History is full of coincidences and ironies. The date of 28th January is one such coincidence – 28 January 1457 and 28 January 1547 – two dates 90 years apart. The former the date of birth of the first Tudor despot, the later the date of his son’s death, the most tyrannical Tudor monarch of all.
Calendar page for January with additions from three different handwritting: 1. the obit of Catherine de Valois and the date of marriage of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York (black ink); 2. the date of birth of Henry VII (in Latin – faded brown ink); and 3. the obit of Henry VIII (brown ink at bottom of folio), from Book of Hours (The ‘Beaufort/Beauchamp Hours’), Use of Sarum, (England (London), after 1401, before 1415) shelfmark Royal 2 A XVIII f.28 January
Below are close-ups of the entries for the birth of Henry VII and the death of Henry VIII.
Natale d[omi]ni Henrici filij Emundi comitis Richemondie ac d[omi]ne M[ar]rgarete vxoris sui filie Joh[ann]is nup[er] duc[?is] Somersete anno d[omi]ni millio cccc quinquagesimo sexto. Born Henry son of the Earl of Richmond and Margaret his wife daughter of John, Duke of Somerset 1456. (Latin text kindly transcribed by Rob Ellis of Medieval London)
The xxviijth [28th] daie of January deceassd the noble prynce Henry the eight the yere of owr lorde 1546
Although Henry VII’s date of birth was 1457, and Henry VIII’s date of death 1547, the years above of 1456 and 1546 are correct because these are contemporary entries written at times when the old Julian Calendar was still in use in England. Until 1752, the 1st January was only the start of the ecclesiastical New Year but not when the year-date changed. The change to a new year started on Lady Day (25th March). Thus English documents written prior to 1752 will have any dates between 1st January and 24th March written in the Old Style. Modern historians either have to adjust these dates to the New Style or ‘double date’ the entry to show both old and new date (e.g. the above dates would be dated ‘1456/7’ and ‘1546/7’).
Henry VII from Guild Book of the Barber Surgeons of York (England, N. (York?), 2nd half of the 16th century) shelfmark Egerton 2572 f.7.
Henry VIII from Guild Book of the Barber Surgeons of York (England, N. (York?), 2nd half of the 16th century) shelfmark Egerton 2572 f.8.
Henry VII giving the manuscript to the monks of Westminster from Indenture for Henry VII’s Chapel (England, S. E. (London), 1504) shelfmark Harley 1498 f.98.
Henry VIII praying in his bedchamber from The Psalter of Henry VIII (England, S. E. (London), c1540-1541) shelfmark Royal 2 A XVI f.3.
If you want to receive my regular history newsletter, then please subscribe below:
Regular readers of my blog will know that beautiful medieval illuminated manuscripts have long held a particular fascination with me. Created in the medieval period – with some manuscripts now 700/800 years old – the medieval world seemed to have been inhabited by mythical creatures: jousting snails, cats in towers hurling missiles at their enemies, giant fish – to name a few. All elaborately and painstakingly drawn and painted by craftsmen from another era.
Today’s selection of images from the British Library’s collection of illuminated manuscripts is the sea-nymphs and mermaids (and a merman too!) of the medieval mind.
Click on any picture to be taken to the British Library’s full description of the image.
Detail of a mermaid sitting on a bar border holding her tail in one hand and a circular mirror in the other. From Scholastic miscellany, (France, Central (Paris), between 1309 and 1316); shelfmark Burney 275 f.404
Miniature of a mermaid playing a harp luring sailors in a boat. From Bestiary, Guillaume le Clerc (England, 2nd quarter of the 13th century); shelfmark Egerton 613 f.38
Detail of a miniature of a mermaid and a fish. From Image du Monde (Le livre de clergie en roumans) (France, Central (Paris) and England, 2nd quarter of the 15th century); shelfmark Harley 334.
Detail of a miniature a mermaid with a mirror and comb. From from Les Fais et les Dis des Romains et de autres gens (France, N. W., Normandy (possibly Rouen), c. 1460-1487); shelfmark Harley 4372 f.79v
Detail of a miniature of the siren (Syrene) or mermaid who holds a fish, and the prow of a boat with two men in it, one rowing. From Bestiary, with extracts from Giraldus Cambrensis on Irish birds (England, S. (Salisbury?), 2nd quarter of the 13th century); Harley 4751 f.47v.
Detail of a miniature of a mermaid and merman with bow and arrow from Decretals of Gregory IX with glossa ordinaria (the ‘Smithfield Decretals‘), (France, S. (Toulouse?), Last quarter of the 13th century or 1st quarter of the 14th century); shelfmark Royal 10 E IV, f.3.
Detail of a bas-de-page scene of a mermaid. From Decretals of Gregory IX with glossa ordinaria (the ‘Smithfield Decretals‘), (France, S. (Toulouse?), Last quarter of the 13th century or 1st quarter of the 14th century); shelfmark Royal 10 E IV, f.47.
Detail of a bas-de-page scene of two grotesques fighting with domestic implements; between them is a mermaid. From Decretals of Gregory IX with glossa ordinaria (the ‘Smithfield Decretals‘), (France, S. (Toulouse?), Last quarter of the 13th century or 1st quarter of the 14th century); shelfmark Royal 10 E IV, f.69.
Full fathom five thy father lies; Of his bones are coral made; Those are pearls that were his eyes; Nothing of him that does fade, But doth suffer a sea-change Into something rich and strange. Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell: Ding-dong, Hark! Now I hear them – Ding-dong, bell.
William Shakespeare, The Tempest, circa 1610-11
This blog
If you want to read more from my blog, please do subscribe by using the Subscribe via Email button. If you’ve enjoyed reading this post, then please do Like it with the “Like” button or Facebook button and/or leave a comment below.
Today’s post is an image of The Crucifixion taken from the mortuary roll of Lucy de Vere. In the twelfth century, she founded the Benedictine nunnery of Castle Hedingham, North Essex and and was its first prioress. According to the British Library’s catalogue “The roll was sent to 122 religious houses in the southern half of England, each writing an answer to a request for prayers made by Agnes, Prioress of Hedingham, for the soul of her predecessor Lucy.”
‘The Crucifixion’ from Mortuary roll of Lucy, foundress and first prioress of the Benedictine nunnery of Castle Hedingham, with tituli (responsive prayers) 1-6, (Essex, England) c. 1225 – c. 1230. Shelfmark Egerton 2849 Part I
If you watched the recent BBC drama, The White Queen, and its bloody climax – the Battle of Bosworth Field – you would be forgiven for thinking that the battle took place during late autumn or even during early winter. For, according to the Beeb, a thick covering of fallen leaves lay on the battlefield floor and light snow covered the bridleways.
But the battle didn’t take place during winter. It took place during the high summer of 1485 – on Monday, 22nd August, to be precise. On the 7th August, Henry Tudor, soon to be crowned on a battlefield as King Henry VII, landed off the Welsh coast at Milford Haven. By late August, he was seven miles west of Leicester, near the village (or, in those days, the hamlet) of Market Bosworth. Margaret Beaufort (born 1443, died 1509), the mother of Henry VII, recorded these momentous events in her Book of Hours.
‘August’ from The Beaufort/Beauchamp Hours (England, S. E. (London), c. 1430,
before 1443) shelfmark Royal 2 A XVIII f. 31v. (We do not know if this is her hand or if a scribe wrote the entries for her.)
The first left margin note in black reads
The day landed king harry the vijth at milford have[n] the yere of o[u]r lord vijth cccc lxxxv [1485]
The second left margin note reads
The day king harri the vijth won[n] the feeld [field] wher was slayn ki[n]g Richard the third Ao Do[m] 1485
The day before the battle, on the 21st August, King Richard III, along with an army of 12,000, rode out from his temporary accommodation at the White Boar Inn in the city of Leicester and set up his overnight camp in a field on Ambion Hill.
Early 20th Century etching of the Blue Boar Inn, Leicester. King Richard III spent the night of the 20th August 1485 in the Inn. It is alleged that he left his bed behind in the inn – perhaps he thought that he’d be coming back to the inn after he had dispatched his enemy, Henry Tudor. A white boar was the personal emblem of Richard III. Legend has it that the inn was originally called the ‘White Boar’ but after the battle and the death of Richard, the inn-keeper hastily changed the inn’s name to the Blue Boar.
By the end of that fateful day, 22nd August 1485, King Richard III, the last of the Plantagenets, lay dead on the battlefield. And the Tudor dynasty began with King Henry VII crowned on Crown Hill in the nearby village of Stoke Golding by the treacherous Lord Thomas Stanley, the new king’s step-father.
King Richard III holds a council of war before the battle.
King Richard III’s trusty advisers.
The general area of the Battle of Bosworth Field. These photos were taken in the early summer of 2013. In August 1485, it is likely that these fields had the remains of that year’s crops still in the ground.
The general area of the battle. By the end of the battle, it is thought that approximately 1,000 men on Richard’s side lay dead on the field, along with 100 men from Henry Tudor’s forces.
Overlooking the general area of the battle-site. The spire in the distance is the (post-medieval) church spire of Stoke Golding, near to which the first Tudor King of England was crowned.
1813 Monument to Richard III. During the battle, the King drunk from the well that was located here.
The Fellowship of the White Boar’s plaque.
Legend has it that the dead king’s body was brought back to Leicester that same evening. Stripped naked and devoid of any dignity or kingly regalia, his body was put on display for several days in Leicester. His enemies (and, of course, his followers) could see for themselves that he really was dead and their new king was Henry VII. Shortly afterwards, he was buried quietly, without ceremony, in the church of the Greyfriars – a Franciscan monastic order.
Modern-day statue of Richard III in a park in Leicester.
Of course, over 520 years later, we now know this legend to be true. King Richard III was indeed buried by the Franciscans in their monastery, where he lay undisturbed until his discovery in 2012. I, like many other people around the world, was riveted to the television during the live press release by Leicester University in February 2013, when they confirmed to the waiting world that the body that they had found was indeed that of the last of the Plantagenets. As the Tudor kings of England had so rightly said, Richard III really did lyth buryed in Leicester.
Richard ye was sonne to Richard Duwke of yorke & brother un to kyng Edward ye iiijth Was kyng after hys brother & raynyd ij yeres & lyth buryed at leator [Leicester]. From Biblical and genealogical chronicle from Adam and Eve to Edward VI (England, S. E. (London or Westminster), c. 1511 with additions before 1553) shelfmark King’s 395 ff.32v-33
Watching the astonishing live press release – showing the perfect synergy of archaeology, genealogy, forensic science, and DNA science – was my small home educated son. He was entranced by the news. So, keen to capture his excitement, a few months later we headed north to Leicester for our most spine tingling School Trip Friday for academically challenged.
If Leicester’s one-way system had been in existence in 1485, then Richard III would never have made it out of the city and into the nearby villages and fields to meet his nemesis. In the 21st Century, guided by my trusty SatNav (who told me several times to ‘please take the 7th exit’ as I repeatedly circled the city), I eventually managed to navigate my way into Leicester, ready for a weekend of finding Richard. Trying to be as authentic as possible, I decided to stay in the exact location where Richard III had spent his second-to-last night on earth – the Blue Boar Inn. Except, of course, the Blue Boar Inn has long been demolished and swept away, but in its place is another hostelry with ‘blue’ as its insignia. Yes, my son and I stayed in the Travelodge – a modern 21st Century inn built on the exact site of its predecessor, the Blue Boar Inn.
The Blue Boar Inn 2013 (aka Travelodge). The area is continuing its medieval drunken past by being, in the 21st century, the weekend home of countless hen and stag parties. The location is now part of Leicester’s multi-lane one way system, and so my son and I spent two nights sleeping more-or-less on a massive roundabout, with the steady stream of all-night cars noisely whizzing around the city.
As well as visiting the site of the Battle of Bosworth (and the wonderful Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre), we, of course, made our way into the centre of the city to find Richard at the temporary exhibition within the medieval guildhall.
My son comes face to face with a medieval king.
The spire of Leicester Cathedral, overlooking the medieval guildhall.
Leicester Cathedral and the Guildhall.
Looking in one direction: the precinct of the Cathedral. To take this photograph, I had to stand directly in the middle of the small road shown in the next photograph.
Looking in the opposite direction: the location of the Greyfriars monastery. Behind the building on the left, halfway down is the entrance to the council car park containing the mortal remains of King Richard III. The distance between Richard’s original resting place for over 500 years is a mere stone’s throw from his proposed next resting place. Should he be moved a mere few hundred yards into Leicester cathedral? Or should he be moved a hundred miles to be reburied in York?
Inside The Car Park. The forbidding green gates, with their modern-day graffeti and barbed-wire tops, .
The car park is tiny – a lot smaller then it appears on the television. Georgian and Victorian buildings surround the space. With five centuries of urban building-work, it truly is a miracle that the exact location of Richard III’s was left, in the main, undisturbed. At some point during the Victorian period, builders managed to sever the king’s feet as they were not recovered with the remains of the rest of his body in 2012.
A temporary marque protects the grave of the five-hundred years dead king. The building in the background is Alderman Newton’s grammar school, which will eventually become part of the new Richard III Visitors’ Centre. If this building had been built even 50 yards further forward, then we would have lost Richard’s grave forever.
The grave of King Richard III, the last of the Plantagenets. The only king of England to die in battle, since Harold died in a hale of arrows in 1066. Stripped naked and buried without a shroud, with his hands tied after death, Richard was stuffed into a shallow grave which was too short for him.
Seeing Richard’s grave was spine-tingling – we so nearly lost him forever to urban development. Eventually the site of his original grave will become part of a beautiful garden next to the new Visitors’ Centre. However, seeing the grave in the setting of a stark and bare council car park was an experience I will never forget.
The quiet serenity and beauty of Leicester Cathedral. Will this be Richard’s final resting place?
Richard, Duke of Gloucester. Born 2nd October 1452 at Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire; died 22nd August 1485, Bosworth Field, Leicester. King of England 1483-1485. Buried 1485 to 2012 in Greyfriars monastery, Leicester.
His current location is known only by the University of Leicester.
What do you think about the search and discovery of Richard III? Where should his final resting place be? Please do leave your thoughts in the Comments box below.
I have a typical English-person’s obsession with the weather. After a cold, wet and dismal start to the summer in June, I am so pleased that since early July, we are now in the full glory of a hot sunny English summer. If you believe in old superstitions, then the next 40 days will be just as glorious as today. Happy St Swithun’s Day.
St Swithun’s day if thou dost rain For forty days it will remain St Swithun’s day if thou be fair For forty days ’twill rain nae mar
St Swithun from Breviary, Use of Sarum with Norwich variants (‘The Stowe Breviary’), (Norwich, England), between 1322 and 1325), shelfmark Stowe 12 f.273 Feast of Swithun
It’s not often I start a blog with warning from a Shakespearean soothsayer, but today I shall because today is the Ides of March – the 15th day of March. The day on which, in 44BC, Julius Caesar was assassinated by his Roman senators. Apparently 60 senators took part in Caesar’s mass stabbing and over 20 wounds were inflicted on him.
Below are medieval images of Caesar’s murder. I find it very interesting that in them, Caesar and his senators are depicted as Northern Renaissance wealthy merchants with their rich and ornate clothing, rather than toga and sandal-clad classical Romans. Could Medieval sensibilities not cope with classical clothes?
Beware the Ides of March!
Caesar being murdered from Bellum Gallicum (Les commentaires de Cesar), (France, N. (Lille) and Netherlands, S. (Bruges?), 1473-1476), shelfmark Royal 16 G VIII f.331v
Murder of Caesar from Les anciennes hystoires rommaines, (Paris, France, Last quarter of the 14th century), shelfmark Royal 16 G VIII f.389
Murder of Caesar from La grant hystoire Cesar, (Netherlands, S. (Bruges), 1479) shelfmark Royal 17 F II f.344
Murder of Caesar from La grant hystoire Cesar, (Netherlands, S. (Bruges), 1479) shelfmark Royal 18 E V f.355v
I can’t resist quoting that immortal line spoken by the late great Kenneth Williams during the film ‘Carry on Cleo’…
Today’s post is about the contents of Tudor wills and how they can be used to inform the modern-day reader about religion during the turbulent reigns of Henry VIII and his three children. The text below formed one of the chapters within my dissertation Religion and Society in Great Dunmow, Essex, c.1520 to c.1560 from my Cambridge University’s Masters of Studies in Local and Regional history awarded to me in January 2012. The text here is in its entirety from my dissertation so reads more as an academic essay rather than a blog post. For this blog post, I have included headings (to break up the text) and images, my original was both heading-less and image-less. If you are wondering why my introduction and conclusion are so short, remember that this is just one chapter in a very lengthy 100 page dissertation and I had a very strict word count to adhere to. The dissertation’s overall introduction and conclusion was far more comprehensive. I have also had to re-arrange the two tables on this post from their original positions within my dissertations – so Table 2 now comes before Table 1. The research of wills I undertook for my dissertation is very different to my normal genealogical research. For genealogical research, I am normally sifting through the personal bequests so to find evidence of family relationships. But for my dissertation, I had to totally ignore family relationships and go for the ‘other bequests’.
St Mary the Virgin, the Parish church of Great Dunmow, circa 1910-20.
Introduction
Historians have studied the wills of many English parishes to gain understanding about the impact of the Reformation. Eamon Duffy examined the wills of the Yorkshire village of Otley(1) and Caroline Litzenberger, in her analysis of the Reformation Gloucestershire, studied the wills of approximately 8,000 testators(2). Therefore, the analysis of wills is a significant methodology employed by historians to provide evidence for the acceptance (or non-acceptance) of religious changes during the Reformation.
Methodology
The methodology used for this article has been to locate, transcribe and analyse all wills for Great Dunmow for the period 1517 to 1565: 40 wills in total.(3) Litzenberger divided her Gloucestershire wills into elite and non-elite wills, but this division is not possible for Great Dunmow’s much smaller sample. Table 1 and Table 2 displays the results from this analysis and this article examines those results.
Great Dunmow’s 1523-4 Lay Subsidy assessments listed 139 tax-payers and 1525-6 church steeple collection listed 165 donations. From these figures, it can be deduced many wills have not survived. Those that have are
thirty-seven wills proved in the archdeacons’ court of the Commissary of the Bishop of London (originals held by the Essex Record Office in Chelmsford);
two proved in the London Consistory Court (official copies held by the London Metropolitan Archive in London); and,
one proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (official copy held by The National Archives in Kew).
The discovery of only two wills proved in the London Consistory Court is particularly disappointing. However, this has been caused because the registers from 1521 to 1539 are missing.(5) Moreover, the first surviving Great Dunmow will that was proved in this court, is from 1559. This demonstrates there are other inconsistencies within the surviving registers from the 1540s and 1550s with the wills for Great Dunmow almost totally missing. Great Dunmow was in the archdeaconry of Middlesex but many nearby towns and villages (for example, Maldon and Chelmsford) were in the archdeaconry of Essex. Any testator with land in only one archdeaconry had their will proved in that archdeacon’s court (and therefore, now their original wills are held by Essex Record Office). However, testators with land in more than one archdeaconry had theirs proved in the London Consistory Court (i.e. the official copies of their wills will be held by the London Metropolitan Archives in London). Therefore, many wills for the years 1520 to 1559 are missing for parishioners who were the ‘middling sort’ or elite (i.e. they owned land/property in both Great Dunmow and neighbouring villages or towns). The missing registers almost exactly span the offices of two incumbents of the bishopric of London: Cuthbert Tunstall, bishop 1522 to 1530(6) ; and John Stokesley, bishop 1530 to 1539(7). It could be speculated that the missing volumes were lost not long after these dates, perhaps handed over to the Elizabethan martyrologist, John Foxe, for his examination of early martyrs within the diocese of London.(8)
There is evidence within Great Dunmow’s Henrician churchwardens’ accounts which can also be used for will analysis. These accounts document six gifts of money from named parishioners to the church, but the wills from these people have not survived. However, as these donations were likely to have originated from wills, they have been included within this analysis. For example, vicar Robert Sturton’s missing will would undoubtedly contain a bequest to the church, as there is a 1528 churchwardens’ accounts entry ‘of[f] wylyem sturton of ye gyfte of M[aster] Sturton sumtyme vycar of thys chyrche…liijs iiijd [53s 4d]’(9). The churchwardens were diligent in recording bequests and gifts to the church in their accounts. This can be detected from John Skylton’s will of 1533 in which he left a bequest of 13s 4d to the church. This exact amount duly appeared in that year’s churchwardens’ accounts, given to the churchwardens by his wife.(10) Therefore, there is credibility to include gifts recorded within the churchwardens’ accounts within this analysis of wills.
Above, Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts (folio 9r) showing the gift from the former vicar. ‘Ite[m] Rec[ieved] of wylyem sturton of ye gyfe of M[aster] Sturton sumtyme vycar of thys chyrche liijs iiijd (53s 4d)‘.
Will of John Skylton of Great Dunmow (January 1533), Essex Record Office D/ABW 8/28. The Tudor scribe who wrote the will (above) couldn’t write in straight lines! The request to the church starts on the third line… ‘hie awter [high altar – this is the end of Skylton’s tithe bequest] of the church – xxd [20d] also to the rep[er]ations [repairs] of the church of Du[n]mowe xiijs iiijd [13s 4d] also to the church of powles iiijd [4d – this is the bequest to St Paul’s cathedral in London]‘.
And here’s the entry in Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts showing that his widow had duly handed over the bequest to the church ‘Ite[m] Rc [Received] of Jone [Joan] Skylton of the gyfte of John Skylton – xiijs iiijd [13s 4d]’.
Analysis of Soul Bequests [The table below for soul bequests was originally on an A3 sheet of paper. I have had to shrink it so that it fits this blog post. Click it to display it within a new window and then use your zoom facility to increase the size of the text. The wills for Elizabeth’s reign are only up until 1565 as this is the point my dissertation ended.]
Soul bequests within preambles of wills have been used by historians of Reformation England to ascertain religious changes. A Catholic preamble would include words similar to ‘almyghtie god & to our blyssed lady saynt mary the virgyn & to all the holy company of heaven’(11). An evangelical or Protestant might include words such as ‘Almighty God and his only Son our Lord Jesus Christ, by whose previous death and passion I hope only to be saved’(12). Somewhere in between would be other types of soul bequests. Litzenberger divided her wills into three major categories: ‘Traditional’ [i.e. Catholic], ‘Ambiguous’, and ‘Protestant’, and within these categories, wills were further sub-divided. Litzenberger’s categories have been used as a framework for the analysis of soul bequests for Great Dunmow’s wills; as demonstrated in Table 2. Categorising soul bequests have to be handled with caution. Wills were only ambiguous if there were no other bequests indicating that they were traditional. Some wills contain either a final stipulation to the executors to provide for the wealth/health of the testator’s soul, or the bequest for ‘tithes forgotten’. The existence of either clause, it can be argued, was the sign of a traditional will, as discussed below. Moreover, ambiguity might have been a defence employed by traditionalists against an increasingly hostile environment.(13) This strategy of ambiguity by traditionalists might account for the eight ambiguous Edwardian wills made during evangelical vicar Geoffrey Crisp’s time. Furthermore, a Protestant was unlikely to use an ambiguous soul bequest and would almost certainly proclaim their religion in unmistakable language.(14) Table 2 demonstrates there were no unquestionably Protestant soul bequests within the surviving wills of Great Dunmow.
Analysis of other bequests (not family)
There are other limitations when using wills for the analysis of religious belief. Duffy comments ‘wills tell us more about the external constraints on testators than they do about shifting private belief.’(15) External constraints could be the religious policy imposed by the monarch, for example, the Edwardian denouncement of purgatory, trentals and masses.(16) There were other constraints, including the scribe who wrote the will and the testator’s witnesses. Margaret Spufford, in her work on sixteenth and seventeenth century wills was the first historian to observe a will could be written by a scribe.(17) She stated
A man lying on his death bed must have been much in the hands of the scribe writing his will. He must have been asked specific questions about his temporal bequests, but unless he had strong religious convictions, the clause bequeathing the soul may well have reflected the opinion of the scribe or the formulary book the latter was using, rather than those of the testator. (18)
Some wills indisputably demonstrate the testator had not been influenced by a scribe or witness. Great Dunmow’s Marian will of Thomas Baker contains a traditional soul bequest along with bequests for tithes forgotten; and, even more revealingly, an obit and a solemnly sang dirge.
A priest providing Extreme Unction (the Last Rites) to a man in bed, from Pontifical; Tabula (England, 1st quarter of the 15th century), British Library’s shelfmark Lansdowne 451 f.234.
There is evidence of a Henrician scribe who was active in two 1520s wills from Great Dunmow, and he possibly used a book containing standard formulaic clauses. This type of precedent book was not unusual during the Tudor period.(19) The will of widow Clemens Bowyer, dated February 1526, almost exactly mimics the earlier will of John Wakrell (October 1525). Both wills have the same soul bequests (Catholic, as would be expected from this period); along with bequests to the high altar, to Saint John’s gild, to the church’ torches, and to the ‘moder holy chyrch of polye [St Paul’s] in London’. Both wills have a bequest for an ‘honest prest to synge a tryntall [trental] for my sol & all crysten solls yn ye p[ar]rsche churche’. However this is crossed out in Bowyer’s will. It is possible the scribe copied the wording from his precedent book, and Bowyer made him cross it out. Trentals were a series of 30 Masses performed within one year, with three Masses on each of the ten major feast-days of Christ and Mary; the priest also had to perform other liturgical duties throughout the year.(20) This was a substantial undertaking, as demonstrated by Wakrell’s bequest of 10s for his trental. Maybe Bowyer did not have sufficient funds, and so made the scribe delete the bequest. This scribe was probably the parish priest, Sir William Wree who was witness to these and one other will. Also witness to Wakrell’s will was former vicar, Robert Sturton, described as ‘p[ar]rsche prest’. Sturton had resigned as vicar in 1523, so he was still performing some of his previous clerical duties.
Will of John Wakrell of Great Dunmow (October 1525), Essex Record Office D/ABW 39/7. The trental bequest reads (from the second word): ‘It[e]m I be q[u]esthe [bequeath] unto an honest prest to synge a tryntall [trental] for my sol [soul] & all crysten [Christian] solls [souls] yn ye p[ar]iche chyrch \of D[u]nmowe a fore sayde xs [10s]’.
Will of Clemens Boywer [Bowyer] of Great Dunmow (February 1526), Essex Record Office D/ABW 3/8. The first crossing out is the trental: ‘It[e]m I bequethe to han [sic] honest prest to sy [n] ge [sing] a try[n]tall [trental] yn ye p[ar]rshe of myche [Much i.e. ‘Great’] D[u]nmow aforsad’. (Were pre-Reformation priests anything other than ‘honest’?)
Old St Paul’s Cathedral – the ‘moder[mother] holy chyrch of polye [Paul] in London’ mentioned by 7 testators of Tudor Great Dunmow. St Paul’s was the mother church of the Diocese of London, and this diocese included the parish of Great Dunmow. The cathedral was the largest church in England and had the tallest spire in England. The spire was struck by lightning in 1561 and not replaced. St Paul’s was destroyed in 1666 – a casualty of the Great Fire of London. Sir Christopher Wren designed the new cathedral – one of the iconic images of today’s London.
Witnesses to Wills The vicars and priests of the parish were witnesses to many wills. However, the decline in priests as witnesses demonstrates fewer priests were within the parish after Henry VIII’s break with Rome. Sir Edmund Clarke was witness to three traditional wills in the 1530s. Evangelical vicar Crisp, was witness to two Edwardian wills in 1551 and 1553; both with ambiguous soul bequests to ‘almighty god, my maker and redeemer’. Catholic vicar John Bird was witness to one traditional Marian will. The vicars must have witnessed many wills and surely influenced some testators by imposing their own beliefs on their dying parishioners. However, Elizabethan vicar, Richard Rogers, a former Protestant exile who spent Mary’s reign in Frankfurt,(21) did not enforce his beliefs on the wills of his parishioners. Seven Elizabethan wills were written during his tenure, although he was not witness to any of them. None of these wills were unequivocally and unmistakably Protestant: indeed the 1563 will of Gilbert Cooke had a traditional soul bequest including ‘the blesyd company of heavne’.
Priest administering last rites
from The Dunois Hours (Paris, c. 1440 – c. 1450 (after 1436))
British Library’s shelfmark Yates Thompson 3 f.211 .
The limitations of using wills to determine religious belief Wills do not always accurately reflect the complete representation of a testator’s religious beliefs. In an investigation of late Medieval wills for All Saints, Bristol, the author of the study found the wills of some of the elite did not include bequests to the parish church.(22) However, the parish’s Church Books demonstrate that during these testators’s lifetime, substantial gifts, such as gilding of the Lady altar, and the refurbishment of the rood loft, had been made to the church. Furthermore, a wife often made donations after her husband’s death but during her lifetime, on behalf of them both. This generosity would most likely not have appeared in either the husband’s or his widow’s wills. This discrepancy between a testator’s will and the gifts made during their lifetime is also true within Great Dunmow. For example, Miles Docleye’s Edwardian will of 1551 has an ambiguous soul bequest and only bequests to his family; there are no religious bequests. It would appear his will was ambiguous but conforming to Edward’s Protestantism. However, Docleye, who must have been at least in his 50s when he died, had given money to each of the parish’s seven collections for traditional religious items during the 1520s and 1530s. It is impossible to determine if his beliefs had changed or if his will was conforming to Edwardian policy. It was probably the latter. This one example demonstrates that the analysis of wills for religious beliefs has its limitations. The laity of Great Dunmow had been investing in traditional religious artefacts throughout the 1520s and 1530s, but these donations are not apparent from their wills.
The importance of ‘tithes negligently forgotten’ The bequest to the high altar for ‘tithes negligently forgotten’ clause was an important part of pre-Reformation wills; and all ten Henrician wills have this bequest. One of the duties of the parish priest was to pronounce the Great Excommunication or General Sentence to his parishioners four times a year.(23) This proclaimed transgressions against the church; and debts (including unpaid tithes) were such transgressions. The bequest ensured the testator cleared his or her debt to the church and so their soul could benefit from prayers. Furthermore, unpaid debts meant the testator’s soul would be longer in purgatory, so this was an important bequest for traditional religion. Henry VIII banned the reading of the General Sentence in parish churches because it was vehemently against those who appropriated Church property or contested the authority of the Church(24), and, of course, Henry VIII had unquestionable contested the Pope’s authority in England.
This prohibition, along with the Edwardian theological retreat from the concept of purgatory,(25) was perhaps the reason why none of Great Dunmow’s Edwardian wills have the tithes to the high altar bequest. Moreover, the Great Dunmow’s high altar had been destroyed on the orders of Edward VI.(26) However, four Marian wills do have the clause; of these, three also have a traditional soul bequest. These four wills were written in 1557 and 1558; so it is possible this bequest was not included in earlier Marian wills because Great Dunmow’s high altar was still to be rebuilt after Catholic Mary came to the throne of England. In Elizabeth’s reign, Elizabeth Dygbey’s will written in December 1558 (i.e. one month after Mary’s death), also had a traditional soul bequest, along with the tithes clause. This was before the Marian high altar was taken down sometime between 1559 and 1561.(27) In 1564, John Byckner used a variation of the tithes bequest for a will which was otherwise ambiguous; the high altar had again been destroyed, so he left his money for ‘tithes forgotten’ to the ‘curate’. Byckner’s will is unusual because, apart from Dygbey’s will written shortly after Mary’s death, no other early Elizabethan will contains the tithes bequest. If this John Byckner, a wax chandler, was the same John Byckner, who lived in the High Street in 1525-6,(28) he would have been at least in his 60s and so perhaps had some of the old, traditional habits. This confirms the remark, ‘Wills were made usually by the old, who were generally less open to new ideas than the young or middle aged.’(29)
A priest excommunicating a group of people by raising a candle
from Omne Bonum (Ebrietas-Humanus) (London, England, c.1360-c.1375)
British Library’s shelfmark Royal 6 E VII f.75v.
Conclusion
The analysis within this articles has demonstrated that bequests within wills alone cannot substantially confirm the religious faith of a testator. However, it is clear that collectively the wills of Great Dunmow do demonstrate significant changes over time. Bequests to the church almost totally stopped after Henry VIII’s reign, in all probability because his attack on traditional religious artefacts made parishioners cautious. Not a single Edwardian testator made an unequivocally Protestant will, even with evangelical vicar Crisp present. Mary’s reign demonstrated a shift back towards traditional religion, with bequests to the high altar, and obits. The early years of Elizabeth’s reign demonstrate that wills had once again started to move away from traditional bequests. However, external factors could influence a testator’s will, for example, religious changes enforced by the monarch, local vicars, scribes and witnesses, and the age of the testator. Therefore wills cannot provide the complete account of the parishioners of Great Dunmow’s changing beliefs. Moreover, Henrician and Marian anti-Catholic events did take place in the parish with the 1546 re-enactment of the murder of Cardinal Beaton, and Thomas Bowyer’s disobedience to the re-established Catholic Church. Therefore, wills can provide only a limited narrative regarding the changes experienced by this parish during the Reformation.
Details of a funeral
from Book of Hours, Use of Sarum
(England, S. E. (Suffolk, Bury St Edmunds?), 2nd or 3rd quarter of the 15th century)
British Library’s shelfmark Arundel 302 f.77v.
Church End, Great Dunmow, postcard circa 1910-20.
Footnotes
(1) Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England 1400-1580 (2nd edn., 2005), pp.515-21.
(2) Caroline Litzenberger, The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540-1580 (Cambridge, 1997), pp.168-178.
(3) (n/a to this blog)
(4) This includes six monetary gifts, as documented in Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, but a corresponding will has not survived.
(5) London Metropolitan Archives, Diocese of London Consistory Court Wills index (2011), (At the time of writing my dissertation, these indexes were in pdf file format and online at http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk. However they do not appear to be there at present.)
(6) D. Newcombe, ‘Tunstal, Cuthbert’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Online Edition, May 2011), http://www.oxforddnb.com
(7) Andrew Chibi, ‘Stokesley, John’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Online Edition, May 2011), http://www.oxforddnb.com
(8) Personal correspondence, Richard Rex, Cambridge, March 2011.
(9) Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, fo.7r.
(10) Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, fol.18v.
(11) Will of Katherine Smythe (1558), Essex Record Office, D/ABW/33/335.
(12) Margaret Spufford, ‘The Scribes of Villagers’ Wills in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries and their influence’, Local Population Studies (1972), pp.28-43 at 29.
(13) Correspondence, Rex.
(14) Correspondence, Rex.
(15) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, p.508.
(16) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, p.505.
(17) Margaret Spufford, Scribes of Villagers’ Wills, pp.28-43.
(18) Margaret Spufford, Scribes of Villagers’ Wills, p30.
(19) Correspondence, Rex.
(20) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, pp.370-371.
(21) Christina Hallowell Garrett, The Marian Exiles (Cambridge, 1966), p.273.
(22) Clive Burgess, ‘”By Quick and by Dead”: Wills and Pious Provision in Late Medieval Bristol’, The English Historical Review, 102 (October 1987), pp.837-858 at p.842.
(23) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, pp.356-7.
(24) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, pp.356-7.
(25) Eamon Duffy, Stripping the Altars, pp.504.
(26) Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, fo.40v.
(27) Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, fo.44v.
(28) Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts, fo.2v.
(29) Robert Whiting, Local Responses to the English Reformation (Basingstoke, 1998), p.130.
(30) The first two columns of Table 2 have been taken from Caroline Litzenberger, The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540-1580 p.172
Notes Great Dunmow’s original churchwarden accounts (1526-1621) are in Essex Record Office (E.R.O.), Chelmsford, Essex, D/P 11/5/1. All digital images of the accounts within this blog appear by courtesy of Essex Record Office and may not be reproduced. Examining these records from this Essex parish gives the modern reader a remarkable view into the lives and times of some of Henry VIII’s subjects and provides an interpretation into the local history of Tudor Great Dunmow.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Please subscribe to my newsletter using the link below
I am planning exciting events during 2019 – including unique online courses:
If Walls Could Talk – Uncover the secret history of your home: step-by-step, discover how to research the story of your home through time;
The Witches of Elizabethan and Stuart Essex: uncover the myths and truths about witches of the 16th and 17th centuries and society’s attitude towards them.
My newsletter will give you more details about all my events, courses, talks and local history services.
Richard ye was sonne to Richard Duwke of yorke & brother un to kyng Edward ye iiijth Was kyng after hys brother & raynyd ij yeres & lyth buryed at leator [Leicester]
So the council car park in Leicester has yielded up its secret. The body discovered by archaeologists in September 2012 is that of King Richard III. The analysis by today’s live conference at the University of Leicester was remarkable – there can be absolutely no doubt that they have got their man. Science, genealogy and history all brought together with DNA analysis, wound analysis, genealogical and historical analysis to prove this.
The discovery is one of the most exciting historical events to happen in living memory. Not because the discovery adds more to our historical understanding of Richard III: it doesn’t. Or because it informs us of something that we didn’t already know: it doesn’t. The discovery of his body merely confirms what we already knew: that Richard died a brutal death on the battlefield of Bosworth, and in death was not treated with dignity.
But more staggeringly, his re-interment in Leicester Cathedral will be a never to be repeated link from our modern-day present to our past: the burial of a king of England. King Richard III – the last of the Plantagenets, the last truly medieval king, the last king of England to die in battle. Or the child-murderer hunchbacked bogeyman of Shakespeare and English history?
With all that will be written and said about Richard III in the coming days and weeks, let us return to contemporary documents written during Richard’s life – along with snippets written afterwards by his nemeses, the Tudors.
Signature of Richard, Duke of Gloucester – future King Richard III
King Richard III
Royal arms of England supported by boars and surmounted by a crown from De re militari (the Book of Vegecye of Dedes of Knyghthode), (London, England, c1483-c1485), shelfmark Royal 18 A XII f.1
Royal arms Anne Neville (wife of Richard III) from De re militari (the Book of Vegecye of Dedes of Knyghthode), (London, England, c1483-c1485), shelfmark Royal 18 A XII f.49
The Genealogy of Richard III The image at the start of this post is a small portion of The Biblical and genealogical chronicle from Adam and Eve to Edward VI, a remarkable document now in the care of the British Library. The chronicle is thought to have been written and illustrated circa 1511 (i.e. shortly after Henry VIII succeeded his father to the throne of England) with additions added by another hand after Edward VI’s death in 1553. The book stayed in the possession of the kings and queens of England until it was given to the British Museum by King George IV in 1823. Below is the full image of the kings – a stupendous display of Tudor propaganda proving that they were the rightful monarchs of England. The genealogy of the kings of England, including Henry IV, Henry V, Henry VI, Edward IV, Richard III, and Henry VII from Biblical and genealogical chronicle from Adam and Eve to Edward VI (England, S. E. (London or Westminster), c. 1511 with additions before 1553) shelfmark King’s 395 ff.32v-33
Lady Margaret Beaufort’s Book of Hours Margaret Beaufort (born 1443, died 1509) was the mother of Henry VII. Below is an image of the entry for August from her Book of Hours. This Book was made between 1430 and 1443 and owned firstly by Margaret’s mother, Margaret Beauchamp (born 1405/6, died 1482), and then by Margaret. Margaret appeared to use her Book of Hours as a calendar to record significant events in the lives of her son and grandchildren. Thus, she used August to record her son’s landing at Milford Haven and the death of Richard III (we do not know if this is her hand or if a scribe wrote the entries for her).
‘August’ from The Beaufort/Beauchamp Hours (England, S. E. (London), c. 1430, before 1443) shelfmark Royal 2 A XVIII f. 31v.
The first left margin note in black reads
The day landed king harry the vijth at milford have[n] the yere of o[u]r lord vijth cccc lxxxv [1485]
The second left margin note reads
The day king harri the vijth won[n] the feeld [field] wher was slayn ki[n]g Richard the third Ao Do[m] 1485
Postscript Has the revival of interest in Richard III already started? At a Christie’s auction of Valuable Printed Books and Manuscripts held on 13 June 2012, a rare manuscript with Richard’s signature fetched £109,250 against an estimate of £10,000 to £15,000. Two manuscripts signed by his usurper Henry VII, fetched £7,500 and £8,750; whilst one signed by Henry VIII only managed £20,000.
Henry VII may have won the battle and the crown but Richard III will be the king that will experience a renaissance with the next generation of modern-day historians.
Tuck’s postcard Richard III from Kings and Queens circa 1902
Richard Plantagenet – Duke of Gloucester, Knight of the Garter, Lord High Constable of England, Lord High Admiral, Governor of the North of England, Chief Justice of North Wales, Chief Steward and Chamberlain of Wales, Commander in Chief, Lord Warden of the West Marches, Lord Protector of England,. King of England, France and Lord of Ireland
What do you think about the search and discovery of Richard III? Please do leave your thoughts in the Comments box below.
History is full of coincidences and ironies. The date of 28th January is one such coincidence – 28 January 1457 and 28 January 1547 – two dates 90 years apart. The former the date of birth of the first Tudor despot, the later the date of his son’s death, the most tyrannical Tudor monarch of all.
Calendar page for January with additions from three different handwritting: 1. the obit of Catherine de Valois and the date of marriage of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York (black ink); 2. the date of birth of Henry VII (in Latin – faded brown ink); and 3. the obit of Henry VIII (brown ink at bottom of folio), from Book of Hours (The ‘Beaufort/Beauchamp Hours’), Use of Sarum, (England (London), after 1401, before 1415) shelfmark Royal 2 A XVIII f.28 January
Below are close-ups of the entries for the birth of Henry VII and the death of Henry VIII.
Natale d[omi]ni Henrici filij Emundi comitis Richemondie ac d[omi]ne M[ar]rgarete vxoris sui filie Joh[ann]is nup[er] duc[?is] Somersete anno d[omi]ni millio cccc quinquagesimo sexto. Born Henry son of the Earl of Richmond and Margaret his wife daughter of John, Duke of Somerset 1456. (Latin text kindly transcribed by Rob Ellis of Medieval London)
The xxviijth [28th] daie of January deceassd the noble prynce Henry the eight the yere of owr lorde 1546.
Although Henry VII’s date of birth was 1457, and Henry VIII’s date of death 1547, the years above of 1456 and 1546 are correct because these are contemporary entries written at times when the old Julian Calendar was still in use in England. Until 1752, the 1st January was not the start of the New Year, but instead the change to a new year started on Lady Day (25th March). Thus English documents written prior to 1752 will have any dates between 1st January and 24th March written in the Old Style. Modern historians either have to adjust these dates to the New Style or ‘double date’ the entry to show both old and new date (e.g. the above dates would be dated ‘1456/7’ and ‘1546/7’).
Henry VII from Guild Book of the Barber Surgeons of York
(England, N. (York?), 2nd half of the 16th century)
shelfmark Egerton 2572 f.7.
Henry VIII from Guild Book of the Barber Surgeons of York
(England, N. (York?), 2nd half of the 16th century)
shelfmark Egerton 2572 f.8.
Henry VII giving the manuscript to the monks of Westminster
from Indenture for Henry VII’s Chapel (England, S. E. (London), 1504)
shelfmark Harley 1498 f.98.
Henry VIII praying in his bedchamber
from The Psalter of Henry VIII (England, S. E. (London), c1540-1541)
shelfmark Royal 2 A XVI f.3.
If you want to read more from my blog, please do subscribe either by using the ‘Subscribe via Email’ button top right of my blog, or the button at the very bottom. If you’ve enjoyed reading this post, then please do ‘Like’ it with the Facebook button below. Thank you for reading this post.
Last year, I posted my first article on Medieval and early Tudor trade: a series of posts which uses images to illustrate the trades that were predominant and powerful in medieval England. Today’s post continues that theme – although some of the images have very loose connections to the trade which they are illustrating – but I hope you enjoy viewing the pictures anyway!
A sinful hermit sitting outside a tavern drinking ale; the alewife approaches him with a flagon from The Smithfield Decretals (France, Last quarter of the 13th century or 1st quarter of the 14th century) shelfmark Royal 10 E IV f. 114v.
Broderers (embroiders)
Plaque on the wall of Gutter Lane, London, EC2 – the original site of Broders Hall which was destroyed in 1940 during The Blitz. The Worshipful Company of Broderers are now located in East Moseley and are strongly associated with The Royal School of Needlework who are based at Hampton Court.
Butchers
Smithfield Meat Market – London’s traditional livestock market for 900 years. ‘Smithfield, or “Smoothfield”, a plain, grassy space just outside the City Walls, was well known in the Middle Ages for its horse Market. In 1173 William FitzStephen, clerk to Thomas Becket, describes the area as “a smoth field where every Friday there is a celebrated rendevous of fine horses to be sold.” There was also trading in sheep, pigs and cattle. In 1305 oxen were being sold for 5s 6d each. In 1400 the City of London was granted the tolls from the market by charter. Bartholomew Fair was held here from 1123 until its suppression for rowdiness and debauchery in 1855.’ (Ben Weinreb & Christopher Hibbert, ed, The London Encyclopaedia, (London, 1983) p.789.)
This blog
If you want to read more from my blog, please do subscribe either by using the Subscribe via Email button top right of my blog, or the button at the very bottom. If you’ve enjoyed reading this post, then please do Like it with the Facebook button and/or leave a comment below.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Find out more about how our site works and how we put you in control by navigating the tabs on the this pop-up window.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
![Natale d[omi]ni Henrici filij Emundi comitis Richemondie ac d[omi]ne M[ar]rgarete vxoris sui filie Joh[ann]is nup[er] duc[?is] Somersete anno d[omi]ni millio cccc quinquagesimo sexto.</em> Born Henry son of the Earl of Richmond and Margaret his wife daughter of John, Duke of Somerset 1456. (Latin text kindly transcribed by Rob Ellis of <a href="http://www.medievallondon.co.uk/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Medieval London</a>)](https://i0.wp.com/www.essexvoicespast.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Henry-VIIs-Birth-1457.jpg?resize=677%2C262)
![The xxviijth [28th] daie of January deceassd the noble prynce Henry the eight the yere of owr lorde 1546](https://i1.wp.com/www.essexvoicespast.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Henry-VIIIs-Death-1547.jpg?resize=711%2C180)
Early 20th Century etching of the Blue Boar Inn, Leicester. King Richard III spent the night of the 20th August 1485 in the Inn. It is alleged that he left his bed behind in the inn – perhaps he thought that he’d be coming back to the inn after he had dispatched his enemy, Henry Tudor. A white boar was the personal emblem of Richard III. Legend has it that the inn was originally called the ‘White Boar’ but after the battle and the death of Richard, the inn-keeper hastily changed the inn’s name to the Blue Boar.
King Richard III holds a council of war before the battle.
King Richard III’s trusty advisers.
The general area of the Battle of Bosworth Field. These photos were taken in the early summer of 2013. In August 1485, it is likely that these fields had the remains of that year’s crops still in the ground.
The general area of the battle. By the end of the battle, it is thought that approximately 1,000 men on Richard’s side lay dead on the field, along with 100 men from Henry Tudor’s forces.
Overlooking the general area of the battle-site. The spire in the distance is the (post-medieval) church spire of Stoke Golding, near to which the first Tudor King of England was crowned.
1813 Monument to Richard III. During the battle, the King drunk from the well that was located here.
The Fellowship of the White Boar’s plaque.
Modern-day statue of Richard III in a park in Leicester.
The Blue Boar Inn 2013 (aka Travelodge). The area is continuing its medieval drunken past by being, in the 21st century, the weekend home of countless hen and stag parties. The location is now part of Leicester’s multi-lane one way system, and so my son and I spent two nights sleeping more-or-less on a massive roundabout, with the steady stream of all-night cars noisely whizzing around the city. 
My son comes face to face with a medieval king.
The spire of Leicester Cathedral, overlooking the medieval guildhall.
Leicester Cathedral and the Guildhall.
Looking in one direction: the precinct of the Cathedral. To take this photograph, I had to stand directly in the middle of the small road shown in the next photograph.
Looking in the opposite direction: the location of the Greyfriars monastery. Behind the building on the left, halfway down is the entrance to the council car park containing the mortal remains of King Richard III. The distance between Richard’s original resting place for over 500 years is a mere stone’s throw from his proposed next resting place. Should he be moved a mere few hundred yards into Leicester cathedral? Or should he be moved a hundred miles to be reburied in York?
Inside The Car Park. The forbidding green gates, with their modern-day graffeti and barbed-wire tops, .
The car park is tiny – a lot smaller then it appears on the television. Georgian and Victorian buildings surround the space. With five centuries of urban building-work, it truly is a miracle that the exact location of Richard III’s was left, in the main, undisturbed. At some point during the Victorian period, builders managed to sever the king’s feet as they were not recovered with the remains of the rest of his body in 2012.
A temporary marque protects the grave of the five-hundred years dead king. The building in the background is Alderman Newton’s grammar school, which will eventually become part of the new Richard III Visitors’ Centre. If this building had been built even 50 yards further forward, then we would have lost Richard’s grave forever.
The grave of King Richard III, the last of the Plantagenets. The only king of England to die in battle, since Harold died in a hale of arrows in 1066. Stripped naked and buried without a shroud, with his hands tied after death, Richard was stuffed into a shallow grave which was too short for him.
Seeing Richard’s grave was spine-tingling – we so nearly lost him forever to urban development. Eventually the site of his original grave will become part of a beautiful garden next to the new Visitors’ Centre. However, seeing the grave in the setting of a stark and bare council car park was an experience I will never forget.
The quiet serenity and beauty of Leicester Cathedral. Will this be Richard’s final resting place?
Richard, Duke of Gloucester. Born 2nd October 1452 at Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire; died 22nd August 1485, Bosworth Field, Leicester.
St Mary the Virgin, the Parish church of Great Dunmow, circa 1910-20.
Above, Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts (folio 9r) showing the gift from the former vicar. ‘Ite[m] Rec[ieved] of wylyem sturton of ye gyfe of M[aster] Sturton sumtyme vycar of thys chyrche liijs iiijd (53s 4d)‘.
Will of John Skylton of Great Dunmow (January 1533), Essex Record Office D/ABW 8/28. The Tudor scribe who wrote the will (above) couldn’t write in straight lines! The request to the church starts on the third line… ‘hie awter [high altar – this is the end of Skylton’s tithe bequest] of the church – xxd [20d] also to the rep[er]ations [repairs] of the church of Du[n]mowe xiijs iiijd [13s 4d] also to the church of powles iiijd [4d – this is the bequest to St Paul’s cathedral in London]‘.
And here’s the entry in Great Dunmow’s churchwardens’ accounts showing that his widow had duly handed over the bequest to the church ‘Ite[m] Rc [Received] of Jone [Joan] Skylton of the gyfte of John Skylton – xiijs iiijd [13s 4d]’.
Church End, Great Dunmow, postcard circa 1910-20.
Tuck’s postcard Richard III from Kings and Queens circa 1902
Natale d[omi]ni Henrici filij Emundi comitis Richemondie ac d[omi]ne M[ar]rgarete vxoris sui filie Joh[ann]is nup[er] duc[?is] Somersete anno d[omi]ni millio cccc quinquagesimo sexto. Born Henry son of the Earl of Richmond and Margaret his wife daughter of John, Duke of Somerset 1456. (Latin text kindly transcribed by Rob Ellis of 
The xxviijth [28th] daie of January deceassd the noble prynce Henry the eight the yere of owr lorde 1546.
Plaque on the wall of Gutter Lane, London, EC2 – the original site of Broders Hall which was destroyed in 1940 during The Blitz. The Worshipful Company of Broderers are now located in East Moseley and are strongly associated with 
