THE GLOUCESTER SCENE—- AUGUST 1483 GWEN WATERS KING RICHARD came to Gloucester shortly after his coronation and stayed in the town for one or two days. More and Vergil make this episode the setting for the first act of the tragedy of the murdered Princes and also for the final meeting between the King and the Duke of Buckingham.1 The aim of this article, therefore, 15 to turn the spotlight upon the Gloucester scené m Au'gus_t, l483—for the above reason, and also because it was typical of many towns in the late fifteenth century. The ordinary citizens, for the most part, ignored power politics as much as they possibly could, being far more concerned with their own local affairs, and King Richard, being such a benefactor of the. town and their own duke, was probably welcomed wholeheartedly and enthusiastically. But among the eminent churchmen and nobility who, one supposes, were gathered there on this occasion, one may suspect divided allegiance, some regard and support, but also some potential disaffection. As has been mentioned previously (Ricardian, Volume III, N'.o 48, p. l_4), the civic and ecclesiastical archives for this year are almost non-existent. T hlS is not perhaps so unusual; the fifteenth century tends to be poorly documented, but it does seem a little suspicious that the only surviving manuscript for the year l483—the year of the town’s incorporation—is (apart from the Charter itself) a carpenter’s specification which happens to be dated in the reign of Edward V. However, it is the persons present—those with some;local affiliation that is— that this article seeks to present for consideration. Journeying with the King on his progress was , This prelate is familiar to all students of the perio_d In his role as mentor to the young Prince Edward and for the part hé played m the dramatic events which followed Edward IV' s death, but it is as the spiritual lord of Gloucester (the town was in the Sec of Worcester in the Middle Ages) that he has his plac_e here. Although he stood so high with the Woodville faction it is worth noting that he had been the pupil of BishopStillington who, according ‘ to the Croyland Chronicler, 2 was much influenced by the younger man. He had held the oflice of Master of the Rolls m Edwar'd IV_’s reigna (an appointment held later by two other controversial figures, , Bishop of Ely, and Robert Morton, ) and Richard too seems to have regarded him as a man of probity, choosing him for his Council and requesting his presence on important national occasions.‘l He was also honoured by Henry VII who raised him to the Bishopric of Ely and a royal writ of 1486 speaks of the “ aficction ” of King Henry for this bishop.5 He had preached 2 the sermon in St Peter’ s Abbey, Gloucester, when King Henry visited the town shortly after his accession. “ It is possible that he served all three monarchs equally well—but one feels that here was a definitely enigmatic personality. Another who on the face of things seems to have been no more than a neutral bystander was the Abbot of Gloucester, William Farley. Although his predecessor had been imprisoned by the Duke of York for some unexplained reason7 and then made Bishop of Hereford by Henry VI (which 15 suggestive of Lancastrian adherence—it will be remembered that Queen Margaret had expected to be allowed passage through the town in 1471 as she had friends within), Richard III paid to Abbot Farley the remaining £20 of Gloucester’s fee farm and probably stayed at the monastery during his visit.“ The Abbot was present at Richard’s first parliament and also at Henry VII’s, after which he seems to have faded out of the picture. 9 However, if there was any intrigue plotted at Gloucester against Richard’s reputation, it is hard to believe that Robert Morton, the Archdeacon, had no hand in it. He was the nephew of John Morton and had been Master of the Rolls under Edward IV and may have still held that honour in August, 1483. (He may have been replaced by Thomas Barowe after the defection of his uncle but is still named as Master of the Rolls in 1484.“) There is one point with regard to this office that would seem to be significant: Edward 1V had granted to John Alcock, when he held the same position, “ a tower within the Tower of London appointed by the king’s progenitors of ancient time for the custody of the said rolls, books, writs and records . . . ”.11 Therefore, if this was still so, and if Robert Morton was still Master of the Rolls in August, 1483, then he was right on the scene of the “ crime.” If nothing else, this fact serves to remind us that the Tower was anything but a private place; the last place, one would think, where murder could be done and remain secret. Circumstances do seem to link Gloucester, in the person of Robert Morton, with Bishop Morton and through him with Sir Thomas More and his tales. And it so happens that the next churchman forges a link with Buckingham —the Prior of Llanthony Secunda, Henry Dene or Deane. This priory,a foundation rich in manors, lands and royal endowments, was situated just outside the town on the southern side. Here had been buried Anne, Countess of Stafford, daughter of Thomas of Woodstock and great-grandmother of Henry, Duke of Buckingham 1" The Priory had received privileges from Edward W and Cecily, Duchess of York, and m exchange had offered p1 ayers for the Yorkist royal family. (Simi- lar prayers were, however, soon raised for Henry VII and his “ dearest consort ” when favours were granted by the Tudor king. 13) When Buckingham met with Richard at Gloucester it is possible that he stayed at the Priory with his retinue—the town’s hospitality must have been strained'to bursting point—but, even if this was not so, it is extremely likely that he encountered the Prior while visiting the tomb of his ancestors. It is also probable that Dene had some contact with the Mortons (it has in fact been stated that he owed his eventual preferment to the Archbishopric of Canterbury to Cardinal Morton“) Dene was also an intimate friend of Sir Reginald Bray who was executor of his will“ and who also had connections with Glouces- tershire. The adherence of the latter knight to the Tudor cause can surely 3 be undoubted and he strengthened this allegiance by marrying Elizabeth Hussey, faithful attendant of Elizabeth of York. A biographical note speaks of his “ skilful negotiations with Morton, Bishop of Ely,” and the “ rich reward ” Bray received after Bosworth.“5 Dene himself was no less in favour with Henry VII. He was made Chan- cellor and Justiciary of Ireland in 149517 as he had some considerable know- ledge of Irish affairs, through handling the Priory’s Irish properties, and was evidently considered staunchly Tudor enough to be watchdog for the King in that disturbingly pro-Yorkist country. He was soon appointed Bishop of Bangor, followed by Salisbury, then Lord Keeper of the Great Seal and finally .m Bacon (cited by Tout) lists him as one of the ablest men in the kingdom and Hall" calls him a man of great “ wit and diligence ” whose valuable services enabled Henry VII’s affairs to prosper as they did.2° His name even received honoured mention in the funeral oration of the Queen: “ These words I speak in the name of England on account of the great loss the country has sustained of that virtuous Queen, of her noble son the Prince Arthur, and of the Archbishop of Canterbury.”21 Seemingly throughout all this distinguished career he retained the humbler office of Prior of Llanthony. It is not diflicult to imagine that if Buckingham had already thoughts of rebellion in mind when he was at Gloucester, the Prior of Llanthony may well have fanned the flames. What is not easy to credit, however, is that the Duke would have sought to return through Gloucester with his insurgent army. The town enjoys quite a reputation for slamming its gates in the face of the foe (usually, it is true, to the surprise of that enemy—as in the case of Queen Margaret and, later, King Charles) and Buckingham must have known that to enter the town he would have to pass through the heavily-fortified Westgate which was further secured by a drawbridge. The Castle, too, was adjacent and although this was probably falling into dereliction it was, presumably, still in the custody of Richard Beauchamp whose loyalty has never been called in question. Last, and certainly not least, Gloucester had just been made incorporate by Richard III, receiving very especial marks of favour from him. Why ever should Buckingham suppose that he would be allowed entry? One can only assume that he hoped for support from some source. Not, presumably, from the newly-elected Mayor of Gloucester, however. John Trye’s name is associated in documents with that of William Nottingham, Chief Baron of the Exchequer in the previous reign, and it is likely that he was related to William Trye of Hardwick who was later summoned in the commission of array of 148422—no evidence of treason there. The High Sheriff, Alexander Baynham, was also so commissioned23 and as he had been knighted by the Duke of Gloucester at Berwickz‘1 he does not seem cast for the part of traitor either. As it happens, of course, the town was never put to the test—the Severn, despite its Welsh origins, rose loyally to the occasion and overflowed its banks creating what was ever afterwards known as the “ Duke bf Buckingham’s Flood ”25 and making passage impossible. We know for certainty, however, that the Duke had collected support from one quarter when he left Gloucester to return to his castle at Brecon. He had 4 been joined by a member of the great Berkeley family—Sir William Berkeley of Beverstone, Gloucestershire. , _ Just to add to the complication of the county’s tangled web of personalities and politics there were three William Berkeleys contemporary with each other and all playing their parts in the events of 1483—5. The Berkeleys had leaned to Lancaster in the past but William Lord Berkeley, of Berkeley Castle, managed adroitly to run with the hare and hold with the hounds, being made Earl of Nottingham by Richard III (this was one of the Norfolk titles to which he was co-heir through his mother, Isobel Mow- bray) and a Marquis by Henry VII?“ Leland says he was “ ons a sure Frende to King Richard the 3” having been “rather winked at then forgyven of the Death of the Lord Lisle.”27 and the family’s own chronicler, John Smyth (who has few good words to say for this Lord Berkeley) says “ so prudent was (his) carriage between those adverse princes (Richard and Henry) and their adherents (adying .the one with men, and the other with money, neither of both with his person) that hee preserved‘the favor of both, at least lost neither of them.”23 So much then for the head of the family, a wily and wayward nobleman, caring for little, apparently, but self-aggrandisement. So now to consider the other two Williams, both from junior brénches of the family. William Berkeley of Weoley, Uley and Stoke Gifl‘ord, and William Berkeley of Beverstone were knighted by Richard III at the coronation and both fought at Bosworth—but on opposing sides. The loyal' Sir William (of Weoley) fled after the battle, was attainted and his lands confiscated but, eventually being pardoned, he regained most of them.” The other Sir William (of Beverstone) died soon after returning to this country with Henry’s army— it is said of the sweating sickness prevalent among that King’s foreign troops."0 Sir William of Weoley had accompanied George, Duke of Clarence, overseas31 (15 Edward IV) and in the previous year had been retained.to serve the King in France. He was married to Anne, daughter of Sir Humphrey Stafford. He received “ divers offices ” during the “ nonneage of Edward Erle of Warrewicke ”32 and also the custody of Beverstone Castle after that Sir William’s defection with Buckingham.” He was commissioner of array in 148434 and became prominent on the Gloucester scene in November of that year, when he was appointed High Sheriff in succession to John Huddleston.35 He was holder of this position at the time of Bosworth and, as has been seen, unfortunately chose‘ to support the losing side. His predecessor, John Huddlestons, was son of Sir John Huddlestone, of Millom, Cumberland (who had been an associate, in the North, of Richard, when Duke of Gloucester) and brother of Sir Richard who had married Mar- garet, natural daughter of the Kingmaker. Because of their relationship with this' half-sister of Anne Neville, all the Huddlestons enjoyed King Richard’s special favour. John was made Constable of Sudeley Castle and a Squire of the Body“ and was probably at Bosworth, fighting on Richard’s side, because he received a pardon from Henry VII in 1486.37 It seems that all three High Sheriffs of Gloucestershire during Richard’s reign—Alexander Baynham, John Huddlestone and William Berkeley—were loyal, even if they did make their peace with Tudor afterwards. 5 William of Beverstone had also held office of High Sheriff, but in South- ampton where, after the Buckingham rising, he was replaced by one named Roggers.” He had also been granted the custody of the Isle of Wight and it is evident that Richard had placed trust in him as had Edward IV under whom he had been High Sheriff of Somerset and Dorset and a Squire of the Body.39 John Smyth says that he “ did partake of many gratious favours, offices and imployments of trust under that King.” It was in his capacity as Squire of the Body that he would have come into close association with Robert Poyntz, of Iron Acton, Glos., whose mother, Alice, had married, as her second husband, Edward Berkeley of Beverstone, uncle of William, and who, himself, was married to Margaret, the illegitimate daughter of Anthony Woodville.‘10 The star of Robert Poyntz was in the ascendant as soon as Richard was slain at Bosworth—in fact Poyntz is said to have been knighted by Henry VII “ on the field of Redmore ”41—and he immediately took over the oflice of High Sheriff of Gloucestershire, the unfortunate William having fled the country. He was made Deputy and Lieutenant of the Port of Bristol42 and, with Sir Alexander Baynham, granted the Constableship of St Briavel’s Castle, Glos.43 As a Knight of the Body he supported the King in the expedition against Perkin Warbeck4‘l and Henry dined with him at Iron Acton. Later he was made Steward of Berkeley, an honour which he .surrendered voluntarily in the reign of Henry VIII.“5 It is not surprising that, with a Woodville wife, he felt more sympathetic towards the cause of Henry Tudor than to that of Richard Plantagenet. It is obvious that the complicated tangle of marital and extra-marital relationships, of which the above is an example, could make for genuine con- flicts of loyalties, but this was a time of intrigue, when those in high places were ever seeking to turn events to their own gain, and the King had a number of potential enemies in an area such as Gloucester which one might expect to be generally pro-Richard; even in his own Duchy the cards were stacked against him.

NOTES

.l . The History of King Richard III by Thomas More, ed. R. S. Sylvester (Vol. 2, Complete Works of Sir Thomas More) Yale Univ. Press, 1963. p. 83 “ King Richarde after his coronacion, takyng his way to Gloucester to visit in his new honor, the towne of which he bare the name of his old, devised as he made, to fulfil yt thing which he before had intended.” p.89 “ . . . . thei departed as it seemed very great frendes at Gloucester. From whence as sone as the duke came home, he so lightli turned from him and so highly conspired against him, that a man would marueil wherof ye chaunge grew." The History afEngland, Polydore Vergil. Camden Society Edition, 1844. p.187 “ Thus Richard . . . not long after, having establyshyd all thinges at London according to his own fantasy, tooke his journey to York, and first he went straight to Gloucester, where the whyle he taryd . . . . he determynyd by death to dispatche his nephewys, because so long as they lyvyd he could never be out of hazard; wherefore he sent warrant to Robert Brakenbury, lyvetenant of the towr of London, to procure ther death with all diligence, by some meane convenyent. From thence he departyd to York . . . . ” (p. 188). 2. P. M. Kendall, Richard III (1955), p. 218 (quoting Croyland Chronicle). 6 V89??? Calendar of Parent Rolls 1467—77 (1899), p. 259. Kendall, p. 299. C. R. Markham, Richard III (1906), p. 9l; Dictionary of National Biagraphy,Vol. 2, p. 236. John Leland, De Rebus Britannicis Collectanea (1770), Vol. IV, p. 198. Victoria County History of Gloucester, Vol. II (1907), p. 59. Warrants under the Signet, I and II Richard III, C. 81/ 1390/2. (The author is indebted to Miss Annc Sutton for particulars of this entry which Miss Sutton located at the Public Record Office). Rolls of Parliament, Vol. VI (1783), pp. 237, 268. l0. Thomas BarOWe was granted the oflice of Master of the Rolls 22nd Sept., 1483, and is named as such on 6th Dec. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1476-85 (1901), pp. 462, 412. See also Ricar- (Iian, Vol. 3, No. 46, pp. 17—18. .1]. See Note 3. .12. Transactions, Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, Vol. 63, p. 115. [3. W. Dugdalc, Monastt'con Anglicanmn, Vol. VI (1846), p. 136. [4. Archaeological Journal, Vol. XVIII, p. 258. ‘IS. Ibid., p. 26]. .16. Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 55, p. 293, “The Bray Family in Gloucestershire,” by the Rev A. L. Browne, M.A. l 7. Arch. Journal, Vol. XVIII, pp. 256, 257. 18. D.N.B., Vol. 14, pp. 253, 252. .19. Edward Hall, Chronicle, etc. (1809), p. '470. 20. Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 63, p. 131. 21 . Arch. Journal, Vol. XVIII, p. 261. 22. Cal. Pat. Rolls 1476—85, pp. 491, 398. 23. Ibid., p. 491. 24. Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 6, p. 132. 25. Edward Hall, The Union of the Two Noble Families of Lancaster and York (1550), f.~153. 26. John Smyth, Lives of the Berkeleys (1883), p. 126. 27. John Leland, Itinerary, Vol. 5 (1908), p. 47. 28. Smyth, p. 127. 29. Rolls. Parl., Vol. VI, pp. 275—8; Cal. Pat. Rolls 1485-94 (I914), p. 266. 30. Smyth, p. 353. ' 31. Smyth, p. 26]. 32. British Museum Hurleiau Mammal-[pt 433, f. 98b. 33.' Cal. Pat. Rolls 1476—85 (190.1), p. 530. 34. Ibid., p. 490. 35. Robert Atkyns, The Ancient and Present State of GIoucaslcrs/tire (1712), p. 363. 36. Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 48, pp. 117, 119. 37. Cal. Pat. Rolls 1485-94 (1914), p. 119. 38. Calendar of Fine Rolls 1471—85 (1961), pp. 47, 276, 39. Smyth, p. 353; Cal. Pat. Rolls 1476—85 (1901), p. 35. 40. D.N.B., Vol. 46, p. 277 (by Gwentlian, daughter of Wm. Stradling, according to this source). 4] . Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 12, p. 151. 42. Cal. Pat. Rb”: 1485—94 (1914), p. 32. 43. lbid., p. 97. 44 Trans. B.G.A.S., Vol. 4, p. 77, “ The Poyntz Family ” by the Rev. H. L. Thompson, M.A., Rector of Iron Acton. 45. Cal. Pat. Rolls 1485—94 (1914), p. 408. ,

7