Regardless of how Richard learnt of the disaffection of Hastings, he had chosen his course of action by Thursday 12 June when he arranged for two council meetings to take place the next day, one at Westminster with the Chancellor, John Russell, and the other at the Tower.
The handling of the denouement was also well planned and careful consideration given to the wording of the subsequent proclamation, as suggested by More. Such preparation, however, need not be interpreted as contrived but merely essential to an important operation. Richard was determined to act swiftly and decisively in this latest crisis and although the hostile chroniclers and historians have implied he acted with feigned spontaneity, hindsight has perhaps affected their judgement of the situation.
So disturbed was Stanley when he awoke during the night that he immediately despatched a messenger to Hastings suggesting they flee the city immediately. Hastings dismissed Stanley's fears with ' we might be as likely to make them true by our going ' and sent the messenger home, saying, he was sure of Richard. While he was steadying his horse in Tower Street Hastings spoke with a priest.
A knight, sent by Richard to ensure Hastings attended the council meeting, merrily asked why he was spending so much time talking to a priest when he had no need; he laughed in the knowledge that soon Hastings would require the services of a priest. When Hastings reached Tower Wharf a double coincidence occurred as he met another man called Hastings whom he had last seen at the same place during the period when he had been accused by Lord Rivers and fallen from King Edward's favour.
While reminiscing Hastings told how well things were with him at the present as he knew that his enemy and author of his former trouble Rivers would that day die at Pontefract. That is how Sir Thomas More, vividly but speculatively, recounts Hastings' eventful last hours before entering the Tower for the council meeting.
The Arrest of Lord Hastings. By James Doyle Courtesy: Geoffrey Wheeler The accounts of 13 June, some more brief than others, basically agree, More of course providing the most colourful and detailed version.
Crowland merely reported: 'On 13 June, the sixth day of the week, when he came to the Council in the Tower, on the authority of the Protector, Lord Hastings was beheaded '. If Chancellor John Russell was the anonymous continuator of the Crowland Chronicle, he was probably involved in the other council meeting taking place at Westminster and, therefore, not an eye witness.
This may account for his brevity or possibly reflect a disapproval or dislike of Hastings which resulted in his failure to provide a fuller commentary on what was a significant event. And the xiij day of Jun the Duke of Glowcetir, sodeynly w' oute Judgement, cawsid the lord Hastynges, Chamberlayne of England, to be beheded w'in the Tower.
And forthwith sent the Bisshoppis of Ely and York in to Walys, there to haue been prysoned. The 'historical notes of a London citizen' also gives the date as 13 June and confirms the arrests of Rotherham, Morton and Oliver King ' with other moo ' [more], the same day. The Great Chronicle of London states that, apart from Hastings and the 'Earl of Derby' , most of the councillors attending the Tower were supporters of the Protector and continues:.
Upon the same [day] dyned the said lord hastynges with him [Richard] and afftyr dyner Rode behynd hym or behynd the duke of Bukkyngham unto the Towyr. When all were assembled a cry of treason was uttered and the usher burst upon 'such as beffore were appoyntid' and arrested Stanley and Hastings, the latter being executed without 'processe of any lawe or lawfully examynacion'.
Mancini portrays the events as beginning with Hastings, Rotherham and Ely making a customary call upon Richard in the Tower at ten o'clock. The Protector at once accused them of arranging an ambush upon him 'as they had come with hidden arms' and again, by pre-arrangement, soldiers entered the room, this time accompanied by Buckingham, and despatched Hastings forthwith. Vergil's version refers to the two council meetings: one at Westminster given the task to proclaim the date of King Edward's coronation and the other within the Tower to debate the whole matter of the coronation.
The date of the coronation had, of course, been set for 22 June and was well publicised, which rather makes a nonsense of Vergil's agenda.
The Tower meeting was convened early, but Gloucester launched into a tirade against the Queen whose witchcraft was wasting his body and he showed the assembly his arm as proof. More's version starts the meeting at nine o'clock with Richard's small talk of strawberries.
He withdraws for an hour or so and when he returns his mood is completely changed, exhibiting ' angrye countenaunce, knitting of brows, frowning and froting and knawing on hys lippes. In More's account we also find Richard's rejoinder ' … and I will make good on thy body tratour ' and ' What then, William, yf by thine owne practises I be brought to destruction ' immediately before guards entered the chamber to make their arrests.
During the scuffle Stanley received a blow that knocked him under a table, with blood about his ears, then with Rotherham and Morton, he was arrested and they were taken to separate rooms while Hastings briefly made his confession, the Protector having declared he would not eat 'til I se thy hed of'. It is noticeable after reviewing these different accounts that Thomas Stanley only appears in the Tudor versions. Perhaps his fame was not so great in when Hastings, Morton and Rotherham took centre stage, but it is worth noting that although he is included with the plotters retrospectively, yet less than three weeks later he carried the constable's mace at Richard's coronation.
Whichever version the reader wishes to accept as the 'true' account, the outcome was the same: the respected and popular Lord Hastings ' who chiefly amongst all the nobylytie was, for his bountifulness and lyberalytie, much beloved of the common people ' was dead.
Forster was taken to the Tower from his home in Hertfordshire on 14 June and others may also have been arrested. Dorset escaped from sanctuary and supposing that he was hiding in the adjacent neighbourhood, he [Richard] surrounded with troops and dogs the already grown crops and the cultivated and woody places, and sought for him, after the manner of huntsmen, by a very close encirclement: but he was never found.
The question remains unanswered as to whether there was a genuine plot against Richard and, if this was the case, whether Hastings was personally involved. Before considering this problem it is relevant to review the situation from Richard's perspective and to follow subsequent events.
It has been argued that Richard kept his options open, and that his actions, generally, can be interpreted as not following a premeditated and determined path to usurpation. His policy was forever under review and changing to meet the needs of the current situation. In other words Richard was merely reacting to new situations. It should be remembered that Richard's situation was not particularly secure at the beginning of June. His role of Protector may be regarded to some extent as nominal: he had failed to obtain the Council's agreement to the executions of Rivers and Grey; the Queen remained in sanctuary with her youngest son and daughters, to Richard's embarrassment; and there was an independent party of magnates and prelates led by Hastings who could wield considerable influence and power.
Richard badly needed to extend his protectorship and he would certainly have been aware of the fate of two earlier dukes of Gloucester who had both held high office and died under suspicious circumstances. To this end he had gained the Council's approval for an extension of his powers after the coronation as is evidenced in the draft address to parliament prepared by Russell.
How long Richard could have held the office was and is open to speculation and no-one was more acutely aware of this than Richard himself. As the date of the coronation drew near, events gathered momentum and the first indication of the ensuing turmoil was the virtual suspension of normal government: grants ceased to be recorded by 11 June.
Richard probably learnt of the conspiracy on the 9th or l0th, applied for military aid within forty-eight hours and proceeded to take corrective action on the 13th and 14th.
Richard was no longer prepared to brook any obstinacy from the Queen and on Monday 16th she relinquished Richard, Duke of York. At what stage Stillington told his story to Richard about King Edward's pre-contract with Eleanor Butler is unknown but undoubtedly Richard was in possession of the revelation by this time and now had three options open to him: ignore the pre-contract and continue with the coronation on the 22nd; postpone the coronation; or assume the throne on the grounds of the illegitimacy of his nephews.
On 16 June Richard took the second option, he issued the writs of supersedeas cancelling both the coronation on the 22nd and parliament on 25 June and he named a new coronation date of 9 November, The deliberations by which Richard came to his decision to become king had now begun in earnest and the decision was made by the Saturday. The postponement of Edward V's coronation was, in part, an expedient act designed to give Richard time to think and decide where his duty lay, following several days of intense activity culminating in the exposure of the conspiracy, the existence of which had demonstrated Richard' s vulnerability.
The revised date for the coronation, however, was common knowledge in official circles and beyond. Many Londoners were involved in the preparations for the coronation and the new date was recorded in the College of Arms chronicle. None of Richard's actions in June the plea for aid, arrest of the conspirators, transfer of Richard of York and the postponement of the coronation need be regarded as sinister or pre-emptive if reviewed in chronological order and without hindsight, In the words of Isolde Wigram, who wrote about the dating of Hastings' death: ' If one starts with the assumption that what Richard said was the truth, everything falls into place '.
The only documentary evidence that the plot existed are the two letters, written by Richard to the city of York and Lord Neville, together with the report of the proclamation issued within a few hours of the execution declaring Hastings a traitor. The opinion has been expressed that if there was no conspiracy, Richard would have waited to take action against Hastings and his friends until after the arrival of the troops, but in the event, the situation was sufficiently threatening to Richard to preclude delay.
Kirby Muxloe, the fortified brick-built manor house which Hastings began building in but was never completed Circumstantial evidence exists in the form of the arrests, not only of the high-ranking prelates, Rotherham and Morton, but of Mistress Shore, Oliver King and John Forster.
What was the purpose of their arrests unless they were part of a genuine conspiracy? Elizabeth Shore's introduction to her future husband, Thomas Lynom, was probably made while he interrogated her in his capacity as Richard's solicitor-general, Forster, Queen Elizabeth's treasurer and receiver-general, was held in prison for almost nine months and he was sufficiently frightened to surrender his stewardship of the liberty of St, Albans within forty-eight hours of his arrest ' in the hope of obtaining remission of his punishment '.
Further testimony to the seriousness of the charges against him was supplied by Stallworthe in his 21 June letter to Sir William Stonor when he reported that men feared for Forster's life. Stallworthe also reported that the London residences of Rotherham and Ely were occupied, and possibly their country homes as well, by Richard's men.
Richard was obviously taking no chances and was extremely thorough in the mop-up operation, presumably searching the prelates' homes and interviewing staff, servants and visitors. Finally, there is one further indication that the conspiracy was real. The register of Abbot Wallingford of St Albans, which recorded Forster's arrest and imprisonment, also records ' that it was said Hastings deserved his fate '.
Perhaps the phrase ' it was said ' indicates a certain scepticism on the part of the chronicler but unless it was generally accepted that Hastings was involved in a plot against the Protector, why bother to make the statement at all? Historians who adopt the traditional anti-Richard stance have drawn their own conclusions about the events of 13 June: primarily that the execution of Hastings was a second pre-emptive act by Richard and one that removed the most powerful magnate who would remain loyal to the son of his former master.
Due to the paucity of the evidence they argue no conspiracy existed except in the minds of Richard and Buckingham and rely on Mancini's gossip ' that the plot had been feigned by the duke so as to escape the odium of such a crime '. It was true, of course, that the existence of a conspiracy did provide Richard with an excuse to rid himself permanently of the Woodville prisoners. The two major arguments against Hastings' involvement in a plot are his relationship with Richard and the unlikelihood of his rapprochement with the Queen.
Presumably Hastings was aware of the content of Russell's parliamentary address confirming Richard's continuance as Protector after the coronation and thus he endorsed this extension to the protectorship. Further, Hastings retained his offices and ' his interests were respected ' so, it has been argued, why should he conspire against the Protector?
To what could he possibly have objected? It could also be argued, however, that this scenario is confirmed by Richard himself: his complete astonishment at Hastings' betrayal that was manifested by his violent and swift response.
Richard acted while his anger was still hot. If he had hesitated and waited to consider what he was about to do to an old friend and comrade he would probably have been unable to order the execution. Further confirmation is provided in the form of Richard's treatment of Hastings' family.
In the normal course of events, Hastings' death would have been followed by his attainder, and the subsequent confiscation of his lands would have placed a considerable amount of patronage at Richard's disposal.
Richard chose not to follow this course of action but to honour Hastings' wishes in being buried near King Edward at Windsor, and on 23 July while at Reading on his royal progress, he officially assured Lady Katherine Hastings that she would in no way suffer from her late husband's conduct.
Are these the actions of the wicked, power-crazed monster of Tudor legend or the calculating land-hungry duke, as he is currently represented by modern historians? Hastings' relations with the Woodvilles spanned many years. Although there were undoubtedly causes for dissension, and these have already been discussed, this did not preclude them from working together during King Edward's reign. Dorset was Hastings' deputy at the battle of Tewkesbury. They served together on commissions of oyer and terminer, were part of a group of feoffees for the Mowbray estate and certainly worked together on other occasions at the behest of their master King Edward.
Rivers and Hastings seem to have shared a common interest in the collection of books. Hastings and the Queen's kin may well have jostled for King Edward's favour but compromise was essential between those who so prominently served their king. In June , however, Rivers was under arrest and Dorset was in no position to become actively involved in a conspiracy.
Hastings' 'animosity' against Queen Elizabeth is not as well documented as that between Hastings and the Queen's immediate relations. The view has been expressed that ' there were less well-advertised examples of cooperation, or at least of agreeable co-existence ' Only More and Mancini record the hostility that stemmed from the Queen's resentment of Hastings being ' secretelye familyer with the kynge in wanton coumpanye ' and ' the accomplice and partner of the sovereign' s privy pleasures ' If More and Mancini are to be believed it seems strange that Queen Elizabeth should single out Hastings as the sole object of her wrath without apportioning some blame to her own son and brothers for encouraging her husband in his infidelities.
The possibility of some degree of discord within the Woodville family, despite their unity , should not be overlooked. The view has been expressed that Elizabeth and Hastings each bore the other a grudge dating back to the marriage agreement that was signed just seventeen days before she married King Edward. Elizabeth, on her part, because of Hastings' tough negotiations, and Hastings because the agreement lapsed after her royal marriage. In the event Elizabeth did agree to the contract, her common sense probably telling her that one hundred per cent of nothing is nothing and that at least with Hastings' backing she stood a chance of achieving a settlement from her in-laws.
What is tantalising, however, is the hypothesis that Hastings, in attempting to obtain a favourable solution for Elizabeth from the King brought her to Edward's attention. In such circumstances Elizabeth may well have retained a certain regard for her husband's closest friend.
Apart from a possible spell in the Tower, Hastings did not seem to lose too many points to the Woodvilles. Few ladies were more pragmatic than the Queen and her later association with King Richard bears testimony to her ambivalence. Richard was responsible for the death of one of her sons, Richard Grey. The argument that Hastings and the Queen could not have formed an alliance because of their much vaunted hostility, however, is obviated by the precedent set by the Earl of Warwick and Queen Margaret.
The forceful personalities of the latter pair are well known and if they could come to an alliance in so could Hastings and Queen Elizabeth a few years later. The ultimate question is why William Hastings would want to become involved in a conspiracy to overthrow Richard of Gloucester? Hastings' Monument at the Tower of London The present author believes that the answer to that question is to be found in two aspects of Hastings' character: his loyalty and his ambition.
Taking his status from his father, Hastings combined his background of landed gentry with the pride of his maternal ancestry. Although lacking the vast acres and wealth, in his early years, of a ' great magnate ' he possessed the intelligence, developed the skills and, from his cousin King Edward, acquired the land to become one of the most important men in England for over two decades.
Edward's trust in ' Hastings was repaid by a lifetime of personal devotion ' and Mancini describes him as the ' author of the sovereign's public policy ' Confident in his own wealth, position and abilities, Hastings was perhaps unconcerned at his lack of higher rank. Although this accords with the loyal aspect of Hastings' character that kept faith with the Yorkist cause throughout his life, worked tirelessly on behalf of his country and inspired confidence in all levels of society, it is perhaps more a eulogy for a 'victim' of the 'ambitious' Richard of Gloucester than a complete and accurate reflection of Hastings' character.
Time and again Hastings proved himself successful and to achieve success on this scale he had to be strong, competitive, astute, resourceful and acquisitive. Hastings' ability as a diplomat alone negates More's ' trusting to much '.
How ' gentle ' was the young Hastings in the Pierpoint affair? Perhaps the measure of William Hastings was his popularity and good reputation in spite of his success. With King Edward's death change was inevitable and each of those closest to the late King quickly assessed their own priorities. His wife, Queen Elizabeth, wanted to attain control. His surviving brother, Richard of Gloucester, saw his role as protector of the realm until the young king could govern for himself.
His greatest friend, William Hastings, wanted a smooth transition of power to a council dominated by the old nobility. Immediately Queen Elizabeth was in conflict with Richard and Hastings and within three weeks her faction was neutralised. On the periphery there were a number of people who recognised an opportunity to promote their own interests, Margaret Beaufort, John Morton, Robert Stillington, William Catesby and Henry of Buckingham.
It was perhaps the combination of their ambitions and machinations that now brought about the strife that began with Hastings' conspiracy and was to end at Bosworth over two years later.
In April, Hastings and Richard shared common goals and Hastings was content to work with Richard during the period of the protectorship. Initially Richard's friendship with Buckingham may not have concerned Hastings but by May, after Buckingham's promotion in Wales, Hastings could begin to feel uneasy as he saw Buckingham usurping a role he had dominated for over twenty years.
Excluded from Richard of Gloucester's inner circle, perhaps regarded as old fashioned and belonging to another generation, it would have taken a humbler man than William Hastings not to resent this change in the status quo. Hastings' ambitions were not diminishing with age and he was still capable of vigorously asserting his authority as he had demonstrated in the council chamber in April. It is very likely that Hastings was aware of the threat posed by Robert Stillington and his knowledge of the pre-contract with Eleanor Butler.
It is entirely possible that Hastings' own 'intelligence' or an interview with Catesby alerted him that Richard was already in possession of the facts. Hastings' fears would have been for the reputation of King Edward IV and the future of the boy, who for twelve years had been destined for the throne of England. Although there had been differences with the Woodvilles it was inconceivable for Hastings to stand by whilst Queen Elizabeth was exposed as Edward's paramour and their children declared illegitimate.
To Hastings, such a scandal would destroy the honour of Edward IV. In late May, Hastings faced the unpleasant fact that his political influence was declining and the possibility that his beloved master's son would not be crowned. Despite his fifty-three years Hastings was not prepared to retire to his estates and abrogate his position, especially as it was being usurped by Buckingham, ' Power once obtained is very seldom voluntarily relinquished ' Caroline Halsted.
The conflict between Richard and Hastings was inevitable but, rather than a display of antipathy towards his former colleague, Richard, Hastings' conspiracy was simply a matter of expediency for his own political survival and that of his young master, King Edward V.
Hastings' brother Thomas and Henry Ferrers were questioned by Henry Pierpont regarding the murder of his brother Robert and the matter was referred to Richard, Duke of York. Hastings was not accused of the actual murder but was clearly held responsible and together with his brother, Ferrers and Pierpont, was ordered to ' keep the peace with each other '.
Hastings, as Captain of Calais, if not directly involved in the questioning of Edwards, would have been aware of the allegation. Hastings complied but negotiated a high price with him, taking the wardship of her son, Thomas Grey, afterwards Marquis of Dorset, and marrying him to one of his daughters.
IX, Nos. Sylvester vol. London It is generally assumed that because of Richard's actions in , there was a history of distrust and dislike between Richard and the Woodvilles. This would not have been surprising: after all this was true of the attitude between Clarence and the Woodvilles, and most people of the time disliked the Woodvilles. Or did they? There is a large element of myth about feelings towards the Woodvilles, and much of what is written is with the benefit of hindsight.
If the family were not so universally unpopular, and if Richard did not distrust and dislike them, how else could the events of be explained? What evidence exists to suggest that Richard and the Woodvilles did not get on and even disliked one another? Unfortunately there is no juicy gossip in the Paston Letters to shed light on their feelings, so we only have official records to rely on. These mention occasions when the paths of Richard and the Woodvilles crossed, but they cannot indicate any feelings upon the part of either.
This has not stopped some historians from trying. Kendall's biography of Richard III is full of purple prose, his description of Richard and the Woodvilles being no exception. In the Woodville court Richard could not have been at ease … he could not bring himself to enjoy the company of the Woodvilles, whose arrogance shone as bright as the newness of their fortunes… Sir Thomas Grey … was already in training to become a boon companion of the King … In the tilt-yard the talk was all of Anthony Woodville … The Queen, beautiful and rapacious, … viewed the King's two brothers only as rivals of her family for the favours of her lord.
Woodvilles surrounded Edward like a glittering hedge … [4]. It might thus be argued that while in the Warwick household he learnt to dislike the Woodvilles as much as Warwick and his brother Clarence did. Yet he did not join them in their rebellion of but joined Edward against them. His loyalty to his brother may have led to an acceptance of, if not a liking for, his new in-laws. There is nothing to suggest that he came into contact with the Woodvilles before It was during the pilgrimage that Edward heard about Warwick's rebellion.
Edward went to Nottingham to raise troops; presumably he sent Rivers to Northampton while Scales remained in East Anglia. Richard's whereabouts are unknown.
In July Rivers and his youngest son, John, were captured and executed by Warwick. Edward himself fell into Warwick's hands and was taken north, but by September he had been released, and went back to London. On 17 October he created Richard Constable of England.
This may have produced the first reason for conflict between Richard and the Woodvilles. The elder Lord Rivers had previously held the office of Constable; it had been made an hereditary title and Anthony, now Lord Rivers, could have expected to assume the office. Perhaps Edward came to some arrangement with Anthony to waive his claim in Richard's favour. When rebellion broke out again in Edward was forced to flee the country. They headed for the coast at Lynn where they took ship for the Low Countries.
Richard and Anthony were together on the same ship, sharing exile and an equal desire to return Edward to the throne. Rosemary Horrox has suggested a 'family' link between Richard and the Woodvilles. The suggestion is that Katherine was Richard's mistress, as his illegitimate daughter was called Katherine. Katherine married James Haute. There were therefore links with the wider Woodvilles family. There are other links between Richard and the Woodvilles in East Anglia. In Richard had been granted the confiscated estates of Lewis FitzLewis.
This would have bolstered Woodvilles holdings in the region. In March Anthony asked Richard to act as an arbitrator in a dispute he had with Roger Townshend over property in Norfolk.
This suggests co-operation between Richard and the Woodvilles and at least an element of trust. The two condemned men remark that it is Margaret's curse which has condemned them to die. A council meets in the Tower to discuss when the coronation day for Edward should be held. Richard enters late, bids the men a good day, and calls Buckingham aside.
Buckingham tells Richard that Hastings will never support him. Hastings says that it is a good thing that Richard is in such good spirits, because it means he does not dislike any of the men present.
Buckingham and Richard reenter the room. Richard asks what the punishment for traitors should be, to which Hastings replies that they deserve death.
Richard then blames the Queen and Mrs. Shore who is the mistress of Hastings with having caused his malformed arm. He accuses Hastings of protecting Shore, and orders the council to behead Hastings. Richard then leaves, followed by most of the council. The Lord Mayor of London arrives at the Tower. Catesby delivers Hastings' head, at which point both Buckingham and Richard must try to mollify the Lord Mayor.
They tell him that Hastings was plotting against them both, and that he confessed as much in the Tower. They ask the Lord Mayor to inform the people of what happened, since he is better placed to placate the masses then they are.
Richard then sends Buckingham to follow the Lord Mayor. He wants Buckingham to tell the people that the children of Edward are illegitimate, which would require that the eldest illegitimate child should take the throne. Richard then wants Buckingham to convince the people that he is also an illegitimate child of Edward, and thus he should receive the throne.
A scrivener enters, with a paper that fully details the treachery of Lord Hastings. The paper is meant to support Richard and Buckingham, but the scrivener points out that it took eleven hours to write, during which time Hastings was still alive. The scrivener asks who is so foolish that they cannot see the discrepancy in times, but he answers his own question by remarking, "Yet who so bold but says he sees it not?
Buckingham informs Richard that his speech to the crowd went over very badly. He says that having told the crowd everything, he asked them to shout out their support of Richard.
Jekyll and Mr. SparkTeach Teacher's Handbook. Themes Motifs Symbols. Mini Essays Suggested Essay Topics. Summary Act III, scenes v—vii. Page 1 Page 2. Test your knowledge Take the Act 3, scenes v-vii Quick Quiz. Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, is the heir to the Lancastrian claim to the throne, and he gathers an army in France to oppose Richard's tyrannical reign. Their armies meet at Bosworth in Leicestershire.
The night before the battle, the ghosts of his victims haunt and curse Richard, while appearing to Richmond and blessing him for the battle.
More detail: 1. Act V Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, is the heir to the Lancastrian claim to the throne, and he gathers an army in France to oppose Richard's tyrannical reign.
For additional reading, see our blogs on Richard III.
0コメント