throughout has been Richard VanAllen, our Public Relations Officer, who rarelyleft his desk and telephone over the next fewdays. All were asked to keep track of theinterviews given but in reality there was somuch media interest at home and throughoutthe world that it became an impossible task.

The buzz began a day or two before D-Day,with press enquiries coming in and requests fortelevision and radio interviews, live orrecorded; many journalists were seekingtelephone interviews for features they werewriting. Meanwhile, the Society’s PR team hadits own problems. It was agreed that we wouldbe given at the last minute a preview of theresults, so that we could finalise our ownstatement, planned to go out immediately afterthe university’s press conference. We also hadthe launch of our new website and the BulletinExtra to consider – both had to reflect theresults and both were working to tightdeadlines. We had several versions of our pressrelease ready to meet all contingencies: versionA (the positive result), version B (DNAinconclusive), version C (it wasn’t Richard –the one we hoped not to have to use). The finalscene for the documentary was being filmed onthe Sunday morning and once the results hadbeen made known to Philippa Langley she wasunder embargo and could not talk to the pressuntil after the announcement on Monday

Philippa Langley talks to the media after the 4February press conference in Leicester.

morning. The day wore on and the universitywere playing it very close to their chests. Onlytwo people were to be let into the secret: SirPeter Soulsby, the Mayor of Leicester and ourown Chairman, Phil Stone. It was very lateafternoon before Phil got the call and he couldtell us was to go with version A of the pressrelease.

Monday 4 February was the most amazingday. The press conference was televised –sadly, coverage was interrupted by anothernews story – but for those in Leicester thatmorning it was something that will never beforgotten. The day started early, Sky News at7.30 a.m. were clamouring for a live interviewwith Phil Stone for early afternoon and theAustralian Broadcasting Corporation inSydney wanted a live interview during thepress conference. This was eventually fieldedby Annette Carson at home in East Anglia.John Ashdown-Hill was whisked off in a car tothe BBC’s Ipswich studio for the their Todayprogramme and suddenly there were notenough spokespeople to cover the mediafrenzy. Call after call came in for interviewsfrom all over the UK and overseas. After theofficial press conference finished at theuniversity Phil and Philippa spent the nextcouple of hours talking non-stop in front ofcameras, including a crew from the Qatari-based Al Jazeera channel. One of Philippa’smost memorable interviews was with TheScotsman, a newspaper she used to work for.

Tuesday 5 February, however, was theSociety’s day; the unveiling of the facialreconstruction of Richard III at the Society ofAntiquaries. The face had, of course, beenrevealed during the previous evening’s TheKing in the Car Park documentary andinevitably there had been some screen ‘grabs’of the image in the next morning’s media. Wehad been under pressure to release pictures ofthe face, under embargo until the documentaryhad been broadcast, to the press beforeTuesday’s conference. This we resisted, notleast because of the logistics, which involvedPhil Stone collecting ‘Richard’ from thepremises of the production company, DarlowSmithson, on his return from Leicester lateMonday afternoon. Both Peter Secchi andRichard Van Allen urged us to have thephotography done that evening so that it would

hit the papers on Tuesday. It’s not always agood thing to ignore professional advice but inthis occasion we did. Something told us thatthe Greyfriars discovery would dominateTuesday’s media and our chances would bebetter the following day.

We had a great line-up for the pressconference, Philippa Langley and Phil Stone,as well as Janice Aitken of Dundee University,the artistic interpreter for the facialreconstruction. She represented ProfessorWilkinson, who had undertaken the actualreconstruction, but unfortunately had anotherengagement that day. We also had Sarah Levitt,head of Leicester City’s Arts and MuseumService (the reconstruction will eventually bedisplayed in their planned visitor centre) andGraham Turner, the artist who has paintedRichard III many times. Other guests includedPlantagenet descendant Michael Ibsen andGreyfriars archaeologist Richard Buckley. Thevenue, of course, was poignant: we gathered inthe Antiquaries meeting room, where theirfamous portrait of King Richard is displayed –the portrait reproduced on the Bulletin’s coverand on our website’s home page. Our pressofficer surpassed himself by arranging forGetty Images to photograph the head, and forthe Press Association to interview the keyplayers. Before the press conference the‘official’ photographs took place in theAntiquaries library and ‘King Richard’ wasprepared for his media appearance by JaniceAitken, who insisted on a quiet five minuteswith him to arrange the wig and hat. (The wigis real hair and King Richard has his own set ofhair straighteners, coloured purple of course.)

Although with nowhere near as manyjournalists and camera crews as the previousday it was still an impressive turnout and oncethe official presentations were over theinterviews began and continued for nearly twohours. Philippa’s final interview was with CNNin their London studio for a live breakfastprogramme broadcasted to around 300 millionpeople in the United States and beyond.

A week later, it all began again with thedecision to launch the design for the proposedtomb of King Richard and once again theinterest was enormous; the phones kept ringingwith requests for interviews or comments.Suddenly it seemed as though history was back

36

A day in LeicesterOn Sunday 10 February I queued for 40minutes to see Leicester Council’s Richard IIIexhibition. I thought the exhibition was nicelydesigned, and despite its necessarily compactlayout did its best to set out the basicinformation of the archaeological project andthe life of the king as well as the passion ofthose that lay behind the quest to discover hisremains. The plastic 3D print of the skull wasquite beautiful, luminous as fine bone chinaand positioned above the digital rendering ofthe skeleton it seemed to me to have theatmosphere of a twenty-first century reliquary.

Earlier, as we reached the front of the queueafter suffering the cold and the rain, a ratherabrupt man came up to me. ‘What’s this?’ hesaid. ‘It’s the exhibition for Richard III’ I said.I’m shy and tongue-tied by nature and notcomfortable with being approached bystrangers. The man grunted. ‘Are the bones inthere?’ ‘No,’ I said, forgetting my diffidence,‘they’re not.’ A bigger grunt. ‘Uh, the bonesaren’t there? Is this something they’ve cobbledtogether then?’ ‘Not exactly,’ I said, but theman had already humphed off, telling thosewith him ‘the bones aren’t there . . .’

I thought this was incredible and I waslaughing (partly in disgust) with my friendwhen I heard an echo behind me in the queue‘oh, the bones aren’t there.’ Moments later, aswe were told we could enter the exhibitionnow, an American lady coming out looked atme archly and said ‘the bones aren’t in thereyou know.’ ‘I know,’ I said. ‘Where are theythen?’ she asked me. ‘I think they’re inLeicester University.’ ‘Oh they’re there arethey?’ She laughed, walking off towards thecathedral.

While the discovery of Richard’s burialplace, and all the knowledge that this discovery

makes available to us, is fantastic, I certainlybelieve that his remains should remain personaland private. I suddenly had the flash of animage; crowds of medieval faces pushingforward to see the remains of the dead kingrecently slain at Bosworth and I thought, arewe any different despite those 500 years?

I was relieved and touched by contrast at myvisit to the cathedral, which is literally fourstrides from the entrance to the Guildhallwhere the temporary exhibition is being held.

I must admit I did believe that Richard IIIshould be laid to rest in York, and in fact Ivoted to have him laid to rest in York Minster.However, when I visited Leicester Cathedralon Sunday I was struck by its warmatmosphere, and its relatively small size givesit an unusually intimate feel. Although it didnot become a cathedral until 1927 it is anancient religious site. The information aboutRichard III that was on display struck me asbeing genuinely welcoming. We mistimed ourfirst visit, as there was a talk going on and allwere gathered around the memorial stoneprovided by the RIII society in 1982. We wentback after visiting the exhibition hoping to takea look at the stone, but the tour party had nowbeen replaced by a choir who were singingbeautifully. We were leaving when the vergervery pleasantly asked us if we had seen thememorial. ‘You must go and see it, you’vecome so far.’ He was so helpful and genuinethat I am convinced that Leicester Cathedral isa really apt choice for the resting place ofRichard. In the leaflet Richard III & LeicesterCathedral it says that Richard ‘resembles mosthuman beings who try to do their best even inthe worst of times’. I am sure that LeicesterCathedral will do their best to honour and givea home to Richard III.

Kay Fletcher

37

on the nation’s agenda and everybody wastalking about Richard III.

The Society has received massive presscoverage and no doubt interest will continue aswe move towards the spring of 2014 and theexpected reinterment of King Richard’s

remains. However, there is no time to rest onour laurels, for our work continues to ensure itwill be Good King Richard that peopleremember next spring.

Wendy Moorhen

38

The king in the car park crowned:initial reflections on the press andtelevision coverage

PreludeBefore the press launch by Leicester Universityon the morning of 4 February, the media hadbeen informing us for several weeks that thescientific evidence would confirm that theskeleton found last September in Leicester wasreally the remains of our last Plantagenet king.Despite the official embargo we were beingdrip-fed news that evidence including DNAlinks would be forthcoming to confirm theidentification. The Sunday Times (3/2/13) ranthe story ‘I had a hunch’ in which PhillipaLangley explained how an eerie feeling whenshe first visited the car park in 2009 made herthink that this was the site of Richard’s grave.This inspired her to raise the money on behalfof the Richard III Society to allow LeicesterUniversity Archaeological Services to carryout the excavation that was to prove her correctand also confirmed John Ashdown-Hill’shypothesis on the location of the Grey Friars(The Last Days of Richard III, 2010, pp93–109).

Channel 4 documentaryThroughout 4 February national radio and TVinformed us that the remains of the missingking had indeed been identified. In the eveningwhen Channel 4 broadcast their documentaryRichard III: the King in the Car Park, theelement of surprise had gone. The only in-depth advance review of the documentary inthe weekly TV guides appeared in the SundayTelegraph (3/2/13), while the background toits production was discussed in Broadcast(1/2/13).

Actor-comedian turned presenter SimonFarnaby talked us through the excavation,starting with the fortuitous discovery on thefirst day (25 August) in the first trench to beopened up of part of the legs of a human burial,which subsequently proved to that of the king.Appropriately there was already a stencilled Ron this part of the tarmac and at the time of thediscovery there was even a dramatic storm.Thus started Philippa Langley’s quest, whichwas to end with her coming face to face withRichard III, so to speak. At this stage the

archaeologists’ aim was to try and establish theground plan of the Franciscan friary, and thenif the choir of the church could be identified,this was where the search for Richard’sremains would be focused. Having decided thatthe first trench was to be located across thechoir it was decided to extend part of it, whichallowed the rest of the skeleton to beuncovered. Interestingly, they initially felt thattheir chances of finding Richard’s remainswere quite remote, and so as the evidence thatthey had actually found him slowly mountedtheir mood changed from scepticism tosurprise. It is extremely rare for the remains ofnamed pre-Reformation individuals to bearchaeologically identified and studied inEngland; almost all bodies which are examinedfrom this period are anonymous.

We witnessed a rather harassed Jo Applebyexcavating the regal skeleton and saw heradmit that she had accidentally damaged theskull with a mattock! It was immediatelyapparent that this particular individual had aspinal deformity, later to be identified asscoliosis. A fragment of iron found betweentwo of Richard’s vertebrae, initially thought tobe an arrowhead, proved to be a Roman nail.Much was made of the discovery of thissupposed arrow head last year when it wassuggested that he had been shot in the back (seeBulletin, December 2012, pp 49–50). It wasapparent that the supine posture of the bodywas slightly distorted by the fact that the gravewas too small, so his skull was upright. Whenthe exhumed skeleton was placed in acardboard box for removal offsite the occasionwas marked by Philippa placing a replica ofRichard’s banner over the box, which JohnAshdown-Hill then reverently carried to thewaiting van. So via a means of transport thatwould have been incomprehensible to Richard,his remains left the friary after 527 years ofresidency.

The latter part of the programme focused onthe scientific study of Richard’s skeletalremains. The horrific nature of his battlefieldinjuries and later mutilations were explained indetail. The radiocarbon dates produced a rangeof 1450–1540 (95% probability), while a DNAlink between samples obtained from theskeleton and descendants of Richard’s sisterwas successfully established. Simon clearly

39

wanted to find out more about Richard’s lifeand he quickly discovered the ongoing battlefor the king’s reputation. The programmeended with a dramatic premiere of Richard’sfacial reconstruction produced by ProfessorCaroline Wilkinson of Dundee University.

What the papers saidThis is the sort of story that the press dream of:the heady combination of royalty, grisly death,mystery and scientific detective work makesfor compulsive reading, so every major paperran it, doubtless aware that it would keep theiropinion columns and letters pages full formany weeks to come. Most of the in-depthpress reports produced during the followingdays included a large-scale photograph of thenow-famous skeleton with annotationspointing out the battlefield injuries, thescoliosis, plus some judicious quotes fromShakespeare’s Richard III (Daily Mail; DailyMirror; Guardian; Independent; Times 5/2/13;Sunday Express 10/2/13). The king’s feet hadbeen removed by nineteenth-century activityon site or, according to the Daily Mail, ‘theywere lost in earth movements’. Variousaccounts mentioned that Richard was buried‘naked’, that is say there was no evidence forthe existence of a coffin, shroud, or clothingand the fact that his hands were crossed overhis pelvis was misinterpreted as evidence thathis wrists may have been tied. During themedieval period some individuals were buriedwith their hands placed over their chest orpelvis in a position of prayer as a sign ofreverence. It is fairly certain that his burial wasa hasty affair, hence the grave being too small.However, haste would have been necessary dueto the fact that his mutilated corpse was alreadydecomposing, as at least two days elapsedbetween his death and his burial. It would havebeen highly irreverent of the friars not to havewrapped Richard’s corpse in a cloth shroud,which would have left no archaeological trace.

The Guardian (Science) pointed out that themitochondrial DNA evidence for Richard’sidentification was imperfect as there are onlytwo direct descendants and there was no ‘deepmatch’ of data. Professor Mark Thomas, ageneticist at University College London,pointed out that the DNA evidence was of lessimportance in determining Richard’s identify

than the other evidence as ‘people tend toprivilege DNA because they see it as firmscience [but only when] you put it togetherwith the spine deformation, the wounds and soon, it makes for a more persuasive case’. In factbefore the press conference LeicesterUniversity geneticist Dr Turi King had notcompleted her analysis of the DNA samples.She had only matched traces of mitochondrialDNA extracted from the skeleton with samplestaken from both relatives and she only had timeto sequence the DNA control region (NewScientist 9/2/13).

Published pictures of Richard III’s newfacial reconstruction tally reasonably well withthe Society of Antiquaries portrait of him,which it is believed was produced in c 1510.However, some papers felt that Richard’sreconstructed facial image looked rathersimilar to that of the Shrek villain LordFarquaad (Daily Mail and Daily Star 6/2/13;and Sun 7/2/13).

Richard’s reputation and further researchThe amount of media interest generated in thePlantagenets may well inspire some researchinto a variety of topics, apart from the ongoingreassessment of Richard’s reputation. As thestudy of history has been described as‘endlessly contentious and argumentative’(New Statesman 8/2/13), there is plenty ofscope here for debate. One commentator notedthat claims that the details concerningRichard’s injuries ‘will “rewrite history books”is unconvincing’ (Analysis, Guardian 5/2/13).Another article (Analysis, The Times 5/2/13)argued that Richard was a contender for ourworst king and that his deformity makes Tudorpropaganda about him ‘more plausible’.Conversely it could be argued that Tudorpropaganda sought to exaggerate his spinaldeformity, so he could be portrayed as twistedin mind and body and therefore unfit to rule.Hopefully, now Richard’s physique can beproperly understood we can get away fromShakespeare’s fictional portrayal of ahunchback king with a withered arm (TLS8/2/13). We now know that Richard’s heightwould have been significantly reduced from 5ft8in. (1.72m) by his scoliosis and that his rightshoulder was probably higher than his left.Also his build was quite slender. However, as

40

Richard lived an active life and took part inbattles, he was certainly not incapacitated byhis condition. One journalist noted that Henry’schroniclers deftly presented Richard ‘as aregicide and child killer, the very epitome ofevil’, which was a fine piece of PR‘manipulation’ (Times 8/2/13). This was atheme that Shakespeare elaborated upon byhaving Richard describe himself as‘deformed’, ‘subtle, false and treacherous’ inthe opening scene of his play (Richard III Act1, Scene 1). Sadly, the media still struggles todisentangle Shakespeare’s character from thereal Richard III, as their coverage is oftenillustrated by actors in costume andShakespeare’s fictional description of Richardis sometimes cited as historical evidence. SomeShakespearean actors and commentators in thelight of Richard III’s rediscovery are nowreconsidering how his character should beportrayed on stage (Guardian 5/2/13* andStage 14/2/13).

Several other themes emerged in thecommentaries that accompanied the newscoverage. First, the battle of Bosworth andRichard’s last hours (Daily Mail and Times5/2/13). We now know Richard was bare-headed when he was apparently struck downby head injuries. The Times pointed out DNAmay now help identify the missing remains ofAlfred the Great, reputedly buried in an

unmarked grave in Winchester; through tracinghis descendants may be difficult (Times5/2/13). A further article compared theachievements of Alfred and Richard (Times9/2/13). It has been pointed out that besidesAlfred, the burial places of Henry I andStephen are also lost, but might berediscovered by archaeological investigation(Sunday Times 10/2/13). Richard III was alsolisted along with various other peopleincluding Genghis Khan, all of whom havebeen ‘misjudged by history’ (10/2/13).

Another suggestion is to re-examine the twoindividuals, believed to be the ‘Princes in theTower’, who were reburied in WestminsterAbbey in 1678 (Times 5/2/13). In 1933, theirskeletal remains were subjected to osteologicalstudy, which established that the twoindividuals were both juveniles, but theirgender was not determined and their agesremain uncertain (Archaeologia, 84, 1934,pp.1–26). Edward, the older of the two princes,was 12 in spring 1483 and his younger brotherRichard was aged 10. Reappraisal of the 1933data confirms that the dentition of these twojuveniles indicates age ranges of c. 11.6 to14.3, and c. 7.8 to 9.5 years old respectively.Estimates of their ages derived from theirskeletal development range from c. 12 to over14 years old for the older juvenile, and c. 10 to13 for the younger one (London Archaeologist,

TThhee ffaaccee ooff aa kkiinngg

AA ttoommbb ffiitt ffoorr aa kkiinngg ((sseeee pp.. 33))

Richard III’s tomb: proposed design. © Richard III Society

The face of Richard III. This facial reconstruction from a CT scan of the Greyfriars skull wascreated by Professor Caroline Wilkinson and commissioned by the Richard III Society.

Photos © Getty Images

i

ii

TThhee sskkeelleettoonn

Left: The skull of the skeleton found at theGreyfriars excavation in Leicester, identifiedas that of King Richard III. Above: Thecomplete skeleton, showing the curve of thespine. © University of Leicester

iii

Human remains found in Trench One of the Greyfriars dig. © University of Leicester

TThhee rreemmaaiinnss aatt tthhee GGrreeyyffrriiaarrss ddiigg

iv

TThhee BBlluuee BBooaarr IInnnn ((sseeee pp.. 1155))

RReecceenntt RRiiccaarrddiiaann ffiinnddss ((sseeee pp.. 1177))

A gold coin dating from 1484 found near to the site of the battle of Bosworth, bearingRichard III's personal emblem of the boar (see magnified detail). Other details show St

Michael spearing a dragon and on the reverse a ship on the waves with a shield and crucifixabove it. Image courtesy of Spink, London.

3D computer model of the Blue Boar Inn, with an old engraving from the same angle.Computer image © University of Leicester

41

vol 5, 1987, pp. 259–62). These figures areimportant, as various letters and press reportshave often either overlooked or misrepresentedthem. All recent requests for the re-examination of these juveniles have beenrefused and it has been foolishly suggested thatthe authorities have resisted examination ofthese remains as ‘the tests could not firmlyestablish if Richard III is to be let off the hook’(Guardian 6/2/13)*. There seems to be acomplete misunderstanding about what re-examination of these two juveniles wouldreveal. For instance, it is extremely unlikelythat re-examination would determine theircause of death and radiocarbon dating wouldonly establish a broad date range for theirdeath: it would certainly not differentiatebetween 1483 and 1485. However, it would bean excellent idea to have a modern re-examination of these juveniles, as currentlytheir remains are undated; modern osteologicalstudy may be able to provide more precise dataconcerning their respective ages (the aging ofmedieval juvenile skeletal remains iscomplex). If DNA could be extracted fromtheir remains this would help determine theiridentity and their kinship relationship (witheach other and with other Plantagenets).

Where Richard should be reburied?This matter was discussed by the House ofCommons (30 October 2012), the optionsconsidered including Leicester, Worksop andYork. On 29 November the Justice MinisterHelen Grant confirmed that if this individualwas conclusively identified as Richard III, thenhis remains would be reinterred in LeicesterCathedral in accordance with the terms of theMinistry of Justice exhumation licence grantedin 2012. Of course the problem is we knownothing of Richard’s wishes – he obviously didnot expect to die at Bosworth and doubtlessexpected to live for many more years as he hadnot started to build a funerary monument.

To date a number of options for places ofreburial for Richard have been discussed in thepress and letters pages. First, in September2012 the Queen apparently vetoed his reburialin Westminster Abbey, where his queen, AnneNeville, was buried in March 1485. There havebeen calls for Richard to have a state funeraland for him to be reburied in WestminsterAbbey (Daily Mail and Evening Standard6/2/13). Second, Fotheringhay, where RichardIII was born and his parents are buried andMiddleham, where Richard lived for severalyears, have both been suggested as appropriateplaces for his reburial. Third, GloucesterCathedral has been suggested as compromise,as Richard was also duke of Gloucester.

*Items included in the collage are denoted byan asterisk (*)

42

Fourth, York Minster has been suggested:because Richard intended to create a collegiatecollege of priests at the Minster he clearlyfavoured York. Also York came top in the BBCHistory Magazine poll in autumn 2012, with60% of the votes as his place of reburial(latterly York City Council and the city’s MPshave called for Richard’s reburial in York –Guardian 6/2/13). Last, Leicester Cathedral,where Richard is already commemorated by aledger stone in the chancel, appears to be thechosen location for his reburial. A computer-generated image of a design for a limestonechest tomb for Richard has been producedalready by the Society (Telegraph and Times14/2/13). An article in the Church Times(4/1/13) argued that Richard’s reburial inLeicester could boost faith: ‘Richard III camefrom troubled times: history now helps us tosee beyond that uncertainty to a confidence inGod’. A Times editorial (5/2/13) stated: ‘Deadchuffed: the great and good of Leicester arebrimming with civic pride over their royallink’. On 7 February it was announced byofficials representing York Minster that theynow supported his reburial in Leicester (Times8/2/13). There is also the question of what formof ecumenical service should mark Richard’sreburial; a Latin requiem mass would seemappropriate (Evening Standard 6/2/13 andTelegraph 14/2/13).

Selective reports from UK newspapers andmagazines concerning the determination ofRichard’s identification. This survey summarises material producedsince September 2012:

17 October Country Life, ‘Villain or Victim? Evenif DNA confirms Leicester bones are RichardIII’s Michael Billington doesn’t think ourimpression will change’, illustrations: Olivier, A.Sher, and M. Rylance as Shakespeare’s RichardIII.

26 October Guardian, ‘Fighting over bones andbadgers’ (Simon Hoggart’s sketch – House ofCommons discussion over Richard III’s place ofreburial). Daily Mail, ‘Yesterday in Parliament:Quentin Letts – ‘That Richard III – is ‘e still onthe electoral roll in York?’.

28 October Mail on Sunday, ‘King Richard III toget cathedral burial’, illustration: copy of Societyof Antiquaries of London portrait of Richard III.

31 October Times, ‘Winter of discontent as MPsfight for Richard III’ (Parliamentary sketch) AnnTreneman, illustration: NPG portrait of Richardlll.

2 November Daily Mail, ‘Has Richard III beenunfairly treated?’ (debate).

30 November Times, ‘Bring up the body – but themystery remains’ Ben MacIntyre (comparing thedecision to exhume Yasser Arafat to determinehis cause of death with the analysis of RichardIII’s supposed remains). Your Family HistoryMagazine ‘Hunchback in the car park? Geneticgenealogy set to help identify the remains ofRichard III’.

8 December Guardian, ‘To catch a king’ (interview)Joanna Moorhead illustrations: NPG portrait andM. Ibsen.

15 December Telegraph, ‘Skeleton will be con-firmed as lost body of Richard III’ Nick Collins,illustrations: Windsor portrait of Richard III.

16 December Sunday Times, ‘DNA or no DNA, wereckon it’s Richard III’ Jack Grimston,illustration: NPG portrait. Editorial: ‘Dirty Dick,saviour of ye printed word’. Sunday Sun, ‘Ahunch it is Richard’.

1 January 2013 Times, ‘Man who holds the key toRichard III’s fate’, inset: ‘No bones about city’sexcitement’ (mood in Leicester), illustrations:Soc of A’s portrait, armed figure of Richard III atBosworth centre and M. Ibsen.

4 January Church Times, ‘Richard III can buildconfidence: the king’s reburial in Leicester couldboost faith’ ; illustration: Cathedral ledger stone.

13 January Sunday Independent, ‘Art: Visions ofRichard’ Alistair Smart, illustration: Windsorportrait (Seven magazine feature).

1 February Broadcast, ‘A hunch, some luck and alot of spadework’, illustrations: scenes fromdocumentary.

2 February Independent, ‘Is the body in the carpark really that of Richard III? At last the answer. . .’ Steve Connor, illustrations: Olivier asRichard III and re-enactors at excavation.

3 February Sunday Independent ‘The man who willunmask Richard III’ (interview), illustrations:NPG portrait, M. Ibsen and re-enactors atexcavation. ‘Could the skeleton found under acar park really be King Richard III?’ (review offorthcoming documentary in Seven), illustration:NPG portrait. Sunday Times, ‘I had a hunch: thetrue story of the hunt for Richard III’ PhilippaLangley (PL) interview, plus ‘Council car parkskeleton will be crowned Richard III’,illustrations: Soc of A’s portrait; PL; theexcavation and M. Rylance playing Richard III.

4 February Evening Standard, ‘Skeleton under carpark is Richard III’ Rose Lydall, illustrations:

43

skeleton and Soc of A’s portrait. Daily Express,‘A hunch it’s Richard III’ Adrian Lee,illustrations: K. Spacey as Richard III; portrait ofHenry VII [sic] and PL on excavation. *DailyMail, ‘Is this the skull of Richard III?’,illustrations: skull; grave excavation and NPGportrait. Daily Mirror, ‘Head of state: expertsready to unveil skull as Richard III’s’ MarkJefferies, illustrations: skull; excavation and Socof A portrait. Daily Telegraph, ‘Is this the skull ofRichard III?’, illustrations: skull, excavation andbattle of Bosworth engraving. Guardian, ‘Carpark man – who may be Richard III’.Independent, ‘Richard III – the final act’,illustrations: annotated skull and NPG portrait.Metro, ‘Battle scars clue to the “lost” king’,illustration: skull. Times, ‘Richard heads for agrave in the cathedral after DNA tests’,illustration: skull.

5 February Daily Express, ‘Hunch pays off: carpark body is Richard III’ Giles Sheldrick,illustrations: skull; skeleton; grave excavationand Soc of A portrait. *Daily Mail, ‘500 years on,the grisly secrets of Richard III’s lost grave arerevealed’ insert ‘Calls for a state funeral’ and‘“Treason” he cried as he charged into thecarnage’, illustrations: skeleton; NPG portraitand battle of Bosworth engraving. *DailyMirror, ‘I had a hunch it was him!’, illustrationsincluding: skeleton and PL on excavation. *DailyTelegraph, ‘It’s him: Richard III rises from thegrave’, illustrations: skeleton; NPG portrait andbattle of Bosworth engraving. Editorial: ‘TheDNA detectives’. Financial Times, ‘Geneticsprovides key to identification of Richard III’.Illustration skeleton. Sun, ‘Richard III – the lastresting place’, illustrations skull, new facialreconstruction (referred to as NFR hereafter),skeleton, Greyfriars site aerial view. *Guardian,front page masthead montage of NPG portraitskull and skeleton, ‘Bent spine, slashed skull andDNA to match: Leicester finds its king’, Science:‘Accuracy of evidence may be bone ofcontention’ Analysis: ‘Bringing up the bodywon’t bury arguments’, illustrations: skeleton;NPG portrait; reconstruction of Richard’s placeof burial within friary and K. Spacey as RichardIII, statue. G2: ‘Could Leicester become the nextholiday hotspot?’ and ‘My first thought was poorman’ (actors reconsider playing the role ofRichard III). Independent, ‘DNA tests prove car park kingreally is Richard III’ Steve Connor and EricShort, illustration: skeleton. *’i’ ‘King RichardIII skeleton bona fide, DNA tests confirm’ Illus.skeleton, skull, grave, NPG portrait. , ‘RichardIII: it seemed like a massive long shot, but the

team who started digging up a city centre carpark soon realised they had struck gold’, ‘Thehunch paid off – proving it would be hard part’,‘Killed by a sword thrust to the base of the skull’,‘The king’s speech’ (Richard III had WestMidlands accent) and ‘Keeping the secret’(extracts from souvenir issue), numerousillustrations including: project participants;excavation; skull and statue of Richard atBosworth centre. Metro, ‘Their hunch wascorrect: car park skeleton is that of Richard III’,illustrations including: skeleton. *Times, ‘Alfredthe Great the next in line to be dug up’,‘Ignominious fate of the soldier king who met avaliant death in battle’, ‘Now DNA team turn toPrinces in the Tower’, ‘Difficulty in tracingdescendants set to dent Alfred hopes’ and ‘A“rudely stamp’d” character with only one aim inmind’, illustrations including: skeleton; NPGportrait; Battle of Bosworth engraving; KingAlfred; the Princes in the Tower by Millais andM. Rylance playing Richard III. Analysis:‘Hunchback and tyrant? Yes. Child killer? Maybe’. Editorial: ‘Dead chuffed: the great and goodof Leicester are brimming with civic pride overtheir royal link’. Sun, ‘Richard III: the last restingplace’ illustrations: including skull; skeleton andnew facial reconstruction of Richard III.

6 February *Daily Express, ‘Richard III:murderous tyrant or misunderstood monarch?’illustration NFR, skeleton, debate R. Gore-Langton and Lynda Pidgeon. *Daily Mail,‘Richard III . . . king of Shrek?’ and ‘Give him aright royal send off’, illustrations including:NFR. *Daily Mirror, ‘The face of a king (withthe voice of a Brummie)’, illustrations including:NFR. *Daily Star, ‘Face it! I’m really kingRichard III’, illustrations including: NFR.*Evening Standard, ‘Royal send-off for Richardis up in the air’, ‘Pressure mounts for funeral tobe Catholic not Protestant’ , ‘Bury Richard III inthe abbey . . . my kingdom for a hearse’.Editorial: ‘Bring back Richard’, illustrationsincluding: skeleton and NFR. *Metro, ‘Meetingmy royal relative’ illus, NFR and M. Ibsen.*Guardian, ‘Now is the wider discontent forsome in York’, ‘ Why the princes in the Towerare staying six feet under’ and ‘It’s like hewanted to be found he was ready’ Maev Kennedy(PL interview), illustrations including: PL withNFR and Millais’s Princes in the Tower.Independent, ‘The recasting of Richard III’,illustration: NFR. Times, ‘Yorkists go into battlefor Richard’s body’, illustrations: NFR and Socof A’s portrait. T2 ‘Richard and me: a love story’(PL interview), illustrations: PL on excavationand with NFR.

44

7 February Sun, ‘Royal’s cartoon lookalikes; HeirBrushed’ (NFR compared with otherindividuals).

8 February Church Times, ‘Richard III raises graveissues’. New Statesman Editorial: ‘The king isdead’. Times, ‘York throws in the towel in thebattle of Richard’s bones’ and ‘Meet PolydoreVergil, the original spin doctor’ Ben MacIntyre.TLS, ‘Richard crookback: how the physicalremains of Richard III compare with historicaland literary accounts of the king’, illustration:skeleton.

9 February *Financial Times, ‘Return ofMachiavellian monarch on the make’. NewScientist, ‘My kingdom for a hearse’ and ‘Royaltruth will out’. (Editorial) Times, ‘Alfred savedus from Danes: what did Richard ever do?’

10 February Independent on Sunday, ‘Hero orvillain’, PL. caricature.* Observer, ‘ WhatLeicester needs to do now is to launch a RichardIII theme park’. David Mitchell. Sunday Express,‘The last Plantagenet: Richard III’ (illustratedsouvenir and wall chart), and ‘I couldn’t believewe found him. I jumped and swore’ and ‘IsRichard III’s son next?’. Editorial: ‘A royal find

gives hope to all lost causes’. ‘After thediscovery of “villainous” Richard III’s bonescome new efforts to clear his name, so who elsehas been misjudged by history’. Sunday Times,‘That’s one royal dug up – plenty more to go’ and‘Car park king or reservoir dog? It’s your call’,illustration: NFR.

14 February Daily Telegraph, ‘Wolsey next onhistoric dig wish list’ (proposal to search forCardinal Wolsey’s lost remains in LeicesterCathedral), illustration: proposed tomb designfor Richard III. Editorial: ‘Burial fit for a king’.Stage, ‘The Bard and some old bones’. ProfessorStanley Wells. Times, ‘Tomb fit for kingrevealed’; illustration: proposed tomb design.

18 February *Newsweek cover NPG Richard III‘He’s Back … ignore the revisionists he was asbad as we thought.’ Simon Schama plus variousfeatures.

21 February Times, ‘Leicester may have Richard –but we have his killer …’ illustration: funeraryeffigy of Sir Rhys ap Thomas.

Bruce Watson and Geoffrey Wheeler

On the lighter side? Satirical swipesand graveyard humourIf we thought that all the ‘car park’ cartoonsand jokes had been exhausted, the ‘breakingnews’ from Leicester this February showedthat, regrettably, that this was not the case.‘Pugh’ (DM 5.02) depicted a sign for the citycar park advertising ‘Short stays up to 2 hours.Longer stay up to 600 years’ [sic], andsimilarly ‘Tim’ (Ind. 5.02) showed one headed‘Pay and Decay’ ‘Very Long Stay car park’with an arrow pointing to the tarmac. A reporterinterviewing an attendant was Roger Beale’ssubject (Fin.T. 5.02), with him saying ‘RichardIII is clearly an overstayer and we’re checkingfor outstanding penalty notices’ whilst theMirror (5.02) reported a Twitter user hadcalculated ‘The day rate for an NCP car park is£18.50p, so as Richard had been there for192,649 days, he owed £3,546,006.50p’ TheSun’s Rod Liddle thought ‘He was a short-tempered man and it is almost certain that hedied of rage trying to get his pound coin intothe slot of one of those trolleys.’ (7.02) PrivateEye (8-21.02) was also under the mistakenimpression as to the site, as its cartoon washeaded ‘The Body in the Supermarket Car Park“. . . crucial evidence proves that it is Richard

III” by Our Archaeological Staff: GloriaSummer. (1) The body was found in a disabledspace (2) Near a hump (3) And a “Yorkie” barwrapper (4) During a winter of discontent (5)DNA reveals remains of Richard’s horsenearby in aisle seven.’ Illustrated by theLeicester skull captioned ‘Keith Richard III’. Arock star connection also occurred to StephenCollins for his strip cartoon in the GuardianWeekend (16.02), which pictured a ‘bass-playing skeleton king’. The two other favouritetopics coinciding with the university’srevelations were the downfall of MP ChrisHuhne and the ‘horsemeat burger scandal’,which inspired a number of artists. But aheadof the latter, Haldane had kicked off (Tim.19.01) with a sketch of the king serving at a‘Richard III Royal Barbecue’ captioned ‘Ahorse, a horse, etc’ and he also contributed on 2February two archaeologists contemplating thelaid-out skeleton with the text ‘It was always acase of following a hunch’. Metro’s RobertThompson had the familiar Shakespeare pleaenacted on stage with a box of ‘Value Burgers’thrown at him from the audience, whilst ‘Tim’(Ind. 11.02) showed two laboratory techniciansat a screen , one revealing ‘It’s worse than wethought, this burger contains traces of Richard

45

III’s DNA.’ A photo of the skull again featuredin Brian Reade’s column (Sun, 7.02) headed‘Exhumed King Richard III brings hiscatchphrase up to date’ with a speech bubbledeclaring ‘A horse, a horse, my burger’s full ofhorse.’ The more overtly political satires, oftenhalf-page full-colour artworks, commencedwith Steve Bell (Gu.Weekend 5.02) picturingGordon Brown as the NPG Richard III portrait,with Gothic lettering ‘History will come toknow that he was not as bad as he was painted.’Dave Brown (Ind. 5.02) showed PrimeMinister David Cameron in Olivier Richard IIIcostume (complete with coronet, butanachronistically, a Lancastrian collar ofEsses) at the despatch box turning to overheartwo conspiring members whispering ‘AHearse, a Hearse, a Hearse for his kingdom!’Abody-strewn battlefield of Bosworth was PeterBrookes’ scenario (Tim. 5.02) showing akneeling Chris Huhne in armour beneath atattered Liberal Democrat banner, exclaiming‘Three points, three points. My kingdom forthree points!’ For the Comment and Debatepage (Gu. 9.02) Martin Rowse also choseBosworth, with a more conventional grosslyhumpbacked Richard at the centre pleading ‘Ahorse! A horse!! My ..ooh! Hello.’ surroundedby armoured figures of David Cameron underattack, Chris Huhne decapitating his wife andMichael Gove slicing through his own legs,with a large packet of ‘Findus Beef Lasagne’ inthe foreground, and the caption ‘Think that justabout covers it all’. But even this was exceededin ‘Riddle’s View’ (Obs. 10.02) an inspired andeven more comprehensive creation. This time acadaverous one-eyed skeleton bursts throughthe tarmac, his crown bearing the legend‘TORY RIGHT’, with a broken sword in hisleft hand labelled ‘HOMOPHOBIA’ and abattered shield in the other inscribed‘EUROPHOBIA’. To the left a ‘PAY ANDDECAY’ ticket machine and right under an‘NCP MIDDLE ENGLAND’ sign, a discardedtakeaway box labelled ‘Lasagne, lasagne, mykingdom for lasagne.’ His speech-bubbledeclaring ‘Now is the winter of our discontent. . . time to deal with those Princes in theTower, Dave and Nick.’ In similar vein‘Backbiter by Birch’ in the left-wing Tribune(8.02) showed David Cameron in NPG Richarddisguise, first rehearsing Shakespeare’s ‘Naked

Villainy’ soliloquy alongside ‘Now is thewinter . . . made complete bummer by this sunof Dork.’ And then facing a costumed BorisJohnson attacking him with a sword, fromwhich he reels exclaiming ‘A Clegg! a Clegg!My Kingdom for a Clegg!’ under a scrollreading ‘Battle of Borisworth’. AdditionalCommons humour was related by AndyMcSmith in his ‘Diary’ (Ind. 7.02) reporting‘Joke thief alert. The Labour MP MikeMcCann raised a laugh at Prime Minster’sQuestions yesterday by asking David Cameron“Can the Prime Minister confirm that ATOShas declared Richard III fit for work?”’ Twominds with similar thoughts were illustrated bythe Church Times’ Noel Ford cartoon of hisversion of the NPG portrait saying ‘Actually,I’d have preferred Stratford upon Avon, whereI could have got my hands on that drattedShakespeare!’ and Tony’s View (S. Exp. 10.02)simply had the Richard III skull wishing to beput ‘Anywhere except next to WilliamShakespeare!’ Finally, a few textual parodiesand verses were also offered in the press, thelongest being a take on ‘Dick Three: theMusical’ Joe Joseph’s re-working of the lyricsto Chicago: ‘They’re gonna crown me king . . .And all that jazz!’ (Tim. 9.02). ‘Beachcomber’(Exp. 5.02) was not far behind with a lengthyShakespearean rewrite of Bosworth, managingto find a rhyme for ‘mitochondrial’ (‘a bondreal’) and Martin Nowell (S.Exp. 10.02)dedicated ‘The Week in Verse’ to FindingRichard: ‘A warrior king uncovered – therecame a final pause. Historians and nation,Broke into stunned applause.’

Included in this issue’s collage (p. 40) aretwo of the most impressive contributions.Philippa Langley was granted a signal honourof a full-page affectionate caricature, skull inhand, by Andre Carrilho and text ‘Hero orVillain?’ (IoS. 10.02) and the uncredited artistillustrating Simon Schama’s feature (Fin.T.9/10.02) also in ‘Hamlet’ mode, must be thefirst to have made use of the new facialreconstruction image.

Geoffrey Wheeler

(NPG: National Portrait Gallery; DM; Daily Mail;Tim.: The Times; Fin.T.: Financial Times; Gu.: TheGuardian; Ind.: The Independent; IoS: TheIndependent on Sunday; Obs.: The Observer; S.Exp.:Sunday Express; Exp.: Daily Express.)

46

The Man Himself

Richard III – a psychological portrait

MARK LANSDALE AND JULIAN BOON

Does a psychological analysis tell us anything new about Richard III? This analysis by ProfessorMark Lansdale and Julian Boon of the School of Psychology, University of Leicester, was

commissioned for the Looking for Richard III project in Leicester.

On the face of it, amongst any number ofhistorical figures, Richard III is an obviouscandidate for psychological analysis. Thereceived wisdom of Tudor calumnies andhistorical circumstance surrounding key eventssuch as his assumption of the throne, theexecution of Hastings and the disappearance ofhis nephews generates a prima facie case forquestioning his personality even if, individ-ually, the accuracy of Tudor commentaries andtheir interpretation of each of these events is, atthe very least, open to serious doubt.

One might argue that historical biography isa form of psychological analysis. Indeed, byway of example, one way of looking atKendall’s excellent 1955 biography of Richardis as an extended conjecture on the nature ofhis personality. Beyond the clarity of writingand the attention to historical sources, much ofthe quality of this book lies in the coherencethat his account of Richard’s character bringsto the interpretation of historical facts. Butwhat is this worth? How can we know, forexample, what Richard actually thought of hisbrother’s lifestyle? Apart from the obviousformalism of style and attention to sourcematerials, how do we differentiate Kendall’sapproach from fiction such as Hilary Mantel’srich portrayal of Thomas Cromwell in WolfHall? And how would psychologists go aboutthe same enterprise differently? In this article,as psychologists who know something of thehistorical controversies surrounding RichardIII’s life, we aim to explore some psycho-logical approaches through which we can

triangulate upon Richard in order to seewhether there is anything new to be said thatadds value to our understanding of him and histimes. We leave it to others to judge whetherthis experiment succeeds.

Our approach is to start by discarding thetheory that Richard was some form ofCaligula-like monster. This calumny originatesin the times of the Tudors, and, as JosephineTey’s The Daughter of Time reflects, it hasstubbornly clung to Richard’s name ever since.From a psychological point of view, this seemsto us a very straightforward argument to make,not least because, actuarially speaking, it wasalways very unlikely. We then move away fromthe aberrantly evil to consider aspects ofpersonality – traits that we all possess to agreater or lesser extent and which have beenthe object of detailed psychological study overthe past 50 years – to ask how those expressedthemselves in a man in Richard’s circum-stances. We do this in three specific ways.First, we explore the issue of Richard’sputative deformity and the effects this wouldbe expected to have had upon him. Second, weconsider the notion that, as a result of hischildhood, he was probably more than usuallysensitive to, and intolerant of, uncertainty. Thischaracteristic is seen in varying degrees in alladults and its expression has wide-rangingconsequences for the motivations and behav-iours of individuals. Finally, we consider howthe circumstances of his final years would haveinteracted with these personality traits toaccount for his behaviour as events unfolded.

47

This is, of course, a partial analysis – thereare other psychological perspectives that we donot consider. We may also fail to convince thatthe approaches we adopt are particularlyinsightful – although we would hopeotherwise. Nor do we spend much timediscussing the chronology and facts ofRichard’s life in order to make space for ourpsychological arguments – we assume thatreaders are already familiar with this. Rather,our aim is to humanise Richard: the image ofthe man we have inherited from More andShakespeare has become something of acartoon sketch; a pantomime villain. We aim, atthe very least, to consider aspects ofpersonality that reconnect us to that obscuredfigure with ways of analysing his behaviourthat remind us that Richard was a real humanbeing – even if, in detail, our argument mustperforce be speculative.

Was Richard a murderouspsychopath?For anyone seeking a genuine insight into thenature of Richard III, the reputation of amurderous psychopath is the elephant in theroom that stubbornly refuses to leave. For thatreason, we seek to dismiss it first and at somelength to indicate how inappropriate the labelwould seem to be here. The bedrock of reliableevidence (disregarding texts that are better seenas Tudor propaganda) is ludicrously thincompared with the standards psychologists setthemselves today, given that most contemp-orary analysis of individuals (as in, forexample, the preparation of case notes forcriminal proceedings) is based upon severalinterviews, interviews with family andacquaintances and psychometric testing. Weare therefore immediately at a disadvantage inattempting to conclude anything at all about apoorly documented individual who died over500 years ago.

Nevertheless, we believe there is no strongevidence that Richard exhibited much by wayof abnormal or psychopathic personalitydisorders. If anything, the evidence suggeststhe opposite. We come to this conclusion byconsidering character traits that might indicatepsychopathic tendencies. These includeamongst others: narcissism; cowardice;thought disorder; superficial charm;

machiavellism; and the ability to controlrelationships.

NarcissismIn the context of personality disorders,narcissism is defined as pathological self-importance; grandiosity associated with a lackof empathy with others, extraordinaryarrogance and aggression. It is one of the mostcommon elements of a psychopathicsyndrome. Obviously, when talking aboutmedieval monarchy, some degree of narcissismcould be seen as a constitutional requirement,because potential claimants to the throne wouldhave been brought up with an obvious degreeof self-importance. However, in Richard’scase, there seems little or no evidence of unduenarcissism. From all accounts, his dress anddemeanour were hardly grandiose and, ifanything, his behaviour with confederates ismore akin to primus inter pares (i.e. self-effacing) than one would expect from someonewith a narcissistic personality disorder.

CowardiceAlthough narcissists are often seen asaggressive and highly effective in engenderinganxiety in the targets of their aggression,psychopathic personality disorders are oftenassociated with forms of cowardice when anoverly-developed instinct for self-preservationprevails. Thus, while such a person mightstrike you down from behind, when faced witha genuine threat they will not confront it butwill seek other methods of response unlessforced to fight to maintain face and sustainself-image. It seems unlikely that Richardshowed any such pattern, as the battles ofBarnet, Tewksbury and ultimately the finalfateful charge at Bosworth (rather than aretreat) indicate. For him, discretion was rarelythe better part of valour.

Psychosis Although some sufferers of extreme person-ality disorders can be described as high-functioning (which cynically can be taken toindicate no more than the individual concernedactually does rather well in life and thereforetheir condition has to be defined bypsychologists as being hard to detect), otherpsychopathic disorders are associated with

obvious psychosis, in which the individualappears not to be self-aware of disorderedthought. This might express itself as ‘voices inthe head’ or simply incoherent cognitions.Medieval historians were certainly capable ofdetecting and discussing this – as descriptionsof Henry VI in his later years suggest. Butagain, no evidence whatsoever appears tosuggest Richard III showed such tendencies. Inthe circumstances, were any such tendenciesevident or common knowledge, we canreasonably expect that subsequent Tudorwriters such as More would have happilyalluded to them as further evidence ofRichard’s monstrosity.

Machiavellism Shakespeare’s characterisation of Richard as adevious, suspicious and scheming usurper iswhat we might expect of a disordered,narcissistic personality. In this respect, theimportant characteristic is that morality iscompletely subverted by self-interest andexpediency. We argue below that whileRichard has been described as Machiavellian,it is probably incorrect, with the attributionsaying more about the accuser than theaccused. Straightforwardness and transparencyseems much more the norm. Thus, forexample, we see Richard, alone among EdwardIV’s delegation negotiating with the FrenchKing Louis, publicly (but apparently logicallyand politely) dissociate himself from hisbrother’s policy and leave in good grace. Nor,whatever Kendall tells us of the personalattraction Richard felt for his feckless brotherGeorge, is there any evidence that Richardcolluded with, or encouraged, him. RatherRichard sticks rigidly in his loyalty to hiscrowned brother. These are not the actions ofsomeone whose principal purpose was tomanipulate, dissemble and draw attention awayfrom his own stratagems. To argue otherwiserequires us to produce evidence of suchdeviousness and as yet there is very little.

Interpersonal relationships Psychopaths often show a complex andapparently paradoxical pattern in theirinterpersonal relationships. Their ability toinflict cruelty and pain upon others is oftendescribed as a lack of empathy – the inability to

understand and share other people’s feelings –but it is equally likely to betray a narcissisticcontempt for others’ emotions coupled with afinely tuned ability to read other people’semotional needs and manipulate themaccordingly. The same skills also enablepsychopaths to be capable of superficial charmto the point of charisma. This in turn heightenstheir ability to develop and exploit controllingrelationships in which their objects are held,enthralled and sycophantic, to be used forwhatever end. Apart from a callous tendency todrop or betray such people when their purposehas been served, and confident of their ownimportance and ability to reassert control atwill, psychopaths can also be socially careless,showing increased likelihood of laziness,rashness, inconsistency and gratuitous abuse ofthose around them. To summarise, psychopathsare motivated to seek and exploit emotionalvulnerability in others, but in an entirely one-sided way. Relationships in which empathy,consideration and trust are genuinelyreciprocated are therefore uncharacteristic ofpsychopaths. This does not seem consistentwith what we know of Richard. Lackingsuperficial charm and charisma, henevertheless shows considerable empathy toclose confederates and the ability to form closebonds with others. He showed trust in othersand expected it back. However, as we seebelow, that characteristic came withpsychological baggage of its own.

We also attach significance to the functionalway (as opposed to anything dysfunctional)Richard ran his affairs before 1483.Psychopathic behaviour is a reasonably stabletrait and it expresses itself early in life. Anysuch tendencies in Richard would almostcertainly have been detectable well before thecritical final two years of his life, when hismotivation and the pressures upon himchanged significantly. Overall, therefore, thepattern is of an absence of evidence forpsychopathy. This goes beyond a ‘not proven’verdict insofar as the evidence – for example,exemplified by the strong loyalty shown by thetowns of the North – indicates the opposite.Further, when we think that the Tudor writerscan be expected to have gone to some lengthsto find such evidence, the balance of evidencetilts towards supposing that that evidence was

48

49

not there to be found. Richard was almostcertainly not suffering from any personalitydisorder that could be described as patho-logical, for those times or indeed our own. Thisis not to say that Richard did not exhibitcharacter traits that other people would finduncomfortable, irritating, or otherwise worthyof remark, but we are almost certainly notdescribing a monster.

Richard’s deformity On his brother’s death, and hearing fromHastings that the Woodville clan were seekingto control the government of England, Richardproceeded south with more disadvantages thanhaving to assert himself as Lord Protector amida hostile court. If the skeleton unearthed in2012 proves to be Richard’s, he was alsodeformed. The scoliosis of his spine was veryadvanced, probably uncomfortable, and almostcertainly very visible as one shoulder beinghigher than the other, even if he attempted tocompensate with padded or tailored clothes andhis own deportment. In the present day,‘deformity’ is not a description that lies wellwith political correctness, and for the most partevery attempt is made to avoid reference to it inany pejorative sense. However, we use it herebecause in medieval England, deformity was aserious business. It represented not only aphysical disadvantage, but it was also taken asthe visible indication of a twisted soul. Toappear malformed in any way risked moraljudgement.

We cannot know what judgement Richardmade of himself in this respect, but it is notunusual for victims of this misfortune toproject upon themselves a sense of guilt. It istherefore possible that Richard labouredagainst what he saw as defects in himself. Suchattribution generally induces a degree ofdefensiveness and caution; and both of thesehave been used to describe Richard in the past.How he attributed such deformity would havea significant impact upon the core of hispersonality. However, he would not have beenable to dissociate from the condition (in theway possible today) as the ‘luck of the geneticdraw’ because the fabric of scientific under-standing that underlies that attitude was simplynot there. Richard may therefore haveconfronted this in himself as a failing, and two

possible responses come to mind, dependingupon whether he attributed cause to himself. Ifhe did, the likely response for a devoutChristian was humility: seeing the disability asa burden from God requiring further penitenceand piety (rather like wearing a hair shirt). If hedid not, and refused to accept personalresponsibility, his alternative response wouldbe anger and denial; resulting in rather moreaggressive and anti-social behaviour. Such as itis, the evidence suggests that piety anddevotion was Richard’s way; and that anemphasis on duty, loyalty and service was, inpart, expressing a compensation for his self-perceived failings.

Whatever Richard’s internalisation of hisdeformity was, we can be reasonably sure thathe will have attributed similar attitudes to thepeople with whom he was dealing – particul-arly if he did not know them very well. Indeed,he may have amplified them in his own mind,this being a characteristic of those in thissituation. Psychologically speaking, thereasoning goes as follows: (a) I am veryconscious of this physical deformity; (b) it isequally apparent to this other person; and (c)therefore they have already drawn conclusionsabout me before we have become acquainted.In extreme cases, the response is to induce aself-stereotypy in which the individualconcerned actually chooses to behave in themanner they feel is expected of them. For thesame reason, overweight individuals some-times adopt the persona of the jolly figure offun, since it is a stereotyped role that comeswith a modicum of social approval.

We can therefore speculate that Richard IIIstruggled in everyday dealings other people,particularly new acquaintances. Dependingupon how the scoliosis developed over his life(a question to which we may ultimately get ananswer), this may have been an issue for mostof his adult life, or may have been one moreintense in the later, more politically important,years of his life but less so in his formativeyears. If this analysis applies, he would havebeen suspicious of the motivations of everyonedealing with him. He would also be more likelyto believe that his interlocutors, on the basis ofhis appearance, assumed his motivations weremalign and devious. In these circumstances,trust would be harder to establish and

50

misunderstanding more likely because of thepotentially vicious circle in which hislikelihood in questioning other people’smotivations towards him is reciprocated byexactly the same dynamic in them. In seekingevidential substance for any reputation Richardhad for being devious and suspicious, this issomething of a smoking gun; taking care toremind ourselves that the assumption is beingmade at the time of writing is that the scioliotic2012 skeleton is indeed Richard.

And yet there seems something very oddabout this analysis. Whilst to psychologistswhat we have described seems a highly likelydynamic, the evidence in Richard’s life offersso many counter-indicators. The first 30 yearsof his life show little or no evidence of themarginalisation that we might have expected.Rather, he seemed remarkably able to engenderand build trust with the people with whom heworked. One possibility here is that, at thisstage, the scoliosis had not yet made its impactfelt. It is also striking that little or no evidenceof this dynamic is seen in the critical last threeyears of his life, where the effects of scoliosiswere at their greatest and when, socially, themost intense stress on his interpersonalrelations would be felt. For example, one of thepuzzles in Richard’s life is why Earl Rivers andhis well-armed comrades behaved the way theydid at the crucial meeting in Stony Stratford asRichard travelled south to assume the role ofProtector. How did Richard, with his smallerentourage, manage to separate Rivers from hisarmy in such a way as to engineer both custodyof the uncrowned Edward V and the arrest ofRivers and Edward’s other protectors? This isall the more surprising when one considersthat, as a Woodville, Rivers must have beenaware of the threat Richard represented. And inthose ages this threat was mortal. If Richard’sappearance and demeanour was such as toexaggerate this threat with an overlay ofdeviousness, how and why did Rivers and hisassociates lose the initiative from a position ofstrength? Shakespeare, with playwright’slicence, effectively takes this as evidence ofjust how devious and dissembling Richardcould be – moving that portrayal closer to theterritory of Richard being a high-performingpsychopath. Thus we have to consider twoextreme alternative hypotheses. One

alternative is that Richard was so devious andmanipulative that he was able to concealmalign motivations, as he had done for manyyears. The other is that Richard was, in fact, aconvincing and skilled negotiator to whomRivers correctly (in a legal sense) surrenderedauthority. Richard was, after all, the legitimateProtector. Rivers’ subsequent misfortunes atthe hand of Richard do not in themselvesvitiate that interpretation. This latter viewwould leave us to conclude that whilstRichard’s putative deformity may have causedhim some social difficulties, it was notsufficient – in and of itself – to be a majorfactor in subsequent events. This is not to saythat it did not contribute to his overalldemeanour, and in the next section we explorea second personality trait that would havecombined with it to significant effect.

The ‘Intolerance of Uncertainty’syndromeBeset by threats of invasion and having lost anheir and wife in short order, in summer 1485Richard returned to Nottingham Castle; bytradition ‘the castle of his care’. In this phrase,and by the accounts at this time of a broodingpersonality, we see another way with which toflesh out our image of Richard III as a realman. A number of reasonably reliableindicators suggest Richard was more thanusually intolerant of uncertainty in a way thatwill have had a marked impact upon hispersonality and his dealings with others.

Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) is acommon syndrome that varies betweenindividuals in degree and is associated withtheir general levels of anxiety. It probably hasits origins in childhood as a need to seek safetyby being able to control one’s environment.Thus, if a child’s perception of their caregiversis as being weak or vulnerable, one (but by nomeans the only) response to the social anxietyassociated with that is to develop a degree ofself-reliance. This can take many formsassociated with an IU syndrome. Withoutsuggesting pathological degrees of this, thoseevident in Richard include: the tendency toshow excessive trust, attachment and loyalty inhis positive attachments; piety and rigid moralvalues, possibly to the point of priggishnessand inflexibility; a strong emphasis upon

51

justice and the law; a high sense of personalresponsibility; and a strong sensitivity topotential threats. Finally, with this constellationof traits, it would not be surprising in IUsyndrome to see an attention to detail that,combined with a need for rapid closure in hispreferred paths of action, could be seen asverging towards the obsessive andauthoritarian.

To a greater or lesser extent, all of thesetendencies have been associated with Richard,and no one can doubt that his childhood fits thepattern. He would have known from his earliestyears that his family was engaged in a to-the-death conflict with another family. At the ageof 6 was left with his mother and his brotherGeorge to the mercy of Lancastrians at Ludlowafter his father and elder brothers fled. He willthen have learned of his father and brotherEdmund’s death at Wakefield, and soonafterwards be forced to flee to the continentwith Margaret of Anjou bearing down onLondon. There is no doubt that Richard willhave known he was growing up in verydangerous times.

The IU syndrome is linked with one moretelling pattern in this case. It is associated witha strong sense of self-control and repression.As a result, religious and moral beliefs can beextreme and inflexibly defended (for thisreason this syndrome is closely associated withauthoritarianism and right-wing ideology).However, it is particularly significant that theprice of this control is such when these beliefsare violated, self-control is compromised andthe likelihood of a disproportional and/orimpulsive response is greater. The execution ofHastings might be seen in these terms. Havingbeen persuaded (by whatever evidence) that thepreviously loyal Hastings was actuallyconspiring against him, Richard’s anger atbetrayal and the desire to re-establish order andcertainty is extreme even if, perhaps, someregret follows. A similar argument might applyto Richard’s intractable attitude to Buckinghamafter his rebellion. Richard was not someone tobetray lightly.

In these character traits we also see apossible motive for the behaviour of Stanleyand Percy at Bosworth. As representatives ofthe landowning aristocracy both of these men –Stanley particularly – show a constrasting

personality profile to Richard’s, in whichopportunism and a very high tolerance foruncertainty run hand-in-hand. In Stanley’s casethis extended as far as gambling with his son’slife at Bosworth. It may well be that both mensaw this contrast in Richard and with it aserious threat. Instead of the wheeler-dealeropportunism of previous monarchs – evenEdward IV – in which past or current mis-demeanours were overlooked in transactions ofland and power as short-term expedients (oneis reminded of Richard’s distaste at EdwardIV’s dealings with Louis XI of France), herewas a man who favoured consistency, justiceand the law over opportunism. He introducedlegislation, for example, in the composition ofjuries and the declaration of interests. Thethreat of this would be to reduce the power ofmagnates such as Stanley and Percy yet further.No wonder the common folk of the North wereloyal, but for these warlords, Richard couldhave seemed like an inflexible, sanctimoniousprig who threatened their autonomy in thenorth and who was unlikely to give up easily inhis chosen path. While Edward IV was alive,these barons may well have been sufficientlysatisfied with Edward’s judgement to feeldisposed to some co-operation with Richard inthe North. Subsequently, it may well be that,unfettered by Edward, the speed of hislegislation in the short time of his own reignand the inflexibility of Richard’s charactermight have sealed his fate at Bosworth. It is acommon fate of modern political leadersultimately to be laid low when they threaten theself-interest of those whose support they relyupon to remain in power.

The transition to monarchy, 1483–5‘Personality’ does not exist in isolation and thevery essence of some personality traits isentirely dependent on circumstances and anindividual’s perception of how events areunfolding. Therefore, whilst of obvioussignificance to the history of England, theyears 1483–5 are also of great significance inthe psychological analysis of Richard’spersonality because this covers his transitionfrom Lord of the North (with little expectationof accession to the throne), to Protector, andthen to king. Richard’s rise and fall can be saidto fit a very common pattern – that of the loyal

52

and hard-working deputy who, coming topower after the passing of a long-standing,powerful leader, is overcome by events inrelatively short order. In recent British politicalhistory three similar cases come to mind inPrime Ministers Eden, Major and Brown.Following the dominance of Churchill,Thatcher and Blair respectively, these certainlyhad hard acts to follow, as did Richardfollowing Edward IV.

The diversity of these three figures – and thedifferent reasons why each of them might haveshared a common fate (we do not need toexplore them here) – should immediately alertus to the dangers of generalising about RichardIII from this perspective. We cannot concludethat these three prime ministers were similar inpersonality to each other because of whathappened to them. But from the psychologists’perspective, this context is still an interestingone to view Richard; this time not looking somuch at traits of the individual personality todraw conclusions about motivations andpersonality, but looking at the interaction ofthat personality and dynamics of theenvironment and context in which people areplaced. Is there anything about the dynamics oftransition from deputy to king that can be usedto cast further insight into this more bloodystage of Richard’s career without resorting toideas of an abnormally disordered personality?

The first point of note is that for ten or moreyears prior to Edward’s death, Richard wasbeing strongly reinforced in his modusoperandi. Service and loyalty to his brother hadserved both well, and his role as viceroy in theNorth further allowed him significant freedomin how he conducted his affairs. He wassurrounded by a loyal team, was fulfilling hisduty to the king and was not exposed to theuncertainties and vicissitudes of the Woodville-packed court. This arrangement was mutuallybeneficial. With his expectation that his brotherwould rule for sometime and then be replacedby Edward V in due course, any resentments(even if he was aware of them) he mightalready be generating in the likes of Stanleyand Percy were hardly likely to cause him tolose much sleep. Therefore, at an age whenmost apprentice politicians (who are not tiedinto office by birth) are required to be flexibleand adaptive, Richard’s experience served to

emphasise the reverse. Paradoxically, at a timeof relative security and peace, thesecircumstances will have reinforced thebehaviours that reflected Richard’s underlyingIU syndrome (the origins of which lay ininsecurity and strife). At this stage, the lifeexperiences that would have led to a moreadaptive mentality, and with it a more finelytuned political sensitivity and ability tocompromise, were substituted by experiencesthat reinforced the status quo.

If his previous experience made it difficultfor Richard’s character to adapt to the differentrole of king, the immediate crises of his reign –in particular the executions of Hastings andBuckingham – will have served to have thesame effect. He appears to have trusted them,and they were probably more adept than he atthe social skills of politics. But consistent withan IU syndrome Richard placed too much storein his associates’ trust and loyalty. For theirpart, perhaps Hastings and Buckingham cameto believe – as we speculate that Stanley andPercy eventually did – that here was a manalready too flawed, too inflexible, to brokercompromise and in any sense share power.They may therefore have concluded (possiblyeven with regret) that they had levered thewrong person into power. Whatever theybelieved, the effect of their loss would havebeen to make it less likely that others couldinfluence Richard in that way. In the nature ofpersonalities characterised by IU, betrayal willhave rendered Richard even less likely to trustnew people and new ideas as they came along.To summarise, the interaction of establishedcharacter traits and the immediate pressures ofthe transition to monarchy could have had theeffect of amplifying those traits in what is aself-reinforcing cycle of behaviour andfeedback. It is a moot point whether thattendency, in itself, made the crises withHastings and Buckingham inevitable (in whichcase one would conclude that Richard’spersonality profile was sufficiently extreme asto undermine his ability to reign effectively),whether they were merely treacherous, orwhether (as seems most likely) the truth liessomewhere between the two. Whatever, suchcrises had the effect of removing keypersonalities capable of mediating betweenRichard’s particular style of management and

53

the more opportunistic expectations of thepowerful subjects upon whom he would needto rely.

This issue is subtle and hard to judge, andperhaps we should be careful not to overstatethe effects of this transition. There is littlereason in documented records to think that thedynamics we describe produced much that wasobviously aberrant. The factors governingRichard’s personality would not be veryremarkable in terms of his overt behaviour,however fundamental they may have been tohis motivations and ultimately to other people’sestimate of him as a leader. By way of contrast,to make this point, consider ex British ForeignSecretary David Owen’s 2007 account of the‘Hubris Syndrome’. This book attempts toaccount for the behaviour of powerful leaderssuch as Margaret Thatcher in terms of theresults of similar self-reinforcing patterns ofbehaviour. But the dynamics of this seem quitedifferent, as a potted selection from Owenindicates in describing the Hubris Syndrome:

• a narcissistic propensity to see the worldprimarily as an arena in which they canexercise power and seek glory;

• a disproportionate concern with image andpresentation;

• excessive confidence in their ownjudgement and contempt for the advice orcriticism of others;

• recklessness and impulsiveness;• loss of contact with reality;• incompetence in carrying out a policy . . .

self-confidence has led the leader not tobother worrying about the nuts and boltsof a policy.

To us at least, this does not sound like Richard.True, medieval monarchs did have a propensityto behave hubristically as a matter ofexpectation. But if anything, the record oflegislation and of command and control in hisyears of monarchy suggest a far morecontrolled and balanced pattern of behaviourthan is associated with other monarchs of thetime. Rather, we suggest that the key elementhere is this sense of control and engagement.This, from all we have seen, is characteristic ofRichard and is a predictable element of the IUsyndrome. In modern parlance, such behaviouris sometimes associated with ‘control freaks’,

and in using such terms, we are able toexemplify how variably this can be perceivedby others in the context in which they work. Atone extreme, some individuals are toleratedwith good humour and friendship for theirendearing qualities – they may be a bit of apain sometimes, but their heart is in the rightplace. At the other extreme, perhaps wheresocial discretion is replaced by managerialauthority and a palliative sense of humour ismissing, such control freaks can be perceivedas vindictive and sanctimonious prigs.

In our assessment of Richard, the point hereis that how his personality was perceived is aninteraction between how extreme certainpersonality traits were, and the perceivedfunctional relationship between the peoplemaking that assessment. Clearly, some of hisclose associates, both in the North, but also inhis monarchy, showed great loyalty andattachment. Others, such as Stanley and Percy,by their behaviour, did not. But these latterindividuals cannot be expected to have foundRichard’s monarchy very palatable and wouldhave felt their interests to be compromised bythose controlling characteristics. Thosecharacteristics need not have been veryextreme to produce the response in Stanley andPercy we observe – nor even in Hastings andBuckingham if we accept that they believedthat, in those times, Richard’s inflexible orcontrolling style would ultimately lead to moretrouble. For these reasons, we speculate thatRichard would have been recognised as of apersonality type in which rectitude, justice,piety and loyalty were valued highly and whichmight also have been seen as verging towardsthe sanctimonious and/or authoritarian.However, it seems unlikely that this wouldhave been seen as extreme to the point ofabnormality. In that case, Richard’s misfortunewas that the febrile state of England and itsaristocracy were not ready for him and his styleof monarchy.

SummaryThis brief analysis points to simple summariesof Richard’s personality. We argue that anysuggestion that Richard was a murderous,Machiavellian psychopath is highly unlikelyand lacks evidence. Furthermore, most of theexpected attributes of such an aberrant

54

personality type are contra-indicated byevidence. But, as is sometimes the case, we donot wish the exclusion of one extremehypothesis to be taken as evidence for its polaropposite. This, in itself, is not evidence thatRichard was a charismatic or saintly monarch.There is nothing beyond a comparativelyefficient government in the time available tohim to suggest that Richard was significantlymore ‘good’ than any other monarch. To fleshout his personality a little more, we speculatethat his behaviour as king and human beingwas influenced by two things. First, hisdeformity would have led to greater reserveand social caution, both on his part and hisinterlocutors (except possibly the mostintimate). This could have been interpreted ascontrolling and cautious and, in the extreme,verging towards the devious and dissembling.This was probably not a serious impediment,but it probably nuanced all interactionsnegatively. Second, his childhood, and therepeated accounts of adult characteristics suchas piety, loyalty and a sense of justice (to namea few) all point to an individual for whomcontrol and the reduction of uncertainty wasimportant. The evidence does not suggest thatthis was expressed in an extreme way, but wehave tried to argue that the interaction of thistendency with the needs and expectations ofothers may well nevertheless have had direconsequences, either because he would bedisliked on a personal basis as a controlling,authoritarian individual, or, more importantly,because he communicated a real threat to thepower of those whose support he needed.Overall, this portrays a slightly damaged, butwithin his own lights, sincere and effectiveindividual who is projected into circumstancesfor which he ultimately lacked the politicalflexibility and luck to prevail.

As we have said, this analysis is based uponthin evidence and we suspect any number ofother psychological approaches will alsogenerate interesting alternative perspectives ofRichard. It is an experiment in historicalanalysis in which we have sought to applypsychologically oriented guiding principles tosuch evidence as is available to provide aplausible account of the man. If this, or indeedany other psychologically oriented, approachadds any value to the historical process, it must

be to inform the way we see the key events ofRichard’s life, where questions remainunanswered. We now turn to some of thesebriefly by way of speculation in the light of thetentative conclusions we have drawn.

What does Hastings’ execution tellus? It is not clear what it is that Hastings wasaccused of, but it is clearer that, howeveralarming and rushed the events were, Richardis probably operating within his authority inordering this summary execution. With thecharacter of Richard that we have portrayed, itis entirely consistent for him to have behavedsomewhat extremely and impulsively ondiscovery of some betrayal or other (althoughthat betrayal is surmise). It is equallycharacteristic that he should have shownmagnaminity to Hastings’ family subsequently.The crucial evidence here, however, is missing.If we were more sure why it was that Hastingshad given offence, we would be in a betterposition to judge the proportionality ofRichard’s response and with it his state ofmind. All we can do without that information isto comment that any number of plausiblescenarios can be identified in which Richard’sresponse would not have seemed particularlyremarkable.

Could Richard have murdered hisnephews?Richard seems, above all other things, to havebeen a careful person. However abhorrent thedouble murder of minors might seem to ustoday, it was usual for displaced monarchs tobe disposed of. Since other kings were happyto do this, there is no reason to rule out thepossibility that Richard felt compelled to dolikewise, for similar reasons to theirs. Thatlower threshold for murder accepted, it wasnever an act to be considered lightly, and weneed to think about why Richard should wishto destroy them and whether our assessment ofhis personality gives any useful insight uponthis. His legal claim to the throne, once theprinces’ illegitimacy was established, wasstrong. With the law on his side, he might havefelt that this was sufficient to minimise the riskof their being the focus of a rebellion. Nor wasa serious attempt being made to abduct the

55

royal children and use them in this way (unlesswe accept the hypothesis that Buckingham wasconducting some nefarious operation prior tohis rebellion). Furthermore, if the princes wereindeed dead for whatever reason, littleadvantage would follow from not tellinganyone. On the other hand, had they been sentto a secret place of safety, silence was essential.For a controlled and careful man, with a keensense of justice, it is more in character to havedone this than to have carried out a pre-emptivemurder without then appropriately clarifying(i.e. tidying up and reducing uncertainty) thesituation afterwards. In sum, our analysis ofRichard would point to his being more likely tohave removed the princes to a secret place ofsafety and less likely to have been complicit intheir murder.

Was he Machiavellian? The concept of being Machiavellian emphas-ises political expediency above moral or ethicalconsiderations. In Machiavellian politics, truthand justice are more likely to be defined posthoc rather than determining what the ends ofthose politics should be. In this respect, whilstdoubtless Richard was capable of shrewdnessand possibly diplomacy amounting toeconomies with the truth, it seems more likelythan for other monarchs that his policy wasdriven by what he believed was right. Indeed,we have argued earlier that this fixity ofpurpose may have been seen by the magnatesof the time as a threat, precisely becauseRichard was less likely to be swayed ordeflected from his purpose by theMachiavellian operators around him. It is easyto see, with a reserved manner and cautiousdemeanour he could be attributed withMachiavellian motives, but we suggest that thiscould be a complete misreading of hischaracter.

Did he usurp the throneopportunistically? By the same token, we surmise that Richard, inmoving to legitimise his monarchy, was notdriven by ambition. Even whether or not hewas pleased to become king is debatable. Thequestion could be framed in terms of whetherhe felt he had a choice. Despite recognisinghow his political enemies would interpret the

course of events, were it the case that theillegitimacy of the princes was established, aman of his demeanour and position would haveno choice but to regularise the situation byenabling the lawful process of succession to goahead. That is entirely consistent with thecharacter we have painted. Equally, for a manwhose entire career had apparently been basedupon the carrying out of his duty according tothe station he had inherited by birth, it seemsunlikely that he would suddenly becomeskilled in a coherent act of deception thatappears never to have fallen apart and therebyrevealed its true nature. The alternativehypothesis that Richard was a long-termusurper who had been biding his time for thewhole of his adult life lacks evidence orplausibility.

Why did he die at Bosworth?With Percy’s ambiguous inactivity atBosworth, Richard might well have withdrawnto fight another day; as had many successfullybefore him. His chances of regrouping, as thelegitimate king, were reasonable, and it is farfrom clear how the future would have unfoldedafterwards. Instead he chose to gamble on whatproved to be an ill-fated charge. Why? Wesuggest the following logic. First, he was theanointed king and it was the will of Godwhether he remained so. For a man of his pietyit was his duty to defend his monarchy to thedeath. Fatalism is not unusual with hischaracter traits (although we note it is lesslikely in psychopathic personalities). Second,he was a seasoned warrior and quite capable ofexecuting the manoeuvre he proposed. Thesepoints given, perhaps at this crisis in the battle(and indeed in his life, this battle following onso soon after the loss of his wife and son), he isdecisive: Richard’s aversion to the uncertaintythat would follow his retreat makes commoncause in his mind with the opportunity to put anend to Henry Tudor for once and for all, andthe product is a chivalric coup de main. It mayhave been seen as a desperate, impulsive act asthe fortune of battle swung against him, but weargue that Richard may have construed it as aduty and an act of faith in God. History tells usthat when the character traits we haveattributed to Richard appear in leaders – traitswhich are self-reinforcing and less likely to

56

lead to compromise – an uncompromising andsudden end is the likely outcome. If so, hadRichard’s reign not ended at Bosworth Field, itmight well have ended soon enough in similarcircumstances.

PostscriptIf the purpose of historical analysis is to relatethe flow of events to the personality andmotivations of the characters within them, itseems logical that psychological analysis ofindividuals could be used to inform historicaldebate. However, judging by critical reviews,historians might previously have made a bettershow of informing psychological insight thanhave psychologists influenced the historicalinterpretation of events. One thinks, forexample, of John Keegan’s influential andbeautifully written The Face of Battle as anexample of the former. On the latter side,historians seem unimpressed with thepsychologist’s approach: the brickbats hurledat Norman Dixon for his analysis of DouglasHaig in The Psychology of MilitaryIncompetence still echo through the literatureof the Great War. Arguments swing from sideto side. Historians argue the analysis is silly tothe point of character assassination. Psycho-logists (including Dixon himself) would arguethat historians have missed his point and failedto grasp the subtlety of psychological analysis.The truth is that two disciplines, with even soobvious a common ground as the study ofpeople in historical events, struggle to exploitit. This is in part because both disciplines come

with long and established cultures and thedifferent expectations that go with them.Largely covert in works such as this, thesecultures contextualise in the reader’s mindwhat the authors intend. If the readers comefrom a different culture, then the words used byauthors often take on different and unwelcomemeanings. Perhaps it must necessarily be so.Either way, it leaves our foray into historicalanalysis flawed: psychologists may feel that wehave been incautious in our speculation beyondwhat meagre evidence allows; historians mayfeel that our inexpert grasp of late medievalhistory undermines our ability to understandthe cognitions of fifteenth-century figures. Weaccept both limitations and offer this defence:if we accept that there is no single correctinterpretation of history – or indeed of humanbehaviour – then the one thing we can be sureof is that it is a mistake to seek orthodoxy andto close down new or challenging approaches.Our purpose here has been to think aspsychologists about Richard III to offerplausible hypotheses that might add flesh andhumanity to the bones of the historical record.For us, our version of Richard has emerged assomeone sharing character traits we see allaround us: some good and some bad. We canalso see how those character traits played out inthe constraints and demands of his socialstation and his times. Whether this analysis isright or wrong, we cannot say. The debate isall. But if its effect is to reconnect us withRichard’s humanity, warts and all, that, at least,is something.

AUSTRALASIAN CONVENTION 2013The NSW Branch will be hosting the biennial Australasian

Convention

at Novotel, Darling Harbour, SydneyAll members and friends of the Richard III Society are welcome.For further information and/or registration please contact the New South WalesBranch at info@richardiii-nsw.org.au

Let’s mark the 530th anniversary of Richard’s and Anne’s coronation with one big celebration!

‘Richard III: the Man behind the Myth’Friday 12 to Sunday 14 July 2013

57

In a notebook belonging to Saxon Barton,probably dating from the mid 1930s, is a list

of some dozen names and addresses headed‘Admirers of Richard III’, the only record wehave of the membership of the Fellowship ofthe White Boar. Among those listed is the nameAymer Vallance.

Philip Lindsay dedicated his polemic OnSome Bones in Westminster Abbey to threepeople: Saxon Barton, Philip Nelson andAymer Vallance. He praised them as ‘three ofRichard’s most gallant champions’. The bookwas written in response to the official report onthe contents of the urn in Westminster Abbey,said to contain the remains of the Princes in theTower. Lindsay noted that ‘The moving spiritof the un-urning was Mr Aymer Vallance, wellknown antiquary and archaeologist and a loverof King Richard. For many years, Mr Vallancehad agitated for these bones to be examined,

and he was present at the disinterment.’Interestingly, he had previously been involvedwith another set of controversial bones, thoseunearthed in January 1888 by workmenexcavating in the East Crypt of CanterburyCathedral. These were thought at the time to bethe remains of St Thomas Becket; however,their provenance remains unproven

The Westminster Abbey urn had beenopened on the 6 July 1933 and five days later ithad been resealed and returned to the Abbey. Inthe intervening period the contents weresubject to a scientific examination by a teamlead by Professor William Wright. The resultswere announced to the public at a meeting heldat the Society of Antiquaries on 30 Novemberthat year; the conclusions were controversialand remain so today. Certainly they were asurprise to the four members of the Fellowshipof the White Boar – Saxon Barton, PhilipLindsay, Philip Nelson and Aymer Vallance –who were present at the meeting. ProfessorWright’s report was subsequently published inthe 1934 edition of Archaeologia; for ananalysis of the investigation and its conclusionssee Bill White’s article ‘70 Years of the Bones:the investigation in Westminster Abbey’ in theAutumn 2003 edition of the Ricardian Bulletin,pp. 34–5.

The recent archaeological dig on the site ofthe Grey Friars church in Leicester and thefinding of human remains would havedelighted Aymer Vallance and he would alsohave been a great enthusiast for the project tolocate King Richard’s remains.

Whilst 1933 had been a disappointing yearfor the Fellowship, with the unfavourableoutcome of the urn investigations, 1934 was ahappier one. In April of that year the RichardIII memorial window in Middleham churchwas unveiled and dedicated; it is likely thatVallance was among the party of Fellowshipsupporters present for the ceremony. For an

Aymer Vallance: an earlyRicardian

JOHN SAUNDERS

Aymer Vallance, MA, FSA, circa 1900

58

account of this event see my article ‘TheMiddleham Window’ in the Spring 2004 issueof the Ricardian Bulletin, pp. 34–6.

Who was Aymer Vallance? Born WilliamHoward Aymer Vallance in 1863, he claimeddescent from Aymer de Vallance, a cousin ofEdward I. By the nineteenth century the familywere involved in banking and brewing andtheir home was in Lynsted, Kent. Vallance waseducated at Harrow and Oriel College, Oxford,where he read classics, and in 1885 he wasgranted his MA. During the following year hewas ordained in the Anglican Church and from1886 to 1888 was a curate at the Church of theAnnunciation in Brighton, noted for its stained-glass windows designed by Sir Edward Burne-Jones and made by William Morris. In 1889Vallance converted to Roman Catholicism,which was not such an unusual path forsomeone of Vallance’s background to follow.Oriel College was where Cardinal JohnNewman taught and it was the focal point ofthe Oxford Movement, which sought a revivalof traditional Catholicism. However, Vallancedid not become ordained in the RomanCatholic Church; instead he moved to London

to pursue his growing interest in Gothicarchitecture and worked as a lecturer for theArchitectural Association. He also had a careeras a writer and contributed to the Art Journaland The Studio, leading artistic magazines ofthe time. He travelled extensively both inBritain and on the continent pursuing researchfor his writing.

In many respects Vallance was a typicalOxford aesthete of the late nineteenth century;he was talented in many fields – an artist, awriter, and an acclaimed expert on ecclesias-tical architecture, an archaeologist and aconnoisseur of the applied arts. Indeed, from avery early age he showed an interest in art andat the age of 19 began to collect old oakfurniture.

In 1895 he was made a Fellow of theSociety of Antiquaries and contributed to theirjournal; he was also an active member of theRoyal Archaeological Institute. He exhibited atthe Royal Society of British Artists and wasalso a skilled photographer, leaving hisextensive collection of photographs to theCourtauld Institute of Art. As an author hepublished a number of biographies and

Architect’s drawings for the restoration of Stoneacre, Aymer Vallance’s home in Kent. © National Trust

59

influential books on English church screens,lychgates and old crosses. In the 1911 census,aged 49, he gave his profession as ‘writer on artand archaeology’.

Aymer Vallance also moved in ratherexalted artistic and literary circles, and throughsuch contacts became influenced by theAesthetic Movement, which emphasised thesensuousness of art and stood in contrast to thebland industrial materialism of the VictorianAge. He was a friend of Aubrey Beardsley andplayed a significant role in launching hisartistic career. Another friend was the art criticRobbie Ross, Oscar Wilde’s executor, intowhose circle he introduced Beardsley. It washis close friendship with another artistic giantof the period that was ultimately to lead to theFellowship of the White Boar. This wasWilliam Morris, whom Vallance had knownsince the early 1880s. Shortly after Morris’sdeath he published the first biography of thegreat designer and campaigner for socialreform. In his preface to the book Vallancewrites ‘I approached Morris in the autumn of1894 on the question of the proposed book, hetold me frankly that he did not want it done byme or anyone else as long as he were alive, butthat if I would only wait until after his death Imight do it.’

William Morris founded the Society for theProtection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) in1877 and this, combined with Morris’s Artsand Crafts background, brought together twoimportant elements for Vallance. Morrisepitomised Vallance’s dual interests inmedieval history and in church architecture.With a growing reputation in these fields

Vallance came into contact with one of thecountry’s leading experts on medieval glass, DrPhilip Nelson, a close friend of Saxon Bartonand a member of the Fellowship.

In 1920 Vallance purchased a badly run-down fifteenth-century half-timbered manorhouse in Kent. The house, located in Othamnear Maidstone, was called Stoneacre, and itdated from the early 1480s. His work inrestoring the house has been described as ‘afascinating exercise in inspired scholarship’. Itwas an opportunity to put his extensiveknowledge of medieval architecture topractical use, and the restoration andimprovements were extensive. Vallance gavethe house to the National Trust in 1928 and itremains in their care and open to the public.He married shortly after acquiring Stoneacreand remained there for his retirement years,becoming an active member of the KentArchaeological Society and contributing manyarticles to their journal Archaeologia Cantiana.When he died in 1943 he bequeathed his largecollection of books and prints to the Society ofAntiquaries.

Aymer Vallance has not featured promin-ently in the history of the revisionist cause, buthe was an important figure and an interestingone too. Hopefully he will now be a little betterknown, and members visiting Stoneacre can doso in the knowledge that it was once the homeof a Ricardian.

Dr. Robert Baxter’s ‘Aymer Vallance – Sonof Lynsted’ has been a useful source ofinformation in the compilation of this article,and I am also very grateful to Helen Challinorfor her helpful comments and insights.

Visit Stoneacre

This National Trust property comprises a fifteenth-century half-timbered yeoman’shouse, with a great hall, surrounded by a garden, orchard and meadows. It is a near-perfect example of a Wealden Hall-House, and contains collections of furniture, woodand metal. It is administered by tenants on behalf of the National Trust and is openduring 2013 between 17 March and 29 September from 11 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. onSaturdays and Bank Holiday Mondays; last admissions one hour before closing.

The property is located in Otham, three miles south-east of Maidstone in Kent. Forfurther information about visiting the property, see www.nationaltrust.org.uk/stoneacre.

60

Parents: Casimir IV, King ofPoland and Prince of Lithuania(1427–92) and Elizabeth ofBohemia-Hungary (c.1409–42)Husband: George the Rich, Dukeof Bavaria-Landshut (d. 1503).Children: It is said that Jadwigagave birth to five children, of whomonly two girls survived infancy,Elizabeth and Margaret.Source: Johann Dorner: ‘HerzoginHedwig und ihr Hofstaat inBurghausen’, BurghausenerGeschichtsblätter, No. 53.Illustration: Anonymous portrait ofJadwiga, about 1502, redrawn byGeoffrey Wheeler.

Early in 1474 negotiations startedbetween the courts of Cracow andLandshut for a marriage agreementbetween Jadwiga and Duke George,eldest son of Duke Louis IX (called‘the Rich’) of Bavaria-Landshut.Both courts were related to eachother. Therefore a papaldispensation was necessary to makethe marriage possible.

On 14 November 1475 George and Jadwigawere married in a splendid ceremony inLandshut. The festivities lasted nearly a week,attended by the Emperor and other famousnobles of that time. Today this famous event isstill remembered in its re-enactment, ‘TheLandshut Wedding’, celebrated every fouryears and one of Germany’s biggest medievalre-enactments.

Like her predecessors, Jadwiga livedin the castle of Burghausen, where she alsogave birth to her children. Her husband died in1503. The lack of male descendants caused theso-called Landshut Succession War (1504).

Jadwiga died in 1502 in Burghausen and wasburied in the Cistercian Monastery atRaitenhaslach. Her grave could be seen untilthe Secularisation. The Foerderer, the Societywhich organises the Landshut Wedding Re-enactment, donated a memorial plaque to herformer burial place.

NoteThe Landshut Wedding re-enactment takesplace this year from 28 June to 21 July; formore information visit www.landshuter-hochzeit.de and click on the little Union Jackfor the English version.

A series of remarkable ladies

RITA DIEFENHART-SCHMITT

3. Jadwiga Jagellonka, Duchess of Bavaria (21.9.1457, Cracow,Poland–18.2.1502, Burghausen, Bavaria)

61

Was Richard a smoker? Well, no, ofcourse not. Tobacco wasn’t introduced

to Europe for at least 100 years after his death.But would he have been, were that infernalweed available then? Again, one thinksprobably not. His brother Edward might havesuccumbed to the temptation, as he certainlyseems to have indulged in many earthlypleasures, including wine and women, butRichard comes across as altogether moreascetic. After all, he was faithful to his wife,had few known mistresses and only fatheredpossibly two bastard children.

I pose the question because I have acquireda collection of cigarette cards, ‘Kings andQueens of England’ which, considering theirage (probably from the 1970s) exhibit analmost Ricardian view about Richard and othermembers of his family. On one side is thefamiliar painting of him from the NationalPortrait Gallery. On the back is the followingdescription: ‘Richard III b. 1452 r. 1483–1485.Younger and only loyal brother to Edward IV,is presumed to have been appointed Protectorin Edward’s lost will. He immediately assumedProtector’s duties, outwitting the Woodvilles,and then, encouraged by the Duke ofBuckingham, accepted the Crown himself. Hisshort reign saw just government andencouragement of the towns and commonpeople. His wife and heir died before him andtreachery, eventually led by Henry Tudor,defeated him on Bosworth field.’ All veryRicardian!

On Edward IV: ‘Was every inch Henry’sgrandfather. After his victory at Towton, andbacked by his cousin Warwick the Kingmaker,he ascended the throne on a wave of popularity.Bar an eclipse in 1469, when he fell into theKingmaker’s power, and another in 1470–1471, spent in Bruges, he was to defeatvirtually Lancastrians, the Warwick and hisbrother, Clarence. He also bought off Louis XIof France in a lucrative but unpopular truce.

The second decade of his reign was a relativelypeaceful period of pleasure seeking andcultural pursuits.’ All true, but not the wholetruth methinks!

Elizabeth Woodville: ‘Wife of Edward IV. . . was the first English Queen – the only onebefore Anne Boleyn – to be chosen for lovealone. Dynastic marriages were an importantpart of power politics. Warwick the Kingmakerwas negotiating a French marriage for EdwardIV when, in 1464, he was dismayed to learnthat his royal protégé had contracted a secretmarriage which could bring him no advantage.Elizabeth was the widow of a lesserLancastrian knight, and she brought to courtnumerous ambitious relatives. Her laterrelationships with Richard III are unfathomed.Henry VII sent her to a nunnery.’ Thepenultimate sentence is an interesting way ofdescribing a clearly difficult period historically.

Edward V: ‘Proclaimed King in 1483, butnever crowned. He was the elder son ofEdward IV, by his unpopular wife ElizabethWoodville, and was officially King after hisfather’s death in 1483. However, on 22nd Junehe was declared illegitimate on the grounds ofhis father’s previous contract with EleanorButler, which, by Medieval Law, made him abigamist. From that time Edward and hisbrother, Richard, Duke of York, apparentlynever left the Tower. The rumour, in circulationby 1485, that Richard III had them murdered,lacks proof. Perkin Warbeck, the Pretendercould have been the younger boy.’

Henry VII: ‘Had a slender, and partlyillegitimate, Lancastrian claim to the throne,strengthened by the determination of hismother, the learned Margaret Beaufort, and thepromise to marry Elizabeth eldest daughter ofEdward IV. The strongest argument, however,was his victory at Bosworth, all ratified byconquest. Henry was a careful replenisher ofroyal coffers. His stability was threatened bypretenders, but he came to see his line

A character reference for RichardIII from an unlikely source

MARK DOBSON

62

acknowledged in the match between his heir,Arthur, and Catherine of Aragon. . . .’ Basicallyfactual.

And finally, Elizabeth of York: ‘Tooksanctuary in Westminster with her mother uponEdward IV’s death. Richard scotched rumoursthat he planned to marry her after his wife’sdeath, in 1485. Henry Tudor then landed inEngland [sic] as he had sworn to do. She was apolitical pawn whose value depended uponwhether there was any truth in the allegation ofthe family’s illegitimacy – and whether herbrothers were still alive. Hence Henry VII’s

motive for being sure they were not alive. Didshe know what had happened to her brothers?She gave Henry 4 children and they becamedear to one another.’

That last line looks a little strange. Just whobecame ‘dear to each other’ – Henry andElizabeth or Elizabeth and the children?

Perhaps if more history teachers hadsmoked Black Cat cigarettes back then theymight have imparted a more sympathetic viewof Richard to their pupils!

I intend to donate this collection of cards toour Group for wider dissemination.

Cards 15–21 in the series ‘Kings and Queens of England’ given away with Carreras ‘Black Cat’ cigarettes

63

Given the media interest in Richard IIIcreated by the Greyfriars dig last August

– September, it was strange that little space wasgiven in the national press to the discoveryreported on 4 December 2012. A smallparagraph in The Times noted it amongst theitems in the British Museum’s Annual Reportof the Portable Antiquities scheme, whilst theDaily Telegraph printed a small photo [Fig. 1]under the heading ‘Find linked to Richard III’,revealing ‘A boar mount that could havebelonged to Richard III has been discovered bytreasure hunters on the Thames foreshore nearthe Tower of London. King Richard took thewhite boar as his sign, while badges in the formof the animal were ordered at the time of hisdeath in 1485’ (probably confusion with the1483 investiture of Prince Edward in York).

A search for contemporary parallels beginspromisingly, as a similar beast, with a crowncoronet, appears in the collection of drawingsc.1466–70 assembled by Sir John Fenn,1 whereit is paired with another detached MS exampleof Richard’s autograph early motto tant ledesiere2 [Fig. 2]. Funeral effigies of hissupporters wearing his livery collars, however,show the boar without any crown coronetaround the neck; that of Ralph Fitzherbert(d.1483), Norbury, Derbyshire [Fig. 3],includes a damaged supporting base, whilst anengraving of the one once on the woodeneffigy of Ralph Neville, Brancepeth, Co.Durham, is freestanding [Fig. 4]. This had beenmissing since C. A. Stothard published it in1876 and the figures were subsequentlydestroyed by fire in 1999.

The latest ‘boar mount’ appears to bestanding on a ‘torse’ or ‘wreath’ formed fromthe twisted folds of mantling on an heraldicachievement, seen between the crest and thehelm, above the central shield. At least oneauthority chose to depict a boar pendant in thisway [Fig. 5], the noted costume historian

The Thameside Boar – another‘dubious device’

GEOFFREY WHEELER

Fig. 1 (All illustrations and photographs by and© Geoffrey Wheeler). Another illustration can befound on p. 17 in this issue.

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

64

Herbert Norris in his volume on dress from1066 to 1485.3 Although it is possible toidentify some of the source material for hisillustrations, and he acknowledges informationgiven by experts at the College of Arms, thismay be one of his own creations, as certainlywith the ‘collar of honour’ shown on theopposite page [Fig. 6] he combines the whitelion from the 1471 Robert Harcourt effigy (oneof the rare examples where that, too, is shownon a torse or wreath) with the unique suns,roses and oak leaves design around the neck ofJoan, Countess of Arundel (d. 1462). Norriswas responsible for costumes and settings forproductions at the Shakespeare MemorialTheatre from 1919 to 1944 (including RichardIII – John Laurie – in 1939) and as adviser toMme Tussaud’s on their historical sections. Healso chose to show their figure of Richard IIIwearing the Arundel Yorkist collar.4

Given the uncertainty about a definiteRichard III connection, it would seemadvisable to extend the search for othercandidates who used similar badges. Onecertainly appears prominently in theillustrations of Joseph Foster’s Dictionary ofHeraldry,5 collared with a crown and chain,but curiously labelled the Earle Darbie [Fig. 7],whose family is certainly not associated withthis animal. Like Sir John Fenn’s collection,Foster made use of contemporary fifteenth-century and Tudor MSS, but with less concernfor accuracy, in assembling his ‘scrapbook’ ofimages. Those for Richard III (pp. 220–1)show his ‘improved’ re-drawing of the king’sstandard and boar supporters based on therather crude originals in Sir ThomasWriothesley’s manuscript book6 and on thepages devoted to Richard II’s heraldry we findEdward IV’s motto confort et liesse insertedbetween the tree-root badge of Thomas ofWoodstock (and later of John, duke ofBedford) and the Tudor portcullis.

A more reliable authority, Michael PowellSiddons, lists a number of families using theboar collared, including Poynings and theStafford Dukes of Buckingham, in his recentdefinitive work,7 but if confirmation wereneeded to disprove any Richard III connection,it emerges from the Leicester Mercury (4December 2012), which naturally devotedmore space, together with a large photograph

Fig. 4

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 5

65

of the copper alloy mount, reporting ‘RichardIII badge turns up on beach’, with the textclaiming that ‘Badges in the form of the animalwere ordered for the king’s cremation [sic – amisreading of ‘coronation’] in 1485’ and‘experts believe it may have been used as apiece of furniture or decorated an item ofleather once owned by a supporter of RichardIII, or possibly even the king himself’, but thisoverlooks the very important detail given in thefurther description of the object as ‘a boarchained, collared and wearing a crown with acrescent above one of its legs’ (my italics),easily overlooked in the Telegraph photo. Thisis clearly the cadency mark denoting a secondson, which rules out Richard as duke ofGloucester or king. The inclusion of theheraldic wreath at the base also shows it to bea crest (not a badge), such as adorns the tops ofhelmets and not applicable to Richard, who, asseen from his Garter stall plate design, used thegolden crowned lion of England.

A similar error was perpetuated by the carverof a chair, traditionally associated with Richardand the Blue Boar Inn, Leicester, which in factappears to be of quite recent origin, more ‘Artsand Crafts’ in style, now kept by EverardsBrewery Ltd.8 Interestingly, one of the colourplates in Michael Siddons’ introductoryvolume9 shows an almost identical blue boar –minus the crown coronet – on the standard ofSir John Vere (1513) [Fig. 8], so in all

probability it should be assigned to a member ofthat family, rather than Richard III.

1. BL Add MS 40742 fol 5 (rear legsrestored), Fenn’s Book of Badges. On fol13 is another similar boar, unidentified,but probably also for Richard.

2. For Richard’s mottoes see Livia Visser-Fuchs, Research Notes & Queries, TheRicardian, Vol VII, No 93, pp. 260–1.

3. Herbert Norris, Costume and Fashion, Vol2, J. M. Dent, 1940, pp. 466–7.

4. See my article in the Ricardian Register(US Branch magazine), Summer 2004,‘The Easy-Melting King: the history ofRichard III at Mme Tussaud’s’, illus p 5.

5. Joseph Foster, The Dictionary ofHeraldry, Studio Editions 1994 reprint, p.219 – additional material advertising hisforthcoming ‘Men of Coat Armour,Bearings and Badges’.

6. Sean Cunningham, Richard III, a RoyalEnigma, National Archives, 2003, illus p.62. From BL Harley MS 4682.

7. Michael Powell Siddons, Heraldic Badgesin England and Wales, Vol II: Ordinaries’,Boydell, 2009, p 16.

8. David Baldwin, Richard III, Amberley,2012, colour plate 56.

9. Siddons, op.cit., Vol Introduction, colourplate 11. From College of Arms MS A17fol 62v.

Fig. 8

66

Across1 Is Gerry far from the burial site?

(10)6 Exploits emerging from

numerous escapades. (4)9 Henry VI get mad? That’s all

. . . (10)10 . . . because in his case this was

characterised by cruel treatmentand lack of clear leadership. (4)

12 Urgent call about difficultclients missing number of keydates in the calendar. (9)

15 Direct, as John Morton was withEly? (7)

17 Make use of stuff for war. (7)18 Inclined towards claiming the

throne, avoiding publicity andnot English. (7)

20 Odd choice of hostage forRichard. (7)

21 Fail to act on disturbances:that’s typical of fifteenth-century government. (9)

25 Keen to impart gravity to times past. (4)26 Religious ceremony consisting of Norse

god holding raven’s head before most ofthe people. (10)

27 Give job to famous model on request. (4)28 ‘Hah, to rebel violently!’, as Salisbury

might have said after this encounter. (5,5)

Down1 Is this fun to sing? (4)2 They might say you are a great pitcher!

(4)3 Lobby for opening of judicial

proceedings on the first of February. (5)4 At home he sat uncomfortably without

giving it much thought. (2,5)5 Old name the Kingmaker’s grandfather

took, not unwillingly at first. (7)7 Shields the children, sustaining wound

over most of chest. (10)

8 Action taken by nun to discover herpossibly unwanted relative. (10)

11 Rude person gives lead role to the Queen.(6)

13 A castle often captured, ruined and due tobe destroyed. (10)

14 Inexperienced topless performers whoenliven e.g. Bosworth and Tewkesbury.(10)

16 One gets in, falls over: drinking too muchof this may be the reason. (6)

19 Hold up negative showing earl, slightlyblurred. Is he a high-ranking 20D? (7)

20 Unhappy demoralised dame going out toget man in arms! (7)

22 It’s no good ending parliament withoutdue consideration. (5)

23 City worth visiting and returning at theearliest opportunity to write initialimpressions for an article. (4)

24 Go very slowly when taking part in Latinchants. (4)

Ricardian crossword 3

BY SANGLIER

Cryptic clues, mostly with a Ricardian or Wars of the Roses flavour. Solution on p. 80.

67

Correspondence

Will contributors please note that letters may be shortened or edited to conform to the standards ofthe Bulletin. The Bulletin is not responsible for the opinions expressed by contributors.Richard in JeopardyFrom Elizabeth York Enstam, by e-mail On 22 October 2012 I was very pleased to learnthat the editors of my favourite television gameshow, Jeopardy, have accurate informationabout King Richard III. Jeopardy airs everyweekday morning on CBS, one of the threemajor broadcast networks in the United States.The show has been running since 1984. InJeopardy the answer is the clue, and thecontestant must give the question, not onlywith the right information but also in thecorrect phrasing. So the answer for KingRichard was, ‘When King Richard III diedfighting at Bosworth Field, he shouted, “Thiscrime! This crime!”’ None of the threecontestants knew the crime, but the editorsknow: ‘Treason! Treason!’ If none of theJeopardy editors is a Ricardian then perhapsshe or he has read an accurate book or articleabout the king and knows not to repeatShakespeare’s dratted fib about that drattedhorse. And now several million faithful TVviewers know too.

Overcoming disabilitiesFrom David JohnsonSurely Graham Ransom (Correspondence,December 2012 Bulletin, p. 64) is absolutelycorrect to state that Richard’s exploits atBarnet, Tewkesbury, and Bosworth are‘deserving of even more praise’. If, as seemsoverwhelmingly likely, the Greyfriars remainsare confirmed to be those of the lastPlantagenet king, then our collectiveadmiration can only be increased by themanner in which Richard overcame hisdisability.

Scoliosis, severe scoliosis even, did notincapacitate Richard in any way, and may evenhave served to strengthen his determination asa young man to live a full and active life. Thiswould be entirely consistent with what weknow of Richard’s conscientious character,driven at all times to do the very best he could.

Perhaps in Richard’s martial achievements

we see tangible proof of an inward strength tocarry the full burden of his dynastic respon-sibilities, despite an affliction that might wellhave sidelined others or provided an excuse totake a back seat.

In Richard’s efforts to uphold the House ofYork, both as duke and as king, we see a manwho earned the loyalty and affection of thosewho knew him best. Just as we today marvel atthose who overcome disability to realise theirtrue potential, so Richard’s friends and familymust have felt similarly proud of his sheerdetermination and unflinching loyalty to theYorkist cause.

From Sandra Hempel, by e-mail I was so happy to watch the programmeconcerning the discovery of his remains. Iknow the lady looked shocked when told of thedeformity to his spine, as was I. But it was likelooking at my own back. I have had scoliosissince I was a teenager. It followed years ofillness as a child and when it was discovered,no surgical cure had been dared upon.Nevertheless, I have grown up, am now in mylate 60s and can walk straighter than myhusband, who has a straight spine. I go to thegym, and when I was younger it did not stopme doing anything, nor does it now, althoughage restricts many of the things I used to do.However, I do not have the pain described bythe people on the programme: your body reactsto it by building up muscles almost as if it istrying to push the bone back into a straight line.The only way you can tell my back is curved isto look closely at my back – naked. My armsand legs are not affected, neither is mywalking.

Who Killed Richard III?From Mark Dobson, by e-mail Following on from the discussion in theBulletin about who killed Richard at the battleof Bosworth, I have recently picked up abooklet produced by Denbighshire CountyCouncil, Denbighshire People and Places by

68

Dr Charles Kightly. This describes Rhys Fawrap Maredudd, who famously retrieved HenryTudor’s standard when Sir Henry Brandon wasfelled by Richard. According to the familytradition it was Rhys who delivered the finalblow onto Richard with his halberd. As if toreinforce this claim, the coat of arms of thefamily displays a white lion holding ‘anuprooted white rose with royal purple leaves’,perhaps symbolising the death of the lastYorkist king. Although the Wikipedia articleabout Rhys Fawr (‘Big Rhys’) does notmention his part in the death of Richard thereare other links on the internet which do, e.g.http://tinyurl.com/Denbighshire-People-and-Places.

Playing over the grave From Jacqueline Grainger (née Maisey)(Alderman Newton’s Girls’ Grammar School1952–7), by e-mailLiving in Leicester, I was fortunate to be ableto visit the grave site, and was astonished tofind that it was in my old school playground!Because of the proximity of the school to theCathedral and the old Greyfriars foundations, itwas always supposed that the king wassomewhere around, but how amazing todiscover that I had actually been happilyplaying over Richard’s bones. The school iscurrently up for sale. A good site for amuseum?

Praise for the BulletinFrom Margaret Manning, Editor, RicardianTimes, New Zealand, by e-mailCongratulations should go to the editorial teamof the Ricardian Bulletin for the fine job doneon the December 2012 issue. To haveaccumulated and incorporated in that issue ofthe magazine so much detail, information,pictures and interesting data on such a veryrecent event as the Leicester dig anddiscoveries, which only came fully to light atthe end of September after all, was a feat ofconsiderable editorial proportions. Extremelygood organisation and hard work would havebeen required to gather together the writtenarticles from the many people involved in theproject, and their subsequent presentation inthe Bulletin. The very professional-lookingresult is proof of the excellent editorial team

we have. The writers of these reports are to becommended also for the diligence demon-strated in producing their articles within such atight timeline. No doubt some parts could havebeen prepared beforehand, ‘in anticipation’ soto speak, but if that happened, it can only pointto the faith held in the justification of theproject. Through the dedication of the wholeteam – writers, reporters, photographers,editors, printers, and probably many othersbehind the scenes – the Richard III Societymembership has been advised in a timelyfashion, of the great events at Leicester inAugust/September 2012.

Keeping things in perspective From Dr Ian Mortimer, by e-mailIt seems to me that, since the findings of theGreyfriars dig have become known, manypeople (including members of this Society)have lost a bit of perspective. Some haveequated finding Richard’s body with exoner-ating him of complicity in any and every crimehe might possibly have committed.

I understand that, in the enthusiasm of thediscovery, it is difficult to remain level-headed,but I do feel that the Society should do its bestto be circumspect. Its purpose is ‘reassessmentof the material’, not the rehabilitation of theman – and it has to be so, for the latter impliesboth a bias and a wilful historical myopia.

One of the great things about the Society isits determination to question received wisdom.It led the way in pulling apart dubious textslong before Deconstructionism was a gleam inJacques Derrida’s eye. It would be a shame ifnow that reputation for questioning theevidence is lost, and a little too much over-enthusiasm results in the Society beingportrayed in the wider press as being biasedrather than objective.

Richard III’s reburialFrom Pauline Harrison PogmoreDuring the recent differing opinions as towhere King Richard should be interred it hasbeen said that there is no written proof of hiswish to be interred in York Minster. This is afact. So is the point that Richard also foundedchantries in other places than the Minster. Hisfoundation at Middleham was intended for sixpriests, that at Barnard Castle for 12. Richard’s

69

foundation at the Minster was for 100 priests.His brother Edward’s chantry at St George’sWindsor was founded with just two priests and16 bedesmen. Placed beside the plans for Yorkthese foundations seem very small. There musthave been a reason for such elaborate plans. Ifthere was any written documentation it couldvery easily have been destroyed during a laterperiod.

We have also heard that it is ‘commonpractice’ if not law that bodies should be buriedin the nearest church to where they areexcavated. This argument falls flat when it isdiscovered bodies from the battle of Towtondiscovered in Tadcaster were reinterred, not inTadcaster, but several miles away in Saxton.

These are just excuses. We are not talkingabout some unknown body here. We are talkingabout the last Plantagenet king of England whodied defending his crown in battle against ausurper and was buried according to thatusurper’s wish in Leicester.

All this aside, we come to a pertinentquestion which no one has answered. If thesewere not intended to be arrangements for hisfamily chantry, where else would Richard havechosen to be buried? Certainly not West-minster. He had no ties of affection for theAbbey, let alone the considerations of space inthe interior. At Windsor the two most importantplaces were occupied by Edward IV and HenryVI, whom Richard himself had had broughtthere for burial. York was the obvious choice. Itanswers the question as to why nothing hadbeen done about a fitting memorial for Anne.Despite his preoccupation with other matters, ifthis was meant to be her final resting placeRichard was too meticulous not to have at leastbegun a plan for a suitable memorial. It furtheranswers the question of the mystery of wherehis son was laid to rest. He is most certainly notat Sheriff Hutton.

Unfortunately it appears Richard will beinterred far from the places he loved. In a trawlthrough websites for some information I foundthis post on the Lost in Castles website, dated24 August 2012: ‘An archaeological dig is nowunder way to determine whether the mortalremains of Richard III are under a car park inLeicester. Over a year ago Lost in Castles wereinvited to make the preliminary computerimpressions for a potential tomb to rebury the

remains should they be discovered. The designhas undergone many changes and is now beingfinalised’. Richard was by adoption anortherner, his heart was in the north and hewas loved there. Where else, I ask myself,would he have chosen. It is not justice forRichard, the last Plantagenet king, to be buriedanywhere but where he chose – York Minster.This tomb should be erected in York, andnowhere else.

Praise for the Greyfriars digFrom Mrs Billie Shirley by e-mailI feel I must thank you and your colleagues forall your hard work that made the Leicester dighappen. My interest in Richard started some 46years ago. On seeing his reconstructed face,I’m quite frankly enthralled, let's hope in thefuture the truth about him will be revealed.

From Judith Veysey by e-mail Many congratulations to all those members ofthe Society and Leicester University fortunateenough to have been actively involved in thisamazing project. The morning press confer-ence had me on the edge of my seat, as did theChannel 4 programme in the evening. It hasbeen such an emotional journey for all of uswho over many years (60 in my case) havegrieved at the inhuman treatment of KingRichard's body after the battle of Bosworth andthe subsequent destruction of his reputation.

Interesting relationships From Joan Bygrave, West Malling, KentI am interested in the following statement madeby Peter Hancock in his book Richard III andthe Murder in the Tower: ‘And Stillingtonhimself was actually related to Eleanor Butlerthrough his aunt Lady Lisle’s (Joan Cheddar)relations to the Talbots. Thus . . . Robert wasmarrying off one of his relatives to the king.’ Ifany of your members have explored thisrelationship I would be pleased to hear fromthem. My address is Rose Alba, Park Road,Addington, West Malling, Kent ME19 5BQ,and I will reimburse any expense.

[We have suggested to Joan that JohnAshdown-Hill’s Eleanor the Secret Queenwould be a good source of information aboutthe relationship.]

70

Book reviews and noticesA Trail of Blood by Jeremy Potter (electronic editions)Bloomsbury Readers, E-Pub format, £1.99; Amazon, Kindle format, US$2.75

The late Jeremy Potter was Chairman of the Richard III Society from 1971 to 1989, and in 1970 hepublished a detective novel, A Trail of Blood. The novel provides a new solution to the mystery ofthe princes in the Tower and was described by Auberon Waugh as an ‘ingenious, exciting and wellwritten novel.’ The book is now available as a Bloomsbury Reader, downloadable to E-Pub readers,and from Amazon, downloadable to Kindles. We are grateful to Jeremy’s daughter, Jocelyn Potter,for alerting us to this.

The Worm of Conscience by Carole ParkhousePublished 8 December 2012, Amazon, Kindle edition, £3.24, ISBN 9780957512405.

Carole Parkhouse, a long-standing member who lives in York, writes to advise that her novel aboutMiles Metcalfe has been published in Kindle format available from Amazon. As Carole describes:‘It’s the story of how Miles Metcalfe came up to town as a youth to study at the Inns of Court andbecame the Attorney-General to Warwick the Kingmaker; how he met and wooed his wife Matildaand their adventures in France and England as part of the Warwick faction before their connectionwith Warwick’s daughter Anne brings them into the sphere of Richard of Gloucester. The novelcontinues with the story of their son James, who serves Gloucester and culminates with the aftermathof Bosworth, and how that impacts on the Metcalfe family.’ She is keen to get the book into printand would be grateful for advice from members familiar with the publishing world; her e-mail isCarole.Parkhouse@bl.uk.

Carole is also the author of a scholarly article about Miles which appeared in the March 1989edition of The Ricardian under the title ‘The Career of a Fifteenth-century Lawyer: Miles Metcalfeof Wensleydale’, so she is fully familiar with the historical facts about Mile’s life and career.

Mistress to the Crown by Isolde MartynTrade paperback and e-book by Mira Harlequin (Australia),February 2013.

Mistress to the Crown is the latest Ricardian novel from the formerchair of the Sydney Branch, Isolde Martyn. The ‘mistress’ of thetitle is Elizabeth Shore, daughter of wealthy London mercer, JohnLambard, and ‘the Crown’, of course, is Edward IV’s. Althoughmentioned in proclamations as ‘Mistress Shore’, Elizabeth was notknown as ‘Jane’ until so-called by a playwright in 1599. She hasbeen a subject of fascination ever since and one of the first plays tobe performed in the new colony of Botany Bay, New South Wales,was her life story.

In Mistress to the Crown, told through Elizabeth’s eyes, we aretaken on a journey through medieval London and Westminster inwhich Isolde’s immaculate research shines through and we are ableto see first-hand the luxury, corruption, squalor and medical ‘cures’which make the flesh creep. We are also taken on the personaljourney of a beautiful, witty and kind young woman who, although married very young to animpotent and frigid man, was able to take control of her own destiny and had many triumphs andtrials before embarking on her second and happy marriage. Again we meet all our old friends andenemies including a complex King Edward IV and a most obnoxious Marquis of Dorset. Elizabethtakes many risks, from the leaving of the security of marriage, albeit unhappy, to the unwitting

71

favours she does as King’s mistress for others. Many plausible reasons are given for the events of1483. There are many wonderful scenes in this book. My favourite is the re-enactment of the Siegeof Troy at Edward’s court. I was also most moved when at the start of her penance at St Paul’sCathedral Elizabeth summons all her courage from the scene on the Rood Screen. It is a long timesince a novel has been centred on Mistress Shore and that is surprising, since she would have beenat the heart of great matters in the kingdom. I’m delighted to recommend Mistress to the Crown as aworthwhile read.

Babs Creamer

The Kingmaker’s Daughter by Philippa GregorySimon & Schuster, 2012, hardback 426 pp.

Anne Neville, daughter of Warwick the Kingmaker and wife firstto Edward of Lancaster then to Richard of York, was at the veryheart of the dynastic struggles of the fifteenth century, yet sheremains a shadowy, largely unknown figure. So what does Gregorymake of this unpromising material? Quite a lot, in fact; for this isthe daughter of proud, ambitious Warwick who, denied sons of hisown, wants one of his daughters on the throne of England. Anne isher father’s daughter, always conscious of her noble status. AtElizabeth Woodville’s coronation, for example, she despises hersister’s attempts to ingratiate herself with the queen: ‘Isabel cangurn all she wants, but I won’t be made to feel awkward.. . . We areof the great Neville family . . . we have royal blood in our veins’.(p. 7).

Warwick shamelessly uses both sisters to further his ambitions.Turning his back on Edward, he now favours George of Clarence as the next king so Isabel is marriedto him at a magnificent ceremony in Calais ‘. . . a celebration of my father’s power’. (p. 33) But asthe balance of power shifts and sways, Warwick decides that Edward of Lancaster is a better bet;much to her horror he abandons the Yorkists and marries Anne to the prince in July 1470. A year laterWarwick and Edward are dead and Anne is left without protection – until the turncoat Clarence, hiseye on her vast estates, takes control of her, with Isabel’s support: ‘I am not free. I am the pawn inpossession of another player’ (p. 140).

Anne renews her friendship with Richard, whom she has known since childhood and she pledgesherself to him ‘in full knowledge of what I am doing. Because I don’t want to be anybody’s pawnagain. The next move that is made will be mine. I will choose my freedom and I will choose myhusband’ (p. 173). Yet, even as she walks up the aisle in May 1472, she thinks of the memorial stonesunder her feet, ‘here, lying in unending darkness, are all the other people who thought that they toowould play their own cards’ (p. 193). Anne knows that Richard would not have married her withouther inheritance but she is deeply shocked when he and Clarence have the countess of Warwickdeclared legally dead so they can get control of her estates as well. The countess, bitter and cruel,taunts Anne with the fact that Richard did not, and has no intention of, getting a full dispensationfrom the pope to make their marriage fully legal and therefore ‘He is providing for the denial of yourmarriage . . . you are not married and your son is a bastard and you a harlot’ (p. 244). Anne is crushed:‘All this time I thought that I was playing myself, both the player and the pawn, and yet I have neverbeen more powerless, never more of a piece in someone else’s game’ (p. 244).

But the game isn’t over yet for soon Clarence and Edward are dead, Richard is king and Anne hasachieved dead Warwick’s dearest wish – a Neville on the throne of England. But Anne no longerwishes to play the game: ‘Ever since I lost my son I have been weary to my soul . . . I am ready tolie down to sleep. I am tired’ (p. 419).

Philippa Gregory does not pity Anne, nor does she sentimentalise her; what comes across inAnne’s words is her strength and her resilience, her honesty, her loyalty and her quiet determination

72

The Barton LibraryContact details for all the librarians are on the inside back cover.

News from the Non-Fiction Papers LibrarianOnce again we have several new additions to the Papers Library, covering a range of subjects. Hereare a few that might be of particular interest to members.

‘On Some London Houses of the Early Tudor Period’ by Charles Kingsford (From: Archaeologia,Vol LXXI, 1921). This article provides detailed information regarding the interiors and furnishingsof four great London houses, including Coldharbour and the Erber. In the 1460s and early 1470sColdharbour was the property of Edward IV’s sister Anne, the estranged wife of the Lancastrian dukeof Exeter. It was occupied by Margaret of York during her visit to England in 1480; Richard III gaveit to the royal heralds as their headquarters, but immediately after Bosworth Henry VII confiscatedit from them in order to bestow it upon his mother. Kingsford’s information comes from survivingaccounts for Margaret Beaufort’s refurbishment of the house in the autumn of 1485.

The Erber was a Neville property, owned successively by (amongst others) Richard Neville, earlof Salisbury, Warwick the Kingmaker, Clarence and Margaret, countess of Salisbury. Kingsford’sdescription is based on accounts surviving from the period 1514–24. Transcripts of the sourcedocuments are given in an appendix.

Transcripts of the countess of Warwick’s parliamentary petitions requesting the restoration of herestates (sources: BL MS Cotton Julius BXII, The Red Paper Book of Colchester, and The ParliamentRolls of Medieval England).

Unsuccessful parliamentary petitions of this period normally sink without trace because they werenot recorded in the Parliament Rolls. We are, however, lucky to have the text of the countess’unsuccessful petition written from Beaulieu Sanctuary to King Edward’s parliament of 1472–4(preserved amongst papers belonging to Richard as duke of Gloucester), plus the record of a secondunsuccessful complaint to Henry VII’s first parliament in 1485 (preserved in the Colchester townrecords), as well as the text of her (briefly) successful appeal to Henry VII’s second parliament in1487.

‘He Contents the People Wherever He Goes’ – Richard III: His Parliament and Government, byChris Puplick. This is the text of an address given to the Sydney Branch of the Society in 2007examining Richard’s legislation in the context of the role and organisation of parliament in thefifteenth century. The author is an Australian parliamentarian.

The de la Poles of Hull, by Rosemary Horrox, published by the East Yorkshire Local History Societyin 1983. This scholarly history of the early de la Poles includes genealogical tables showing the linesof descent of the family up to the end of the fifteenth century.

Look out for additions to the Fiction, Non-Fiction and Audiovisual Collections in the next Bulletin.

to be her own person. That she, governed by the law and custom of the times, is a pawn in the grandgame played by more powerful people around her, does not diminish her qualities, rather it serves toemphasise them – for she is the Kingmaker’s daughter.

Elaine Henderson

Bosworth: the birth of the Tudors by Chris Skidmore This new book will be published by Weidenfeld & Nicolson in hardback on 23 May 2013. The bookdraws on eyewitness reports, newly discovered manuscripts and the latest archaeological evidence.In June’s Bulletin we will be giving details of a special discount offer for members wishing to buythe book.

73

Branches and Groups

Contact listBranchesAmerica Mary Retallick: 401 S G St #408, Tacoma, WA 98405. Tel: 253 589

8527. E-mail: mretalli1966@gmail.comCanada Ms Sheilah O’Connor, 156 Drayton Avenue, Toronto, Ontario,

M4C.3M2 Canada. Tel: 416 693 1241. E-mail: richardiii@cogeco.ca.Website: http://home.cogeco.ca/~richardiii.

Devon & Cornwall Mrs Anne E Painter, Yoredale, Trewithick Road, Breage, Helston,Cornwall, TRI3 9PZ. Tel: 01326-562023. E-mail: aepainter@aol.com.

Gloucester Angela Iliff, 1 Court Road, Horfield, Bristol, BS7 0BU. Tel: 0117 9089983: E-mail: ardiliff@gmail.com

Greater Manchester Mrs Helen Ashburn, 36 Clumber Road, Gorton, Manchester, M187LZ. Tel: 0161 320 6157. E-mail: hhathorhm@aol.com.

Hull & District Terence O’Brien, 2 Hutton Close, Hull, HU4 4LD. Tel: 01482445312.

Lincolnshire Mrs J. T. Townsend, Westborough Lodge Farm, Westborough,Newark, Notts. NG23 5HP. Tel: 01400 281289. E-mail:ian.townsend@talktalk.net.

London & Home Counties Miss E. M. Nokes, 4 Oakley Street, Chelsea, London SW3 5NN. Tel:01689 823569. E-mail: Elizabeth_nokes@hotmail.com.

Midlands-East Mrs Sally Henshaw, 28 Lyncroft Leys, Scraptoft, Leicester, LE7 9UW.Tel: 0116 243 3785. E-mail: sallyoftarahill@homecall.co.uk.

New South Wales Julia Redlich, 53 Cammeray Towers, 55 Carter Street, New SouthWales, 2062, Australia. E-mail: info@richardiii-nsw.org.au. Website:www.richardiii-nsw.org.au.

New Zealand Robert Smith, ‘Wattle Downs’, 61 Udy Street, Greytown, NewZealand. E-mail: rob.helen.smith@xtra.co.nz orsecretary@richard3nz.org. Website: www.richard3nz.org.

Norfolk Mrs Annmarie Hayek, 20 Rowington Road, Norwich, NR1 3RR. Tel:01603 664021. E-mail: annmarie@talktalk.net.

Queensland As New South WalesScotland Juliet Middleton, 49 Ochiltree, Dunblane, Perthshire, FK15 ODF. Tel:

01786 825665. E-mail: keith.mddltn@xna9791.plus.com (lower caseletter l, not figure 1)

South Australia Mrs Sue Walladge, 5 Spencer Street, Cowandilla, South Australia5033. E-mail: walladge@internode.on.net.

Thames Valley Diana Lee, 161 Green Lane, Shepperton, Middx, TW17 8DY. Tel:01932 219665. E-mail: diana.pr.lee@gmail.com.

Victoria Hazel Hajdu, 4 Byron Street, Wattle Park, Victoria, 3128, Australia. E-mail: hhajdu@tpg.com.au.

Western Australia Louise Carson, 26 Warrida Way, Maddington 6109, Western Australia.E-mail: Richard3inWA@gmail.com. Website: www.r3wa@org.au.

Worcestershire Mrs Pam Benstead, 15 St Mary’s Close, Kempsey WR5 3JX. E-mail: pb@richardiiiworcs.co.uk. Website:www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk.

Yorkshire Mrs P. H. Pogmore, 169 Albert Road, Sheffield, S8 9QX. Tel: 0114258 6097. E-mail: scarletlion1119@yahoo.co.uk.Website: www.richardiiiyorkshire.com.

74

Groups Bedfordshire & Roger Bradban, 10 Grays Grove, Little Staughton, Beds MK44 2BT.Buckinghamshire Tel: 01234 378136. E-mail: roger.bradban@googlemail.com.Bristol (in affiliation with Keith Stenner, 96 Allerton Crescent, Whitchurch, Bristol.Gloucestershire Branch) Tel: 01275 541512. E-mail: keith.stenner@blueyonder.co.uk.Continental In process of formation; contact Rita Diefenhardt-Schmitt at

Ulmenweg 8, 65520 Bad Camberg-O.selters/Ts, Germany.Croydon Miss Denise Price, 190 Roundwood Rd, London NW10. Tel: 020

8451 7689.Cumbria John & Marjorie Smith, 26 Clifford Road, Penrith, Cumbria, CA11

SPP.Dorset Babs Creamer, 27 Baker Road, Bear Cross, Bournemouth, BH11 9JD.

Tel: 01202 573951. E-mail: riiidorset@ta1ktalk.net.North East Mrs J. McLaren, 11 Sefton Avenue, Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne,

NE6 5QR. Tel: 0191 265 3665. E-mail: jumikmac@yahoo.co.uk.North Mercia Miss Marion Moulton, 6 Shrewbridge Crescent, Nantwich, Cheshire

CW5 5TF. Tel: 01270 623664. E-mail: moult.dabber@yahoo.co.uk.Nottinghamshire Mrs Anne Ayres, 7 Boots Yard, Huthwaite, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Notts& Derbyshire NG17 2QW. E-mail: ajayres@fsmail.net.Sussex Liz Robinson, 14 Queen’s Park Rise, Brighton, BN2 9ZF. Tel: 01273

609971. E-mail: shezcounihan@hotmail.com.West Surrey Rollo Crookshank, Old Willows, 41a Badshot Park, Famham, Surrey,

GU9 9JU. E-mail: crookshank@starkmann.co.uk.

New contact details

Bedfordshire & Buckinghamshire Group Roger Bradban, 10 Grays Grove, Little Staughton,Beds MK44 2BT. Tel: 01234 378136. e-mail roger.bradban@googlemail.com

Yorkshire Branch Please note that Pauline Harrison Pogmore’s e-mail address has changed to:scarletlion1119@yahoo.co.uk (111 as figures, not letter ls).

Western Australia Branch Louise Carson, 26 Warrida Way, Maddington 6109, Western Australia. E-mail: Richard3inWA@gmail.com. Website: www.r3wa@org.au

Devon and Cornwall Branch meetings 2013At our November 2012 AGM it was decided to cut down the number of meetings held by the branchbecause of the rising cost of room hire and the diminishing number of members attending. Meetingswill take place on the following dates during 2013:9 March: Guns and Roses, a talk by Tomas Eriksson on the use of black powder ordinance and howit was employed by both Yorkist and Lancastrian forces during the Wars of the Roses.11 May: Branch members’ research on Richard III’s visit to the West Country in 1483. We will meetto pool information with a view to possibly offering a short talk to external interested parties.13 July: Richard III as Soldier, a talk by Keith Stenner.12 October: Annual General Meeting.December: Christmas lunch.All meetings are held at the University of Plymouth on a Saturday afternoon and they run from noonuntil approximately 3 p.m. All members are very welcome to come along.

West Surrey Group reportAt our October meeting in Upper Hale we had a report from our chairman on the Society’s AGM inYork, which included an update on the archaeological diggings at the Greyfriars, Leicester. Some of

75

our members took on the role play of characters, having researched them, for the period betweenEdward IV’s death and Richard III’s accession. So we were treated to episodes of the de la Poles,Jane Shore, Lord Mayor of London, King Louis XI of France, Elizabeth Woodville, King James IIIof Scotland, Bishop Stillington, Cardinal Bourchier, the earl of Northumberland and MargaretBeaufort. It was an interesting and telling exercise, with some of the characters proving unexpectedlysympathetic in their researchers’ eyes.

Our November meeting welcomed a new member, Jan Frankom from Godalming, and then themeeting focused on our annual book review. This year’s selection was David Baldwin’s newbiography of Richard III. A wide range of views and points were given, and various aspects debatedat length, with a number of members thinking that the book would make a very good ‘first read’ fora person not familiar with that part of history.

Our December meeting was our traditional Christmas lunch at the Princess Royal, in Runfold,Farnham, where we had the pleasure of welcoming members and guests from Devon, Lancashire,Oxfordshire and Worcestershire.

We are now planning for 2013, with our AGM in January and our first three meetings alreadyconfirmed; Stephen David of the University of Swansea coming to talk to us in February on theEuropean perspective on late fifteenth-century England and Keith Stenner of the GloucestershireBranch talking to us in March on the battle of Bosworth; in April we are scheduled to have a talk onmedieval calligraphy. We also look forward to welcoming new member Sarah Gerrard fromCamberley.

If you would like to receive any further information about the West Surrey Group, please do nothesitate to contact Rollo Crookshank, tel: 01252 319881 or e-mail crookshank@starkmann.co.uk

Gill Gibbins

Worcestershire Branch report The autumn of 2012 saw the Branch entertain two excellent speakers. In October, Stephen David gavea most interesting and carefully researched talk on Nicolas von Poppelau, who is usually no more thana footnote to Richard’s reign; his report, however, is often cited as evidence that Richard was notdeformed or stunted and gives us a picture of the magnificence of the court. Von Poppelau was not,Stephen David said, a mere ‘traveller’, as he is usually described, but clearly a man of importance whocame to Richard’s court for a specific purpose. He was an Imperial Knight of the Hapsburg Emperor,Frederick III, and was German, despite coming from the town of Poppelau, since 1945 named Oppeln,in the Duchy of Silesia in Bohemia. He spent eight days at Middleham Castle during Richard’ssummer progress in 1484. He gave a speech to the king in Latin, dined with him at his table and wasgiven a gold necklace by him, favours that indicate he was a man of some status. The thesis advancedwas that von Poppelau was a player in the power struggle in Europe, an envoy sent from theHapsburgs to bring England into an alliance with the Empire and Burgundy at a time when Margaretof York’s chaplain and commercial agent were also in England; Henry Tudor was seeking Frenchassistance and France feared Richard would support Brittany’s struggle to remain independent.

George Goodwin, author of the acclaimed recent book about the Battle of Towton, Fatal Colours,was the speaker in November. The branch had decided to make this a public lecture, so toaccommodate larger numbers and provide the necessary technical equipment it was held at HanleyCastle School, where we were also able to have a Society stall, books from the Ledbury Bookshopand afternoon tea for all. Members and guests were rewarded with a most erudite and entertaininglecture, illustrated by a large number of appropriate slides. George Goodwin discussed not just thebattle, but the crisis of the English monarchy created by the accession of the infant Henry VI andprolonged by his failure as a king; he failed to measure up to the military prowess of his illustriousfather and he failed to provide strong and effective government. The result was the catastrophic‘absence of kingship’ that led to civil war. George Goodwin led his audience through the intricaciesof the theories of medieval kingship as well as through the political manoeuvrings of the mid-fifteenth century to present a very clear explanation of the reasons how and why Towton happened.He also explained its consequences: as a ‘defeat of a large army of the north by an “invader” from

76

the South’ it represented the ‘genesis of Yorkist rule’. However, Richard III relied on the north untilhe was defeated by Henry Tudor, from the south and west. Arguably Towton set the scene for furtherusurpations. It was a significant turning point not only in English history, but also in the developmentof the English monarchy.

The December meeting was a purely social occasion. The light-hearted Ricardian quizzescompiled by members and the Christmas ‘Bring and Share’ tea were greatly enjoyed by all.

Carol Southworth

Yorkshire Branch reportThe Yorkshire Branch committee remains the same as for last year, with Angela Moreton as chairman(and editor of Blanc Sanglier), Pauline Harrison Pogmore as secretary, Marjorie Hodgkinson as ourtreasurer and sales officer, and Hannah Moreton, Scowen Sykes and Lynda Telford completing thenumber of committee members. Pauline and Hannah are responsible for our website, which ismanaged by James Garton, and Pauline is also branch librarian and research officer.

Our customary wreath-laying in commemoration of the battle of Wakefield took place at the dukeof York’s statue near Sandal castle on 31 December. We were very pleased that several new membersattended – it’s always good to put faces to names – and we were glad to welcome some familiarsupporters too. After Sandal we went to the chantry chapel on Wakefield bridge to place flowers inmemory of Edmund, earl of Rutland, near the site of his death. This part of the proceedings wasinterrupted by a cloudburst, but at least we had no snow. A report of the event by George Nairn-Briggs will appear in our April Blanc Sanglier.

The Friends of the Chantry Chapel have recently announced that it is now possible to have simplememorial plaques placed in the chapel itself. The plaques are made of brass and cost £300 each.Yorkshire Branch committee feels it would be appropriate to commemorate Edmund of Rutland inthis way, since he has no other memorial. We are also investigating the possibility of placing a plaquein memory of King Richard in his collegiate church at Middleham, and we will keep membersinformed on the progress of this initiative. If you would like to contribute to this appeal, cheques maybe sent to our secretary, payable to ‘Yorkshire Branch Richard III Society’ and endorsed ‘MemorialPlaques’. We hope to attend the Towton commemoration to be held on Palm Sunday, 24 March.Further details on our website or from our secretary: please note her new e-mail address,scarletlion1119@yahoo.co.uk. (1119 is a date, not the letter L.) Flowers will be laid on behalf ofYorkshire Branch at the Dacre Cross near Towton battlefield – possibly the last surviving fragmentof the memorial chapel to the dead of the battle that King Richard began (but did not finish).

Our Arthur Cockerill Spring lecture will be held at Jacobs Well, Trinity Lane, York, on Saturday27 April when staff from the Royal Armouries in Leeds will talk on ‘Arms and armour in the periodof the Wars of the Roses’. The lecture will begin at 2 p.m. and tea will be available at £3.50 perperson, payable on the day.

The committee is very pleased to announce that the branch will have a stall at the HarewoodMediaeval Fair to be held on Sunday 26 and Monday 27 May (Spring Bank Holiday), and membersof the branch have been invited to give short talks at this event. Please see our website for moredetails. In response to those members who asked us to run another Study Day, the committee is gladto say that Jacobs Well has been booked for Saturday 15 June. This event will run from 10 a.m. to 5p.m. Speakers will include Marjorie Hodgkinson, Lesley Lambert, Pauline Harrison Pogmore,Scowen Sykes and Lynda Telford, on such topics as the Black Death in York, Witchcraft and ‘Whodo you think you are? – Warwick the Kingmaker’ . Booking will open in April and a booking formwill appear with our April newsletter. The day costs £19.00 per person, or £22.50 to include a lightlunch (otherwise own arrangements). Members and friends are all welcome to attend.

Finally, we must apologise for a glitch to our website which, we now learn, has resulted in thenon-arrival of some e-mails sent to our secretary. The problem has now been resolved and Pauline iscatching up with the correspondence.

Angela Moreton, chairman

77

New membersUK members 1 October–31 December 2012Helen Ackland, Cleckeaton, West YorkshireJohn & Barbara Adams, BarnsleyKaren Andrews, Bishops WalthamLillian Atkins, Nuneaton, WarwickshireNeil Aufflick, Old Windsor, BerkshireSteven & Lynne Austin-Vautier, St John, JerseyHelen Bailey, LondonArthur Ball, Bishops Stortford, HertfordshireS Barnard, LeedsCharlotte Barton, LeicesterChristine Beech-Law & Family, Tealby, LincolnshireJennifer Bibby, LutonJudith Bland, Keighley, West YorkshireSylvia Blundell, Sidcup, KentDebbie Borley, Rothley, LeicestershireAlexander Brondarbit, WinchesterTrevor Brooks, Rainham, KentNicola Bryant, LondonAnne Burge & Hugh McMichael, Malvern,

WorcestershireSue Byron, Eastbourne, East SussexShaun Cafferty, NantwichElizabeth Cameron, Upminster, EssexSteven Capes, Llandudno, ConwayElizabeth Carrick, BrightonAnn Channon, Alton, HampshireSylvia Charlewood, CheltenhamJeanne Chattoe & Family, Witney, OxfordshireM Chedgey, Alresford, HampshireMargaret Clark, Ludlow, ShropshireAnne Collin, Rugby, WarwickshireBetty Comer, Great Yarmouth, NorfolkAllan Coombes, BournemouthJohn Coventry, Cleveleys, LancashireGregory Crane, High Wycombe, BuckinghamshireCaterina Crofts, AccringtonLinda Cusdin, Heston, MiddlesexKate Czerny, Horsham, West SussexMike Dagg-Jenden, BirminghamAlison Day, NottinghamMaxwell Diment, Ivybridge, DevonSonia Dimmock, NottinghamJanis Dixon, StockportShirley Draheim-Jackson, StamfordKatie Dungate, Reigate, SurreyJacqueline Dunn, Feltham, MiddlesexRoger Dyer, LeicesterEileen Evison, Loughborough, LeicestershireCarol Fellingham Webb, KeighleyDeborah Fiddaman, Beauchamp, LeicestershireAnne Firth, DoncasterGenevieve Fletcher, BrightonZoe Fletcher & Lee Allott, SheffieldSylvia Fox, MonmouthStephen Frosdick, Dereham, Norfolk

Peter Gargett, LeedsSarah Gerrard, Camberley, SurreyLes Gibbings, Milton KeynesDorothy Gormlie, Barhead, East RenfrewshireMoira Goulty, RotherhamJacqueline & John Grainger, Lutterworth,

LeicestershireGeoff Gration, DerbyTracy Greenwell, Blandford, DorsetValerie Hall, GuildfordPatricia Hall, DarlingtonSusan Hanson, YorkJoan Harmon, LondonMary Harrison, BrightonJohn Hathaway, Birmingham Andy Hathaway, Waltham Abbey, EssexKaren Hockley, BirminghamRosemary & Don Hodgkinson, Northwich, CheshireAlison Illsley, Wysall, NottinghamshireHelen Ingram, Ilminster, SomersetGillian Ingram, WirralPhilippa Jacobs, Holyhead MountainIan Johnson, Loughton, EssexLynette Johnston, BirminghamChrista Keenan, PortsmouthMargaret Knight, GuildfordPeter Low, Twickenham, MiddlesexMhairi Macleod, StirlingBrian Magson, Hinckley, LeicestershireAshley Mantle, KidderminsterChristine Marshall, Clitheroe, LancashireDorothy Martin, Crambe, YorkshireIain Mc Lean, StockportNicola Meyrick, LondonRosanne Morley-Mead, BirminghamJoanne Mungovin, Wigston Meadows, LeicestershireG Musgrave, Westcott, SurreyDavid Newman, YorkSteven Norman & Family, Wigston, LeicestershireSuzanne North, Bromley, KentPatricia O’ Doherty, Chatham, KentMichael O’ Flaherty, Southport, MerseysideSusan Ollier, Milton KeynesRichard Packer, Ilford, EssexAngela Parker, Melton Mowbray, LeicestershireKate Parry, WorcesterChristine Peel, Milton KeynesRebecca Piechowski, Warminster, WiltshireJohn & Patricia Porter, Felixstowe, SuffolkCarole Potton, HullStacey Powell, LeedsAlison Prater, LondonChristopher Price, BromsgroveAnn Proudfoot, LiverpoolRaluca Radulescu, Bangor, GwyneddHoward Raingold, London

78

Jean Rees, Mere, WiltshireWilliam Rivers, Kidlington, OxfordshireAnita Roberts, Crawley, West SussexFiona Robertson, DumfriesAdrian Robinson, CoventryKenneth Rochester, Southend-on-SeaJill Rodgers, Felsted, EssexElizabeth Rogers, DundeeJohn Rozmus, Henlow, BedfordshireKenneth Russell & Family, LeicesterSusan Ryrie, CoventryPaul Seal, Petersfield, HampshireVal Seeley, Clevedon, SomersetBarbara Senior, Westwoodside, DoncasterAndrew Sharp, Leyburn, North YorkshireGeorgie Slater, TauntonRosemary Smart, TadcasterJan Smith, Great Missenden, BuckinghamshireRaymond Snaith, Stockton-on-TeesKenneth Steel, Kings Lynn, NorfolkLeonard Straughan, LiverpoolKate Sullivan, LeicesterRoger & Maureen Sullivan, Waterlooville,

HampshireBrian Taylor, Brixham, DevonJennifer Taylor, Virginia Water, SurreyHelen Teal, Sowerby Bridge, West YorkshireCharles Thomas, Barnstaple, DevonDeborah Toms, South Benfleet, EssexGemma Towns, StourbridgeRichard & Susan Turner, Beverley, East YorkshireDavid Twining-Harris, BristolW Waddell, Mitcheldean, GloucestershireMargaret Wadsworth, BarnsleyJudith Wadsworth, BathKathleen Walker, Belmont, DurhamMartin Wall, Whitbourne, WorcestershirePamela Wells, Addingham, West YorkshireElaine Weyman, London, Angela & Peter Wheatcroft, Kibworth Harcourt,

LeicestershireDavid Wilding, Nr CanterburyElizabeth Williams, ColchesterFred Williams, Haddenham, CambridgeshireColin Woodhouse, Atherstone, WarwickshireJohn Yarnold, Lymington, HampshireWilliam & Georgina Young, Knaresborough, North

Yorkshire

Overseas members 1 October –31 December2012Rachel Allerton, Chatswood, NSW, AustraliaRickie Barak Sagiv, Tel Aviv, IsraelKenneth Beem, Cantonsville, MD, USA

J Berry, MallorcaErin Bissonnette, Mankato, Minnesota, USAAmy Cole, Geelong, Victoria, AustraliaLearna Coupe, Campbelltown, NSW, AustraliaAriana Ellis, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaVeronica Evans, Milton, Queensland, AustraliaAmy Feldman, Hackham, South Australia,

AustraliaHoward & Laurie Fitzpatrick, Dublin, Republic of

IrelandDianne Herbert, Denistone East, NSW, AustraliaAndrew Hunter, Surrey, Ontario, CanadaConstance Klein, Norwood, NJ, USAKaren Ladniuk, BrazilConnie Leung, Tsuen, NT, Hong KongFarrah Mcfadden, Lethbridge, Alberta, CanadaLynsey Neil, Gore, New ZealandJan O’ Brien, Kelowna, BC, CanadaRuth Overy, Redwood Park, South Australia,

AustraliaCarol Parker, Durham, NC, USARoger Patrick, Mountain View, , USAMark Pearce, Kellyville, NSW, AustraliaChristopher Puplick A M, Neutral Bay Junction, N

S W, AustraliaJanice Ratter, Mangerton, NSW, AustraliaConnie Ruzich, Sewickley, PA, USAJulia Slayden, Tallahassee, FL, USAMichael Smith, San Francisco, CA, USAEmily Stap, Grand Junction, MI, USATim Tully, Cable, WI, USABill Tully, Vancouver, BC, CanadaElaine Tyrrell, Duncan, BC, CanadaJohanna Visser, East Bowral, NSW, AustraliaPaul West, Paget, BermudaJurgen Wulf, Hamburg, Germany

US Branch 1 October –31 December 2012Thomas G. Adams, Placentia, California Rebecca Aderman, Tallmadge, OhioPaul L. Beckley, Lawrenceburg, KentuckyHarry Black, Birmingham, MIJeanne Carr, Indianapolis, IndianaMary Cheyne, Woodstock, ConnecticutRichard Elder, Morgantown, KentuckyRichard Flaville, Sr, Ithaca, New YorkJules Harris, Tucson, Arizona Elisabeth Lee, San Mateo, CaliforniaSusan McCosker, Albuquerque, New MexicoTimothy Tully, Cable, WisconsinThomas and Margaret Upham, Exeter, New

HampshireLynn C. Vandeberg, Mountain Top, Pennsylvania

79

Obituaries

Alison Bray, 1958–2012The Devon and Cornwall Branch are sad to announce the death of Alison Bray, who died peacefullyat Mount Edgcumbe Hospice on 12 November. Alison was a long-standing member, having joinedboth the Society and the branch in 1983. She served on the branch committee as treasurer for severalyears.

One of Alison’s other interests was cycling; until her office moved to St Austell she cycled dailyfrom her home in Penryn to Truro. On branch trips she would arrive on her bike and on onememorable occasion when returning from a weekend in York we dropped her off at the Bristolservice area so that she could cycle the rest of the way home to Cornwall. Alison was also passionateabout football and Arsenal in particular. Occasionally branch meetings and important matchesclashed and on such occasions she always came to the meetings but would be found with a radioclose to her ear to make sure she didn’t miss how her team were getting on.

When I last visited her in the hospice, Alison was very pleased to hear that the dig in Leicesterhad most likely found Richard III’s remains and that he would be honourably reinterred. She will begreatly missed by all Devon and Cornwall members.

Anne Painter, Secretary, Devon and Cornwall Branch

Joan PembertonJoan died 22 October 2011, aged 87; she was my housekeeper, and a long-term and faithful member of your Society. As she was blind, it was mytask to read her the news and articles from your publications. I have nowinherited the reproduction portrait of Richard III that I had given her manyyears before.

Henry Tudor and his gaolbird ruffians passed through Cardigan in 1485.In 1985 the journey was replicated by an actor on horseback with a band ofsquaddies on leave from the army for the occasion. To deal with thisunwelcome intrusion Joan had Richard’s banner made, covered the churchnotice board with it, and alongside it she planted a wooden post with anotice saying ‘Richard rules OK’, before absenting herself. The actor who played Henry cameriding by, saw the display, stopped and ordered one of his soldiers to confiscate it; but I told theman to back off, which he decided was the safer course. The media were delighted and tried tointerview me, but I pretended that the whole episode was a mystery to me, and said I had onlyordered the soldier away because I, and no one else, had authority over the church notice board!

Canon Seamus Cunnane

Rose SkuseThe Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire Group are sorry to report the death in January of theirsecretary, Rose Skuse, after a prolonged illness. A full obituary will appear in June’s Bulletin.

Recently deceased members

Alison Bray, Penryn. Joined before 1985John Cook, Runcorn. Joined 2000Joan Pemberton, Ceredigion. Joined before 1985Rose Skuse. Joined 2002Dr Leslie Watkiss, FSA Dorset. Joined 1998

80

CalendarWe run a calendar of all forthcoming events notified to us for inclusion. If you are aware of anyevents of Ricardian interest, whether organised by the Society (Committee, Visits Committee,Research Committee, Branches/Groups, etc.) or by others, please let the Bulletin team have fulldetails in sufficient time for entry. The calendar will also be run on the website.

Date Events Originator12–14 April Study Weekend and Yorkshire Museum visit. Fully Research Committee

booked.27 April Arthur Cockerill Spring lecture, venue Jacobs Well, Yorkshire Branch

Trinity Lane, York; Royal Armouries speakers on ‘Arms and armour in the period of the Wars of the Roses.’ The lecture will begin at 2 p.m. and tea will be available at £3.50 per person, payable on the day. .

18 May Day trip to Beaulieu Abbey and Bucklers Hard. Visits Committee (see p. 12)

1–4 July International Medieval conference IMC (see p. 22)11–15 July North to Newcastle: 2013 Long Weekend Visits Committee (see

p. 22)12–14 July Australasian Convention, Sydney NSW Branch (see p. 56) 17–18 August Bosworth Weekend Visits Committee 7 September Visit to Bodiam Castle Visits Committee5 October Members’ Day and AGM, London Joint Secretaries9 November Norfolk Study Day Norfolk Branch (see p.12).23 November Visit to the Whitechapel Bell Foundry Visits Committee14 December Christmas at Fotheringhay Chairman

Answers to crossword on p. 66 Across: 1 Greyfriars; 6 Uses; 9 Everything; 10 Rule; 12 Solstices; 15 Oversee; 17 Harness; 18 Tending; 20 Strange; 21 Factional; 25 Agog; 26 Ordination; 27 Task; 28 Blore Heath. Down: 1 Glee; 2 Ewer; 3 Foyer; 4 In haste; 5 Ranulph; 7 Scutcheons; 8 Stepsister; 11 Starer; 13 Pontefract; 14 Reenactors; 16 Spirit; 19 General; 20 Soldier; 22 Trash; 23 Pisa; 24 Inch.

Late newsThe Greyfriars dig has won Current Archaeology’s Research Excavation of the Year award. Thepublic choose this award and a record number voted for the Greyfriars. We will have full coverageof the award in June’s Bulletin.

The Achievement of arms

of the Richard III Society

Front cover: Portrait of Richard III reproduced by kind permission of

the Society of Antiquaries of London