In 2012 the greatest archeological find was made arguably since the
discovery of Tutankhamen tomb by Howard Carter in 1922. In recent years a
certain degree of scandal had befallen the current royal dynasty in the UK, and
as despicable certain of the allegations are, they pale when compared to the
degree of scandal, skullduggery and intrigue that the predecessors of the
Windsor clan!
Personally, I am not a Royalist, but neither am I a Republican. If
anything I am indifferent to the Royal Family. Our families have very little in
common and whilst they continue in a figurehead capacity with no political role
to play they can get on with what they do.
I do not feel the same way about Royal Houses from a time in history
when the will and actions of the monarch, and those within reach of the throne shaped the fortunes, or misfortunes of the British
Isles. There is no better example of this than the Wars of the Roses
(1455-1487), a particularly turbulent period in Britain’s generally turbulent
past. The Wars were fought between supporters of the House of Lancaster (the
Red Rose) and the House of York (the White Rose). Both Royal Houses were
branches of the House of Plantagenet a dynasty that held onto the English crown
for over 330 years (1154 (accession of Henry II) to 1485 (death of Richard
III)).
During the Wars of the Roses, the crown changed hands, or should that
be heads, no less than five times. The male line of the Lancastrian claim ended
with the death of Henry VI in the Tower of London. Upon Henry's death Edward IV, of
the Yorkist line, was restored to the throne and did much to restore stability
until his unexpected death in April 1483.
The 12 years of relative stability during the reign of Edward IV ended
and a genuine ‘Battle Royal’ ensued for the coveted crown. Since Edward’s young
heir was just 12 years old when the King died, his paternal uncle, Richard the
Duke of Gloucester, was appointed Lord Protector of the Realm. In the build up
to his coronation, the influential cleric, the Bishop of Bath and Wells,
claimed that Edward IV had a pre-existing marriage to a noblewoman named Lady
Eleanor Talbot. When the Three Estates validated the claim of the Bishop, the
consequences for the English crown and stability within the land were far
reaching. The King’s marriage to Lady Talbot rendered his later marriage to
Elizabeth Woodville (his Queen) bigamous, meaning that their now ‘bastard’ children,
Edward V and Richard Duke of York had no legitimate claim to the throne. Edward V
reigned for just 78 days when his uncle and Protector, Richard, was offered the
crown by Parliament.
Edward V was moved to the Tower of London in May 1483, as was tradition
prior to a coronation of a new king. Here he was joined by his younger brother
Richard. Their uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, was crowned Richard III on 6th
July 1483. An Act of Parliament of 1484, known as the Titulus Regius formally stated the illegitimacy of ‘the princes in the Tower’ and thus the validity
of Richard’s claim to the throne.
Trouble and strife were never far away in these times and whilst the
crown sat on Richard’s head to the satisfaction of Parliament, would be
challengers to the throne were always on hand to try to displace it. As
mentioned earlier, the Lancastrian claim fizzled out with the death of Henry VI
in 1471 with which the House of Tudor saw an opportunity to muscle in on the
throne related action. The claimant, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, made
attempted to seize the crown right at the commencement of Richard’s reign when
he tried to lead an invasion force across the English Channel. This attempt was
defeated by bad weather, but a second attempt saw his forces arrive in Wales.
The rivals were keen to meet on the field of battle. Richard moved his forces out of Leicester on 21st August 1485 and the battle was fought at Bosworth Field the following day on 22nd.
.jpg)
The battle was long, hard and bloody. At one point in the fighting
Richard spied Henry in a group away from his main force and in an attempt to
bring the battle to a swift conclusion led a charge of knights to engage with
Henry. Richard was in the thick of the fighting, unlike Henry who was shielded
by the soldiers of his bodyguard. At this stage the Stanleys (a powerful
military family waded in). The Stanley’s had complex relations with both the
Yorkists and the Tudors such that their allegiance on the day was unknown, right
up until they through their lot in with the Tudors. The Stanley knights forced
Richard and his remaining men back towards marshy land where the account would
have it that Richard was unhorsed as his mount stumbled in the boggy earth.
Richard suffered many injuries at the hands of William Stanley’s men, but the
coup de grace was said to have been delivered by a Welsh soldier who struck
Richard on the back of the head with such force with a halberd that part of
Richard’s skull was removed. In the word’s of Guto’r Glyn, a contemporary Welsh
poet, that soldier “Killed the boar, shaved his head”. The white boar was the personal
device of Richard.
After the conclusion of the battle, Richard was unceremoniously
conveyed back to Leicester, naked, strapped to the back of a horse. His mutilated body was put on display so that
the local population would know that the Richard III was dead.
It is believed that the body was taken into the possession of the
Franciscan monks of Leicester and hastily buried within their friary
(Greyfriars).
Coming back up to date in 2012 news broke across the globe that the remains
of Richard III, England’s last Plantagenet King of England had been discovered
in a Social Services car park in the centre of Leicester. The location of the
find was a gift to headline writers and Richard became for a time ‘The King in
the car park’.
The story leading up to the discovery is almost as thrilling as the
find itself, but you can look into that at another time. There are numerous
accounts, including that of Philippa Langley who through the ‘Looking for
Richard’ project that she established was pivotal to the discovery some years
latter.
On 24th August 2012 bones were uncovered at the site of
Greyfriars. Another headline grabbing fact was that the bones were located in
the car park under a reserved parking space denoted
by an ‘R’ painted on the tarmac!
Working back from the legs that were the first part of the skeleton to
be unearthed, the team exposed the spine which clearly indicated that the owner
of the bones suffered from scoliosis (an abnormal curvature of the spine)
proving Shakespeare to be correct in at least one aspect of his depiction of
Richard in his ‘history’ play. More
convincing still was the damage to the skeleton indicating wounds received in
battle that were consistent with someone who had been unhorsed and bludgeoned
on the ground. In particular, the damage to the base of the back of the skull
appeared to be consistent with the contemporary description of the death blow
in Glyn’s poem.
Photo: University of Leicester
But a bent spine and a battered skull do not a king make and it was
hard science that put the identification of the remains as those of Richard III
beyond all reasonable doubt. Some years prior to the Leicester discovery a
writer and historian, John Ashdown-Hill, was requested to trace Richard’s
female line of descent through mitochondrial DNA sequences. In this way, the
line was established from Richard’s eldest sister, Anne, to a living relative
in Canada. From these data, along with subsequent data generated by Turi King and her
team at the University of Leicester, it was possible to obtain a match between
the mitochondrial DNA extracted from the excavated bones and the sequence
determined earlier for Richard’s female line.
What had seemed to be an impossible task by many had been achieved. The
lost remains of one of England’s best known (second only to Henry VIII) and most
notorious (second to none) kings had been found and positively identified
thanks to a heady mix of tenacious determination, inspiration and good science.
In the years following the discovery, Leicester has reaped the rewards.
In the area surrounding the cathedral and the former site of the Franciscan friary,
Richard seems to be ubiquitous with his image gracing everything from contemporary mediaeval
buildings to modern bars and restaurants!
So this was the stuff that brought Gunta and I to Leicester on a gloomy
autumnal Saturday in November.
The Kind Richard III Visitor Center is located in the mediaeval quarter
of central Leicester, a stone’s throw from the Cathedral. The museum is
brilliantly designed, a fact to which a stack of awards located nextto the
toilets (!) testify. The building is split across two time periods. The ground
floor is given over to the England of Richard’s day. Here the visitor learns
about life in 15
th Century England and the intrigues and feuds that
threatened stability within the realm at this time, especially the protracted ‘Wars
of the Roses’. The lower floor galleries end with accounts of the Battle of
Bosworth Field, the brutal slaying of Richard and the return of his body to
Leicester.
The upstairs galleries are concerned with the popular perception of
Richard down through the intervening years and the discovery and analysis of the
remains. The visitor is lead past audiovisual portrayals of Richard from
Shakespeare’s literary hatchet job on the character of Richard. From our
beloved thespians to former Sex Pistol, John Lydon, who drew inspiration for his
Johnny Rotten persona from Olivier’s hunchbacked monarch, the message is clear,
according to the established history King Richard was a proper wrong’un.
'Oi 'Enry Tudor... You want some!'
Next comes the science, starting with the dig and discovery of the remains…
there is even exhibit space for Philippa Langley’s Union flag wellington boots!
There is a wealth of information on the background genetic research and
analysis that changed a high probability into proof positive that ‘Richard was ‘ere!’. And finally detailed explanations of the multiple deformations and injuries inflicted
upon the skeleton, not least to his feet, lost in time, presumed to be the result
of the digging in the vicinity of a Victorian drainage system.
Photo: University of Leicester
A reconstruction of Richard's spine
The tour culminates with the opportunity to view the location of the
grave itself, Richard’s resting place for no less than 527 years. It was enough
to set a tachophile’s extremities a-tingling. The visitors centre extends into
what was the Social Services car park, the former interior of Greyfriers such
that the burial plot is visible. Illuminated and underglass the visitor can
look down upon the grave and see exactly how the remains were found (the
position of the skeleton is marked). I have to say that standing there looking
upon the site was quite powerful and rather moving, especially given the fact
that recent research appears to be on the verge of turning this period's
established and accepted history on its head.
Before departing from the Visitor’s Centre for the cathedral there is
one more thing of note to see. A famed mediaeval king must have a top notch
funeral pall to cover his coffin and a lady by the name of Jacquie Binns, an
ecclesiastical textile artist got the commission. What followed was 12 months
work (and no doubt eye strain and sore hands) to produce a work of extreme
beauty, artistry and poignancy.
Effectively the pall tells the two sides of this remarkable journey of
King Richard, past and present. On both sides are presented characterized figures
both political and pastoral. The ‘past’ side features several groups of people,
on the left,an anonymous mourner (a common feature of mediaeval funerals) an
aristocratic lady and a knight and on the right, Bishop, a Greyfriar (holding a
model of the friary) and a Priest. These groups are on either side of a central
group that depicts Anne (Richard’s Queen), his son Edward and St Martin, patron
saint of Leicester Cathedral. Bringing things more up to date, the ‘present’
side depicts persons involved in the discovery. To the left, Professor Sir
Robert Burgess, Vice Chancellor of the University of Leicester, Dr Richard
Buckley, Co-Director of the University of Leicester Archeological Services and Dr
Jo Appleby, project osteo-archaeologist (holding Richard’s skull). To the
right, we see Philippa Langley (with Richard’s portrait), Dr John Ashdown-Hill,
the historial who set off of the trail of Richard’s maternal DNA and Dr Phil
Stone Chairman of the Richard III Society (here holding Richard’s device of the
boar). The group in the middle depicts the aforementioned modern day political
and pastoral folk in the form of Sir Peter Soulsby, elected Mayor, the Very Reverend
David Monteith, the Dean of Leicester (with Bible) and finally, the Right
Reverend Tim Stevens, Bishop of Leicester. Keeping all in check are a number of
Seraphs.
The centre of the pall that sits on top of the coffin features the
King’s Arms. The pall covered the coffin for a period of three days when the
coffin lay in state within the cathedral prior to burial.
Leaving the visitors centre it was just a short walk to the Leicester
Cathedral to see the tomb. Our visit coincided with bell-ringing practise which
I usually appreciate, but such was the cacophony of atonal noise that it was
good to enter the building where the sounds was impressively muted!
Leicester Cathedral must be one of the smallest cathedrals that I have visited in the UK (and I have seen a lot of them!) but the reburial of King Richard’s bones on 26th March 2015 certainly put the catherdral on the map, whatever it’s size. The funeral service and reburial occurred in the presence of Justin Welby, until very recently, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Sophie, the Countess of Wessex and Prince Richard, the current Duke of Gloucester, a title held by Richard III under the reign og his brother Edward IV.
The tomb itself is hugely impressive. The tope stone of fashioned from Swaledale fossil stone whist the base is formed from Kilkenny marble. Some three feet below the base of the monument is a brick lined vault. Here Richard’s remains lie in a lead ossuary, itself within a coffin of English oak. Another great twist to the story is the fact that the furniture maker responsible for making the coffin was one Michael Ibsen, nephew to Richard, 16 times removed. His DNA was included in John Ashdown-Hill’s study to establish Richard’s maternal lineage.
Apparently Gunta broke the rules when she took the photo below. 'No posing with the tomb' we were told after the event. It wasn't as if I were gurning or doing my best Olivier as Richard the Hunchback impression!
The coat of arms present on the plinth is composed of 350 indivvidual
pieces of stone. The symbol itself courted controvery at the time, since the
established and accepted history has Richard as a usurper to the English crown
and therefore one who has no right to bear the Royal Coat of Arms. However, the
argument was won and its addition onto the marble plinth went ahead.
History is changing. Even the official website of the Royal Family
presents Richard in a positive light. Of his coming to power and the
controversy of the Princes in the Tower, the following is stated:
'Richard III deposed his nephew, the young Edward V, on receiving
evidenced that Edward IV had a marriage contract with Lady Eleanor Butler
before his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, thus making all of Edward and
Elizabeth's children illegitimate. Edward V and his younger brother Richard
were housed in the tower: their date of death is not known, but Tudor
historians claimed Richard III was responsible.’
The above is an acknowledgement at a pretty high level (!) that the
accusation of regicide on the part of Richard was a claim made by the new Tudor
dynasty rather than solid, evidence based historical fact. That establishment
attitudes towards Richard III were changing was further indicated when
Elizabeth II bestowed the MBE upon Philippa Langley (along with John Ashdown-Hill)
for "services to the exhumation and identification of Richard III". Not
bad for digging up a ‘wrong ‘un’ you could say.
'I, I will be King,
And you, you will be Queen'
(Words: King David (Bowie I))
Afterword:
I have not here gone into he whole 'Princess in the Tower' controversy. However, there is a growing body of evidence that strongly suggests that the accepted history of the fate of Edward V and Richard, Duke of York has a case to answer. The 'Titulus Regius' formally ascerted Richard's claim to the throne, a fact that was widely known. Thus, the illegitimate children of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville posed no threat to Richard. After Bosworth, the new king, Henry VII, in an attempt to smooth the waters between the Houses of Tutor and York, married Elizabeth of York. He also repealled the 'Titulus Regius', the Act of Paliament that declared the princes to be illegitimate. In doing so, he legitimised the princes's claim to the throne. As such, logic would dictate that the fates of Edward and Richard were of greater concern to Henry than was ever the case for Richard.
The persistence of the foul murder of the princes owes much to the discovery of two juvenille skeletons during renovation of the White Tower (in the Tower of London) in the reign of Charles II. These bones were moved to Westmisdter Abbey and have only been scientifically analysed once back in 1933. Uncertainty also surrounds the identity of the occupants of two coffins found close to the vault in St Georges Chapel, Windsor, containing the remains of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville. As I understand it, examination of the remains of royals requires that consent be obtained from the Royal family and in her lifetime, Elizabeth II was reluctant to grant it. It seems to me though, on the momentum that has been generated by the discovery of Richard, that the time is right for just such a re-examination of these remains. This is especially so since we now not only have DNA technology (obviously unavailable in 1933), but we have Richard's DNA to boot. A respectful re-examination of the potential prince's remains in the least invasive way possible seems to be a small price to pay in order to bring a greater understanding to one of the greatest mysteries in British history. What do you say Charles?
.jpg)
