killed at Stoke Field – or legged it to Europe?

i’m unconvinced by the ‘executed at the same time as Edward of Warwick and Perking Warbeck’ theory as theres simply no paper trail, unlike for the other charactors in the story, and i think the idea that he lived out his days as a bricklayer in Kent (or other annonymous life..) doesn’t seem to fit with the way that the Plantagenet children were, unless they dabbled in plots, pretty well looked after by the Tudor monarchs.

either, imv, he just dies of one of the many maladies available early on in the Tudor period like his sister Katherine, he is killed at Stoke Field and his body isn’t recognised or just buried in a mass grave, or he gets out and (perhaps) tries to get to the court in Burgundy.

i suppose, with conspiracy hat wedged firmly on, if anyone wanted to train up a pretender, having the son of a King – and perhaps Sir Francis Lovell? – doing the training might be a good start…

its very interesting that these two – possibly the closest to RIII left – dissappear at the same time. could be coincidence, but from what i can see there was enormous loyalty amongst his immediate circle.

Jasmine said
All the stuff about the pension is correct, but then John just vanishes. If he had been involved in the PW affair, then one might expect a record of his trial, conviction and execution – but there is nothing. It is as if he just fell off the edge of the world.

Yes Buck said he was involved in an ‘Irish plot’ and Henry had him executed, but I don’t know if Kincaid managed to source that one. I looked at Buck’s source myself and couldn’t find it.

Bob & Bo I don’t think anyone ever connected John with Richard of Eastwell, at the time they thought he was another illegitimate son – and his age would have made him a child when Richard died. Baldwin thinks he was Richard of Shrewsbury but Jasmine keeps pouring cold water on my favourite theory Spoilsport.

Stop it

Well Richard of Eastwell claims he was the illegitimate son of Richard III. Most historians dismiss this because Richard III acknowledged all of his illegitimate children, which is why David Baldwin thinks he may have been Edward IV’s son. But then perhaps if the boy was very young he may not have been known about yet. Who knows? There is barely a mention of Richard’s illegitimate daughter until Richard arranged her marriage. I have not read extensively on this, maybe Jasmine can help? John was mentioned when he was appointed Captain of Calais and knighted. I don’t know if there are earlier records of either of them, perhaps Richard was simply not recorded because he was a child and R3 had plans for him later.
Someone mentioned *somewhere* the other day that we would not have known about Edward IV’s illegitimate daughter Grace unless she was mentioned attending Elizabeth Woodville’s funeral. Now this doesn’t mean she was not looked after, on the contrary, it seems that EW befriended the girl.

Olga said

Well Richard of Eastwell claims he was the illegitimate son of Richard III. Most historians dismiss this because Richard III acknowledged all of his illegitimate children, which is why David Baldwin thinks he may have been Edward IV’s son. But then perhaps if the boy was very young he may not have been known about yet. Who knows? There is barely a mention of Richard’s illegitimate daughter until Richard arranged her marriage. I have not read extensively on this, maybe Jasmine can help? John was mentioned when he was appointed Captain of Calais and knighted. I don’t know if there are earlier records of either of them, perhaps Richard was simply not recorded because he was a child and R3 had plans for him later.
Someone mentioned *somewhere* the other day that we would not have known about Edward IV’s illegitimate daughter Grace unless she was mentioned attending Elizabeth Woodville’s funeral. Now this doesn’t mean she was not looked after, on the contrary, it seems that EW befriended the girl.

Good point, Olga. I’ll have to read up on it, but I think John of Gloucester was known about before he was appointed Captain of Calais. According to the dates given at the time of his death, Richard of Eastwell would have been 16 around the time of Bosworth and one would expect that had he been the king’s son, some mention of him would have been made earlier in the reign – 14 would have been considered a reasonable age for a future knight or whatever employment the king would wish for him, to have become known to a wider ‘auldience’.

Here’s the thing, there was 60 years between Bosworth and Richard Plantagenet turning up in Eastwell. That would make him 75/6 if he was that age when Richard III died. He took a labourer job at Eastwell. It is not completely impossible, but I think it is highly unusual that he would be labouring at that age. It is possible he was younger when Richard died. I am just speculating of course. The theory he was displaced by the Dissolution is very interesting. Perhaps he thought a wild tale like that would give him more protection?
Henry VII did not hunt down York descendants. Warwick was executed only after pressure from Spain. I haven’t read about Warbeck yet but I just finished Blood Sisters and was interested to see Warbeck wrote to Isabella of Castille, effectively signing his own death warrant – and young Warwick’s. Henry VIII is another matter but perhaps if bloody Reginald Pole hadn’t been cavorting about Europe leaving his elderly mother to the mercy of a monster she may have fared better.

I don’t agree Bo. He had killed plenty of men of the church by that time, he had no conscience in that regard. Margaret had lived almost her entire life, more than 50 years, perfectly safely under the Tudors and was horrified at what Reginald was doing. Well I think I am sure they wrote to him many times telling him to come home. Probably because she realised what danger it was placing her family in.

Well our young Catherine was not the idiot people enjoy making her out to be. She was by all accounts a kind young thing with a big heart. But she is dismissed because she made the error of developing a crush on her cousin because she craved the company of people closer to her age.

I agree I think Margaret Pole is amongst the worst of Henry’s crimes, it actually makes my blood boil thinking about it.

Richard III, the ‘hunchback king’, really could have been a formidable warrior . . . and his body double can prove it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..e-warrior-…-and-his-body-double-can-prove-it.html

For centuries, he has been known as the hunchback king — popularly demonised as weak and deformed.

But experts claim they can now prove that Richard III may have been a formidable warrior.

Dominic Smee, a 27-year-old unemployed teacher from Tamworth, Staffordshire, has the same rare form of adolescent-onset scoliosis that Richard III was thought to have had, resulting in spinal curvature of 75 degrees to the right and an S-shaped curvature of the ribs.

Mr Smee has taken part in a series of challenges with experts, including a cavalry charge, to assess what the king might have been capable of when he went into battle with Henry VII in 1485.

The results, to be shown on a Channel 4 documentary tonight, suggest that Richard III’s scoliosis need not have prevented him from fulfilling his role as a warrior.

I agree Anyanka, to be honest Richard had something that actually set him apart from his peers. I do rather feel that of all the Duke’s boys Richard was perhaps the most gifted of all as he refused to allow his disability to get the better of him and was perhaps one of the finest warriors of Plantaganant age.
H5 was as good but ertainly not better than Richard. H5 destroyed the French army in little over 2 hours with his skilled archers, but to be honest that at the time was a mighty victory for England, H5 regained France (albeit temporarly) since King John had let the French crown slip through his fingers.
But Richard’s victories made Agincourt look like a ride on Professor Burps bubble works at Chessington’s world of adventures.
I must admit I was guilty of believing the Shakespear’s and the Tudor progandists who made Richard look the nephew murdering villian,and took the throne, but now I’ve got to know him better, I think that he was a remarkable man and a formidible warrior, It’s just a shame that his reign was just so short, it would have been interesting to see how England would fair under the Yorks Instead of the British lion on our flag would we have a boar and ragged staff?
I do think that although there were tenitive enquiries to marry Richard to the Portugese Princess I get the feeling he may have married into Scotland, so that he could bring peace at last between the 2 counties.