DOCSLIB.ORG

Boy in the Tower Free Ebook

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Boy in the Tower Free Ebook FREEBOY IN THE TOWER EBOOK Polly Ho-Yen | 336 pages | 29 Jan 2015 | Random House Children's Publishers UK | 9780552569163 | English | London, United Kingdom Princes in the Tower, Richard Duke of York and Edward V The two brothers were the only sons of Edward IV, King of England and Elizabeth Woodville surviving at the time of their father's death in When they were 12 and 9 years old, respectively, they were lodged in the Tower of London by the man appointed to look after them, their uncle, the Lord Protector : Richard, Duke of Gloucester. This was supposedly in preparation for Edward's forthcoming coronation as king. However, before the young king could be crowned, he and his brother were declared illegitimate. Boy in the Tower uncle, Richard, ascended to the throne. It is unclear what happened to the boys after the last recorded sighting of them in Boy in the Tower tower. It is generally assumed that they were murdered; a common hypothesis is that they were killed by Richard in an attempt to secure his hold on the throne. Their deaths may have occurred sometime inbut apart from their disappearance, the only evidence is circumstantial. As a result, several other hypotheses about their fates have been proposed, including the suggestion that they were murdered by Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham or Henry VIIamong others. Boy in the Tower has also been suggested that one or both princes may have escaped assassination. From until his capture inPerkin Warbeck claimed to be Richard, Duke of York, having supposedly escaped to Flanders. Warbeck's claim was supported by some contemporaries including the aunt of the disappeared princes, Margaret of York. Inworkmen at the tower dug up a wooden box containing two small human skeletons. The bones were found in a box under the staircase in the Tower of London. The bones were widely accepted at the time as those of the princes, but this has not been proven and is far from certain. The news reached Gloucester around 15 April, although he may have been forewarned of Edward's illness. Edward V and Gloucester set out for London from the west and north respectively, meeting at Stony Stratford on 29 April. Edward V and Gloucester arrived in London together. Plans continued for Edward's coronation, but the date was postponed from 4 May to 25 June. On Sunday 22 June, a sermon was preached by Dr. Dominic Mancinian Italian friar who visited England in the s and who was in London in the spring and summer ofrecorded that after Richard III seized the throne, Edward and his younger brother Richard were taken into the "inner apartments of the Tower" and then were seen less and less until they disappeared altogether. Mancini records that during this period Edward was regularly visited by a doctor, who reported that Edward, "like a victim prepared for sacrifice, sought remission of his sins by daily confession and penance, because he believed that death was facing him. There are reports of the two princes being seen playing in the tower grounds shortly after Richard joined his brother, but there are no recorded sightings of either of them after the summer of Many historians believe the princes were murdered; some have suggested that the act may have happened towards the end of summer Maurice Keen argues that the rebellion against Richard in initially "aimed to rescue Edward V and his brother from the Tower before it was too late", but that, when the Duke of Buckingham became involved, it shifted to support of Henry Tudor because "Buckingham almost certainly knew that the princes in the Tower were dead. Clements Markham suggests the princes may have been alive as late as Julypointing to the regulations issued by Richard III's household which stated: "the children should be together at one breakfast". Other than their disappearance, there is no direct evidence that the princes were murdered, and "no reliable, well-informed, independent or impartial sources" for the associated events. Only one contemporary narrative account of the boys' time in the tower Boy in the Tower that of Dominic Mancini. Mancini's account was not discovered untilin the Municipal Library in Lille. Later accounts written after the accession of Henry Tudor are often claimed to be biased or influenced by Tudor Boy in the Tower. Four unidentified bodies have been found which are considered possibly connected with the events of this period: two at the Tower Boy in the Tower London and two in Saint George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. Those found in the tower were buried in Westminster Abbeybut abbey authorities have refused to Boy in the Tower either set of remains to be subjected to DNA analysis to positively identify them as the remains of the princes. Several sources suggest there were rumours of the princes' deaths in the time following their disappearance. Rumours of murder also spread to France. Only Mancini's account is contemporary, having been written in London before November Markham, writing long before Mancini's account was discovered, argued that some accounts, including the Croyland Chroniclemight have been authored or heavily influenced by John Morton, Archbishop of Canterburyin order to incriminate Richard III. Robert Fabyan 's Chronicles of Londoncompiled around 30 years after the princes' disappearance, names Richard as murderer. This identified Sir James Tyrrell as the murderer, acting on Richard's orders. Tyrrell was the loyal servant of Richard III who is said to have confessed to the Boy in the Tower of the princes before his execution for treason in In his Boy in the Tower, More said that the princes were smothered to death in their beds by two agents of Tyrrell Miles Forrest and John Dighton and were then buried "at the stayre foote, metely depe in the grounde vnder a great heape of stones", but were later disinterred and buried in a secret place. Polydore Vergilin his Anglica Historia c. Holinshed's Chronicleswritten in the second half of the 16th century, claims that the princes were murdered by Richard III. The chronicles were one of the main sources used by William Shakespeare Boy in the Tower his play Richard IIIwhich also portrays Richard as the murderer, in the sense that he commissions Tyrrell to have the boys killed. Pollard believes that the chronicle's account reflected the contemporary "standard and accepted account", Boy in the Tower that by the time it was written "propaganda had been transformed into historical fact". More wrote his account with the intention of writing about a moral point rather than a closely Boy in the Tower history. Additionally, More's account is one of the bases for Shakespeare's Richard IIIwhich similarly indicts Richard for murdering the young princes. Insome workmen remodelling the Tower of London dug up a wooden box containing two small human skeletons. The bones were found buried 10 feet 3. They were not the first children's skeletons found within the tower; the bones of two children had previously been found "in an old chamber that had been walled up", which Pollard suggests could equally well have been those of the princes. However, More also stated that they were later moved to a "better place", [22] which Boy in the Tower not match with the bones discovered. One anonymous report was that they were found with "pieces of rag and velvet about them"; the velvet could indicate that the bodies were those of aristocrats. A monument designed by Christopher Wren marks the resting place of the putative princes. The bones were removed and examined in by the archivist of Westminster Abbey, Lawrence Tanner; a leading anatomist, Professor William Boy in the Tower and the president of the Dental Association, George Northcroft. By measuring certain bones and teeth, they concluded the bones belonged to two children around the correct ages for the princes. There were also three very rusty nails. One skeleton was larger than the other, but many of the bones were missing, including part of the smaller jawbone and all of the teeth from the larger one. Many of the bones had been broken by the original workmen. No further scientific examination has since been conducted on the bones, which remain in Westminster Abbey, and DNA Boy in the Tower if DNA could be obtained has not been attempted. A petition was started on the British government's "e-petition" website requesting that the bones be DNA-tested, but was closed months before its expected close date. If it had receivedsignatories a parliamentary debate would have been triggered. Inworkmen carrying out repairs in St. George's Chapel, Windsorrediscovered and accidentally broke into the vault of Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth Woodville, discovering in the process what appeared to be a small adjoining vault. This vault Boy in the Tower found to contain the coffins of two unidentified children. However, no inspection or examination was carried out and the tomb was resealed. The tomb was inscribed with the names of two of Edward IV's children: George, 1st Duke of Bedford who had died at the age of 2, and Mary of York who had died at the age of 14; both Boy in the Tower predeceased the king. In the late s, work was being carried out near and around Edward IV's tomb in St Boy in the Tower Chapel; the floor area was excavated to replace an old boiler and also to add a new repository for the remains of future Deans and Boy in the Tower of Windsor. A request was forwarded to the Dean and Canons of Windsor to consider a possible examination of the two vaults either by fibre-optic camera or, if possible, a reexamination of the two Boy in the Tower lead coffins in the tomb also housing the lead coffins of two of Edward IV's children that were discovered during the building of the Royal Tomb for King George III —13 and placed in the adjoining vault at that time.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RICHARD III by William Shakespeare Directed by Ian Gallanar February 10 – March 5, 2017 Thank You High Sparks of Honor in Thee Have I Seen
    RICHARD III By William Shakespeare Directed by Ian Gallanar February 10 – March 5, 2017 Thank You High sparks of honor in thee have I seen. - Richard II Sponsors Funders Mayor Catherine E. Pugh & the City of Baltimore This production has been funded by Mayor Catherine E. Pugh and the Baltimore Office of Promotion and The Arts The William G. Baker, Jr. Memorial Fund creator of the Baker Artist Awards | www.bakerartistawards.org Media Partners 2 RICHARD III Richard’s Revival A Note from the Founding Artistic Director Richard III is a remarkable play. The history in it is not very good. Shakespeare compresses events at will. The idea of who the protagonist and antago- Ian Gallanar. Photo by Theatre nists are in this play might not match the historical record. Consultants Collaborative Inc. The play is not as deeply moving or profound as King Lear or Hamlet. Instead, what makes this play great are Shakespeare’s craftsmanship and innovation. Richard, Duke of Gloucester is one of the greatest anti-heroes in the theater. Shakespeare prac- tically invents for the stage the notion that our main fi gure can be villainous and yet, somehow, likable. Why? Because he’s entertaining, he’s funny, he’s wicked, and he speaks to us directly. The anti-hero is a creation that has stood the test of time. My favorite period of Shake- speare in performance is the era in which troupes of actors toured the California gold rush towns. Their productions were deeply important to these guys in the middle of nowhere trying to strike it rich.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMOIRSOF SIR JAMES TYRELL. (Communicatedby the Rev
    MEMOIRSOF SIR JAMES TYRELL. (Communicatedby the Rev. W. H. SEWELL, Vicar of Yaxley.) - In. Suffolk at Gipping, which is a hamlet about two milesto the east of HaughleyRoadRailwayStation,there is a remarkablyinteresting Chapel,the building of which localtraditionassignsto Sir James Tyre11in expiationof the crime it is supposedhe committedin murderingthe Princesin the Tower. But little'is reallyknownwith accuracYofthe life of Sir JamesTyrell. An inscription is however to be seenon. the Chapel,in whichhis nameis found togetherwith that of his wife: whichfact lends its support to the tradition that Sir Jamesbuilt the Chapel; but in no wayjustifies the prevailingidea that it wasbuilt in expiationofa crime, still lessthat that crimewasthe murderofthe Princes. What then are the facts of Sir James Tyrell's life? How comesit that his name the nameof a great Captain, was ever connectedwithsofOula deedP When and with whomdid the commonstoryof the murdersarise? And to what extent is the storyitselfto be believed? No printed Historyof England with whiChI am ac- quainted assistsus very much in answering any of the abovequeries. It is a problemthe solutionofwhichwould take the generalhistoriantoo far perhaps from his course to discover. He would scarcelypause in his narrativeto collect what informationis to be met with in chronicles and continuationsprintedor unprinted,respectingany one personagebeneath the dignity of a Sovereign. Such an inquiry however respecting a subject of the realm, an eminent person in his time, seems properly undertaken in a separate essay. Hence the present contribution, which, attempting to clear the character of a Suffolk 126 INTRODUCTION. gentleman, i'shere offered through a Society that extends its researches only as far as the county of Suffolk.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Writing in Britain from the Late Middle Ages to the Eve of Enlightenment
    Comp. by: pg2557 Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 0001331932 Date:15/12/11 Time:04:58:00 Filepath:d:/womat-filecopy/0001331932.3D OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – REVISES, 15/12/2011, SPi Chapter 23 Historical Writing in Britain from the Late Middle Ages to the Eve of Enlightenment Daniel Woolf Historical writing in Britain underwent extraordinary changes between 1400 and 1700.1 Before 1500, history was a minor genre written principally by clergy and circulated principally in manuscript form, within a society still largely dependent on oral communication. By the end of the period, 250 years of print and steadily rising literacy, together with immense social and demographic change, had made history the most widely read of literary forms and the chosen subject of hundreds of writers. Taking a longer view of these changes highlights continuities and discontinuities that are obscured in shorter-term studies. Some of the continu- ities are obvious: throughout the period the past was seen predominantly as a source of examples, though how those examples were to be construed would vary; and the entire period is devoid, with a few notable exceptions, of historical works written by women, though female readership of history was relatively common- place among the nobility and gentry, and many women showed an interest in informal types of historical enquiry, often focusing on familial issues.2 Leaving for others the ‘Enlightened’ historiography of the mid- to late eighteenth century, the era of Hume, Robertson, and Gibbon, which both built on and departed from the historical writing of the previous generations, this chapter suggests three phases for the principal developments of the period from 1400 to 1 I am grateful to Juan Maiguashca, David Allan, and Stuart Macintyre for their comments on earlier drafts of this essay, which I dedicate to the memory of Joseph M.
    [Show full text]
  • Begin Title Page
    L220 [Original (104 pages) is typed, double spaced, fair quality, located in Georgia State Archives, Atlanta, GA. This copy has been digitized both for your convenience and to improve legibility. Compare pages 19 bottom & 20 top to other sources, something seems to be missing DFB] THE TERRELL FAMILY Facts, Traditions and Surmises --------------- xXx -------------- COLLECTED BY General W. H. H. Terrell, deceased, late of Indianapolis, Indiana; Colonel Lynch Moore Terrell of Atlanta, Georgia, and Robert Williams Carroll of Cincinnati, Ohio. -------------- oOo -------------- COMPILED, WITH SOME COMMENTS, By Robert Willliams Carroll, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1 8 9 0. --------- 000 --------- Republished and distributed by : Terrell Society of America, Inc. 128 20th Ave NW Cairo GA 39827-1017 1 INTRODUCTORY The annals of a family have no general interest; but there is a craving in human nature to know something of ancestors. Individuals hope to derive good from the example of those who have gone before, and are prone to exaggerate the importance of their actions, the nobility of their lives and the eminence of their social positions. This tendency is an amiable weakness which cannot fail to have an elevating influence on conduct. If one imagines a standard higher than the facts justify, he will try to, attain an equal elevation, and, in the effort, benefit himself and Society. The TERRELL family in this country have held, at least, a respectable, position in the social world. They have produced some men of ability; have been prominent in many walks of life, and have not been content to be mere "hewers of wood and haulers of water." Physically they have developed a good type, and men- tally have not fallen below the average They have transmitted from, generation to generation a spirit of concord and affection among themselves, which has either been an inheritance from the original stock, or the effect of the social habits of the people of old Virginia, which so often leads to extreme man-infestations of family pride.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the History of the Principal Kingdoms and States of Europe Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics
    an introduction to the history of the principal kingdoms and states of europe natural law and enlightenment classics Knud Haakonssen General Editor Samuel Pufendorf natural law and enlightenment classics An Introduction to the History of the Principal Kingdoms and States of Europe Samuel Pufendorf Translated by Jodocus Crull (1695) Edited and with an Introduction by Michael J. Seidler The Works of Samuel Pufendorf liberty fund Indianapolis This book is published by Liberty Fund, Inc., a foundation established to encourage study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. The cuneiform inscription that serves as our logo and as the design motif for our endpapers is the earliest- known written appearance of the word “freedom” (amagi), or “liberty.” It is taken from a clay document written about 2300 b.c. in the Sumerian city- state of Lagash. Introduction, annotations, charts, appendixes, bibliography, index © 2013 by Liberty Fund, Inc. All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America c 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 p 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Frontispiece: The portrait of Samuel Pufendorf is to be found at the Law Faculty of the University of Lund, Sweden, and is based on a photoreproduction by Leopoldo Iorizzo. Reprinted by permission. Library of Congress Cataloging- in-Publication Data Pufendorf, Samuel, Freiherr von, 1632–1694 [Einleitung zu der Historie der vornehmsten Reiche und Staaten so itziger Zeit in Europa sich befi nden. English] An introduction to the history of the principal kingdoms and states of Europe Samuel Pufendorf; translated by Jodocus Crull (1695); edited and with an introduction by Michael J.
    [Show full text]
  • King Richard the Third Reader 1
    King Richard the Third Reader 1 1.1.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 1.2.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 1.3.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 1.4. 2.1.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 2.2.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 2.3.: Third Citizen 2.4. 3.1.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 3.2.: Priest 3.3. 3.4.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 3.5.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 3.6. 3.7.: Richard (Duke of Gloucester) 4.1. 4.2.: King Richard III 4.3.: King Richard III 4.4.: King Richard III 4.5. 5.1. 5.2. 5.3.: King Richard III 5.4.: King Richard III 5.5. King Richard the Third Reader 1 of 6 © shakespeareteacher.com King Richard the Third Reader 2 1.1.: Lord Hastings 1.2. 1.3.: Queen Elizabeth, Lord Hastings 1.4.: Keeper 2.1.: Lord Hastings, Queen Elizabeth 2.2.: Queen Elizabeth, Lord Hastings 2.3. 2.4.: Queen Elizabeth 3.1.: Lord Hastings 3.2.: Lord Hastings 3.3. 3.4.: Lord Hastings 3.5. 3.6. 3.7. 4.1.: Queen Elizabeth 4.2. 4.3. 4.4.: Queen Elizabeth, Third Messenger 4.5. 5.1. 5.2.: Henry (Earl of Richmond) 5.3.: Henry (Earl of Richmond), Ghost of Hastings 5.4. 5.5.: Henry (Earl of Richmond) King Richard the Third Reader 2 of 6 © shakespeareteacher.com King Richard the Third Reader 3 1.1. 1.2.: Halberdier 1.3.: Earl Rivers, Catesby, Second Murderer 1.4.: Second Murderer 2.1.: Earl Rivers 2.2.: Duchess of York, Earl Rivers 2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespeare's Richard Iii: the Sources for His Characterization and Actions in the First Tetralogy
    SHAKESPEARE'S RICHARD III: THE SOURCES FOR HIS CHARACTERIZATION AND ACTIONS IN THE FIRST TETRALOGY APPROVED: —^ Major Professor / \ \ /' // / /• I Minor7Profe s sory L kJ ' Director of the department of English Dean of the Graduate School V SHAKESPEARE'S RICHARD III: THE SOURCES FOR HIS CHARACTERIZATION AND ACTIONS IN THE FIRST TETRALOGY THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS 3«i If by Ft Connie Patterson Bender, B.A. Denton, Texas August, 1968 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION II. THE PRIMARY HISTORICAL SOURCES III. THE SECONDARY HISTORICAL SOURCES IV. THE LITERARY SOURCES , . 84 V. SHAKESPEARE'S TREATMENT OF HIS SOURCES. .. .107 VI. SUMMATION . , BIBLIOGRAPHY . , iii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Although critics have levelled reams of comment against its faults, The Tragedy of King Richard the Third has been from its first performance one of -Shakespeare's most popular plays. The first quarto edition of 1597 was followed by seven other quartos before 1635. The two Folio editions, 1623 and 1632, made a total of ten different printings of the play in the first forty years of its life.-'- There are many reasons for the popularity of this play, not all of which are directly related to the play itself or to. its literary value. There was, during the last decade of the sixteenth century, a revival of interest in the events of the civil wars and the last years of the Plantagenet reigns. Particularly, this interest showed itself in the writing and reprinting of many works which dealt with those turbulent days.
    [Show full text]
  • Faith Acker Phd Thesis (Appendix II Embargoed)
    ‘NEW-FOUND METHODS AND ... COMPOUNDS STRANGE': READING THE 1640 'POEMS: WRITTEN BY WIL SHAKE- SPEARE. GENT.' Faith Acker A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2012 Full metadata for this item is available in Research@StAndrews:FullText at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/3461 This item is protected by original copyright ‘New-found methods and . compounds strange’: Reading the 1640 Poems: Written by Wil. Shake-speare. Gent. Faith Acker This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 11 October, 2012 iii Abstract The second edition of Shakespeare’s sonnets, titled Poems: Written by Wil. Shake-Speare, Gent, and published by stationer John Benson in 1640, was a text typical of its time. In an effort to update the old-fashioned sonnet sequence in which its contents had first reached print, the compiler or editor of the Bensonian version rearranged the poems from the earlier quarto text, adding titles and other texts thought to have been written by or about the sonnets’ author. The immediate reception of the 1640 Poems was a quiet one, but the volume’s contents and structure served as the foundation for more than half of the editions of Shakespeare’s sonnets produced in the eighteenth century. In part due to the textual instability created by the presence of two disparate arrangements of the collection, Shakespeare’s sonnets served only as supplements to the preferred Shakespearean canon from 1709 to 1790.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaris Capture Pro Software
    Why Richard III? T.M. COLWELL King Richard III: Antichrist, Machiavellian politician or reluctant and ben- evolent king? These contrasting epithets demonstrate the variety of interpreta- tions to which Richard III has been subjected over the past 500 years.l Of particular prominence have been those themes representing the king as a ruth- less politician and tyrannical leader, as the man responsible for the mystery and probable murder of his royal nephews, and as a physiological and psychologi— cal monster. These characteristics were developed in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries by historians and playwrights, culminating in Shakespeare’s Richard III, and it is the insistence of these works on the negative character- istics of Richard and his reign which accounts for much of the modern popular interest in this king. This article will demonstrate that these themes, while not always presented ' uniformly, have continued to dominate the popular image of the last Yorkist king. Medieval and Tudor representations of Richard III taken from literary sources will be compared with contemporary, that is, twentieth-century, cine- matic and literary images of the king. Such an approach may allow the reader to appreciate both the diversity of the representations of Richard III and their relationship to the themes of tyranny, mystery and morality, themes which continue to stimulate interest in the last Plantagenet king. When investigating medieval history, it should be understood that. the writing of history in the Middle Ages followed essentially different guidelines to those followed today. Whereas modern history writing is based on the inter- pretation of source materials, medieval and early modem historians ‘wrote within a theological framework; they regarded history as exemplarist and 161 society as by nature hierarchical’.2 In this way, history was intended as a guide for both leaders so they would rule wisely, and for the increasing numbers of literate people so that they would act as obedient subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • S Richard III Society, Inc. Volume XVIV No. 1 Spring, 2005 REGISTER STAFF
    s Richard III Society, Inc. Volume XVIV No. 1 Spring, 2005 REGISTER STAFF EDITOR: Carole M. Rike 4702 Dryades St. • New Orleans, LA 70115 (504) 897-9673 FAX (504) 897-0125 • email: [email protected] ©2005 Richard III Society, Inc., American Branch. No part may be RICARDIAN READING EDITOR: Myrna Smith reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means — mechanical, P. O. Box 69 • Arkansas Pass, TX 78335 electrical or photocopying, recording or information storage retrieval — (361) 332-9363 • email: [email protected] without written permission from the Society. Articles submitted by members remain the property of the author. The Ricardian Register is ARTIST: Susan Dexter published four times per year. Subscriptions are available at $20.00 1510 Delaware Avenue • New Castle, PA 16105-2674 annually. CROSSWORD: Charlie Jordan In the belief that many features of the traditional accounts of the [email protected] character and career of Richard III are neither supported by sufficient evidence nor reasonably tenable, the Society aims to promote in every possible way research into the life and times of Richard III, and to secure a re-assessment of the material relating to the period, and of the role in English history of this monarch The Richard III Society is a nonprofit, educational corporation. Dues, grants and contributions are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law. In This Issue Dues are $35 annually for U.S. Addresses; $40 for international. Each additional family member is $5. Members of the American On Images of the Princes in the Tower Society are also members of the English Society.
    [Show full text]
  • Tna Prob 11/6/417
    THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES PROB 11/6/417 1 ________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: The document below is the Prerogative Court of Canterbury copy of the will, dated 16 May 1475 with codicils dated 18 March 1477 and 26 March 1477, proved 11 June 1477, of Sir Thomas Tyrrell (d. 28 March 1477) of Heron in East Horndon, Essex. According to Wedgewood the testator was aged 25 at his father’s death, and was thus born in 1411-12. However according to both Wedgewood and Richardson, he was said to be aged 40 or more in 1459, and would thus have been born about 1419. According to both Wedgewood and Richardson the testator died 28 March 1476, leaving a will dated 15 May 1475, proved 11 January 1477. See Wedgewood, Josiah C., History of Parliament: Biographies of the Members of the Commons House 1439-1509, (London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1936), pp. 891-2 at: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.210096/page/n963/mode/2up See also Richardson, Douglas, Magna Carta Ancestry, 2nd ed., 2011, Vol. I, p. 14 at: http://books.google.ca/books?id=8JcbV309c5UC&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14 However the PCC copy of the will below is dated 16 May 1475 and contains codicils dated 18 March 1476, 17 Edward IV, [=18 March 1477 New Style] and 26 March 1477, 17 Edward IV [=26 March 1477]. The probatum clause states that the will was proved 11 June 1477, and the testator’s will thus appears to establish that he died in 1477, not 1476. On the other hand, the testator’s IPM appears to establish that the testator died in 1476 since it is dated 16 Edward IV, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction on March 26, 2015, the Bones of King Richard III of England
    Introduction On March 26, 2015, the bones of King Richard III of England were laid to rest in Leicester Cathedral. Among the attendees were an Oscar-nominated actor, a member of the royal family, and the University of Leicester team that unearthed his remains in a car park.1 This unlikely assemblage displays the ongoing interest in and importance of this polarizing figure. As a king who ruled a mere two years, from 1483 to 1485, his impact on the larger history of England has been of little import. But his story has been dramatized and fictionalized by authors from the sixteenth century and beyond, in ways that are demonizing, sympathetic, or somewhere in between. The struggle has, arguably, been over the body of the king which was lost to history in the years of the Reformation. This conflict has centered on the classification of Richard’s body as much as the possession of his physical remains, and many historians and biographers have attempted to write the definitive version of Richard. Richard’s remains were discovered in 2012, but they were not confirmed to be his until scientific investigations concluded in 2013. The recent discovery of the body has reopened the debate over what some call the “real Richard,” spawning a forum for scholarly work on Richard’s discovery in Clemson University’s Upstart journal. As Alice Dailey puts it in her article for the forum, the discovery of the remains does not reveal the “anatomy of the interior man that the skeleton alone cannot provide” (np). Archaeologists dug up Richard’s body, not his mind and heart, the things that made him human.
    [Show full text]