Category: Executions Of Nobles - Meandering Through Time

Birth of Margaret Pole

12/8/2018

On the 14th of August in 1473 the birth of Margaret Pole, the daughter of George Duke of Clarence and Isabel Neville at Castle Farleigh, an estate not too far from Bath in Somerset.

This west country castle was once the ancestral home of the Hungerfords, a family who had sided with the Lancastrians during the Wars of the Roses and were punished for that with execution and the loss of their estates. Castle Farleigh was granted to Richard, Duke of Gloucester, later Richard III, however, in 1473 it was linked with the Duke of Clarence for it was here that Isabel gave birth to Margaret.

Isabel Neville died in 1476 and Clarence was executed two years later, Margaret lived out the rest of her childhood with her paternal cousins in the royal household. Six years following the accession to the throne by Henry Tudor she was married to Richard Pole by whom she would have five children - the four sons were thorns in the sides of Henry VIII. However, Margaret was a member of the young Katherine of Aragon's household during the reign of Henry VII and under Henry VIII she was governess to Henry's daughter Mary. During the troubles between Catherine and Henry and Henry and Mary, Margaret would stay true to their cause.

By the end of 1538, Margaret was in trouble and found herself embroiled in the fall out of the arrests of her sons Geoffrey and Henry Pole on a charge of treason. She was detained at Cowdray Park, the home of the Earl of Southampton. It wasn't long before trumped up charges were brought against her, and she was sent to the Tower where she was kept for just under two years. Poor Margaret was not treated well during her incarceration, the conditions were austere and inadequate for a woman her age let alone her status, the room was cold and damp and she suffered as a result.

Margaret Pole would die at the hands of an inexperienced executioner on the 27th May in 1541 - she was sixty-eight years old.

The above image is considered to be that of Margaret Pole as she wears a tiny barrel charm on a bracelet which is taken to represents her father's death in a barrel of Malmesbury wine. This, of course, is a case of fabricating the evidence to fit the crime. Not only did this one tiny detail added weight to the vat of wine theory but it means that this portrait has been wrongly attributed.

The Execution of Edward Stafford

17/5/2018

“A butcher's dog has killed the finest Buck in England” was a reference to Cardinal Wolsey part in the execution of Edward Stafford

Cardinal Wolsey had obtained great power and wealth rather quickly and Henry was soon dependent on him and the advice he gave, this of course angered the nobility and other men of rank who considered that Wolsey was punching above his weight.

Envy and jealousy played their part in the downfall of Buckingham as it later would with Wolsey, there was a least one person who succumbed by pointing the finger of suspicion at the Duke and he made his feeling quite plain in a letter sent to Wolsey accusing Buckingham of treason.

Was Buckingham part of a plot to kill the king, Thomas More suggested his conviction was based on hearsay others considered him guilty as charged.

A J Pollard wrote of Buckingham's fate

"Buckingham was not executed because he was a criminal, but because he was, or might become,
dangerous: his crime was not treason, but descent from Edward III"

Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham climbed the steps to the scaffold at Tower Hill on the 17th May in 1521.

Execution of Thomas Wyatt

9/4/2018

I often wonder what I would do in a given situation in history, for instance, would I have followed Richard Duke of York against Henry VI? At Henry VIII's separation with Rome would I have stuck with the old religion or taken up the new Protestant one? Nobody knows what they would have done, and I suppose it all depends on who your family were, what positions they held and how they thought the turning of fortunes wheel might affect them.

My 15th century West Country ancestor was a fervent heretic hunter, yet his Catholic son, considered ‘suspect and weak and followed only those noblemen who are dangerous in the county’ conformed to the teachings of the Protestant church. I have to assumes that, if I was with my ancestor at this time I might to have joined him in capturing those men who were not of the same faith as me or maybe I would have been willing to join a rebellion that was taking place in the first few months of the reign of Queen Mary that was known as Wyatt's Rebellion.

For leading a rebellion against the crown Thomas Wyatt mounted the scaffold on the 11th April in 1554 and was executed for treason.

The proposed marriage of the newly crowned Queen Mary to Philip of Spain and the fear that many people had that England would once again turn towards the old religion was at the root of Wyatt's rebellion. He had previously been imprisoned for his support of Lady Jane Grey’s claim to the throne but he had managed to escape the executioner's axe. Wyatt's new plan was to remove Mary from the throne and replace her with her Elizabeth, who would then marry Edward Courtenay. Courtenay was never a proven rebel but he was however embroiled in the plot. Peter Carew, a West Country gentleman did take part as did Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk. Many others joined Wyatt but no one seemed to notice that the vast majority of the populace had taken to Mary as their queen.

On entering London Wyatt's rebels were outnumbered by the queen's forces and Wyatt was captured.

While in the tower Wyatt named Edward Courtenay as the instigator of the rebellion and begged Courtenay to admit to it. By implication, Courtenay and Princess Elizabeth were suspected of being involved and they too were imprisoned, when no evidence was found they were both released and Courtenay fled the country but Wyatt was sent to trial at Westminster Hall on 15th March.

Following his trial Thomas Wyatt was beheaded at Tower Hill, his body quartered and his bowels and genitals burned. Wyatt's demise was gruesome but the treatment of his remains even more so, his head and body parts were then taken and parboiled and were later displayed for all to see, his head however disappeared.

What of the fate of Carew and the Duke of Suffolk? Carew, like Courteney, escaped abroad he was captured and imprisoned but later released on payment of his debts to the crown. The Duke of Suffolk also escaped but was found on his estate in Warwickshire, where he was betrayed by his gamekeeper.

Execution of Henry Grey

22/2/2018

Just as his daughter had done only twelve days before, Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk climbed the wooden steps of the scaffold to his execution on the 23rd February in 1554.

Unlike Jane's however, his death occurred at Tower Hill just outside the Tower of London.

The slippery slope to Henry Grey's gruesome demise, you could argue, began in the October of 1551 when both he and John Dudley became rich and powerful at the same time, they were conferred of the titles of the Dukedom of Suffolk and Northumberland respectively the very same day. However, Suffolk's machinations began three years earlier when he hoped to obtain the marriage of his daughter Jane, by placing her in the household of the Seymour family, to the future Edward VI. Thomas Seymour's death in 1548 scuppered Grey's plans. However, an alliance with the Duke of Northumberland, who we know set these plans to action, looked like the way forward.

At the beginning of 1554, Henry Grey managed to escape death for his part in the Duke of Northumberland plans usurp Mary's throne by feigning support of the new Catholic queen, however, Grey had a deep dislike of the old religion and needed no encouragement to join Thomas Wyatt's unsuccessful rebellion. By the end of January that year all was lost, Wyatt fled to Wales and the Duke of Suffolk escaped to his estate in Warwickshire, where he was betrayed by his gamekeeper.

By the 10th of February, Henry Grey was locked in the Tower of London for the second time, was found guilty of treason on the 17th of February and the date of his execution was set for the 23rd.

At nine o'clock on the morning of that day Henry Grey had the opportunity to speak to the assembled crowd, he apologised for offending the queen and spoke other platitudes to gain his place in heaven. According to John Foxe, the historian and writer of the stories of martyrs, Grey was accompanied to Tower Hill by Hugh Weston, Mary's chaplain. Weston followed Grey up the stairs to the scaffold but Grey objected. Grey, wrote Foxe, pushed Weston down the steps and a fight ensued. Another account, I assume written by Foxe, tells us that when Grey's executioner asked for him for forgiveness, a man in the crowd interrupted. This man was owed money by Grey, he shouted to how he was to be reimbursed to which Suffolk replied,

“Alas, good fellow! I pray thee trouble me not now, but go thy way to my officers.”

If we accept that the written accounts of Jane Grey's death had been falsified and embellished in later years by so-called historians we must, therefore, take with a pinch of salt these stories of Henry Grey's death.

Henry Grey was no doubt a weak man driven by greed. Stupidity Henry Grey had in abundance, arrogance, it seems, he had a plenty too. He like John Dudley knew how to play the game, they thought that they would succeed but they didn't, they both punished for their ambitiousness with the loss their heads.

Death of Lady Jane Grey

11/2/2018

Lady Jane Grey's execution took place inside the Tower of London on the 12th February 1554, her place of execution was a privilege afforded only a select few, most executions took place outside on Tower Hill. In the years between 1483 and 1941 twenty-two people were executed inside the walls of the Tower of London five of them were women and three of the five were queens, Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard and Jane herself. The other two were Margaret, Countess of Salisbury and Jane Boleyn, Lady Rochford.

The last day of Jane's life is shrouded in myth, a myth that has been circulating for nearly two hundred years. In 1852 English antiquarian John Gough Nichols published his version the account of Jane's death in his Chronicle of Jane Grey and Queen Mary, the chronicle itself is based on an eyewitness account by an unknown person who was inside the Tower of London at the time.

John Gough Nichols had a keen interest in rare books and had enjoyed coping from texts and epitaphs as a young boy, he also accompanied his father to Royal Society and Society of Antiquaries meetings. Obviously, words were important to him, you would think then that with such a passionate love of words and history he would know what embellishing and adding untruths to ancient text could lead to. In 1834 Nichols went to see the latest work of French artist Paul Delaroche in the National Gallery, this work went by the title The Execution of Lady Jane Grey. It was this one painting that changed history and how we understand Jane's story today. There is no doubt it's a fine painting that evokes a sense of sadness in us and it must have had the same effect on Nichols, he had fallen for an ideal. Delaroche in his story of Jane Grey's last moments uses pathos to get his idea of the suffering of the French nobility across - clever that! However, to the vast majority of the viewing public, all they saw was a romanticised view of the tragic death of a young girl.

Paul Delaroche used other English historical victims as cloaked references to the French Revolution, his victims were Charles I and Thomas Wentworth. Another example of Deloroche getting his point across is his 1831 artwork The Children of Edward, which he took inspiration from Shakespeare The Life and Death of Richard the Third, a story he knew to have some truths. With this in mind, he was able to make a comparison of the deaths of the two English princes to draw attention to the mysterious deaths of Louis XVII of France. Delaroche always denied any reference to the revolution in his works, but why would a French artist produce work based on the deaths of English victims of tyranny, if it was not to represent his own. Twenty years later, when Nichols wrote his Chronicles of Jane Grey and Queen Mary the memory of Deloroche's painting must have still been as vivid as the day he saw it, why else would he feel impelled to embellish the story and put words into the mouth the dying Jane Grey that she did not utter. In his chronicle he writes:

'First, when she mounted the scaffold, she said to the people standing thereabout " Good people, I come hither to die, and by law, I am condemned to do the same. The fact and the deed, against the queen highness, was unlawful and the consenting thereto by me, but touching the procurement and desire thereof by me or on my half, I do wash my hands thereof in innocence...Then the hangman kneels down and asked her forgiveness who she forgave most willingly. Then he willed her to stand upon the straw which doing she saw the block and said "I pray, dispatch me quickly" and kneeling down saying "will you take it off before I lay me down?" and the hangman answered "No, madam" She tied the handkerchief about her eyes and feeling for the block said "What shall I do? Where is it?" One of the standers-by guided her unto she lay her head down upon the block and stretched forth her body and said "Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit" and so it ended.'

Compare this to the original written account of the aforementioned eyewitness present in the tower on the day of Jane's death.

'Jane, we are told, is nothing at all abashed neither with the fear of her own death, neither with the sight of the dead carcass of her husband. She came forth, the leftenant leading her in the same gown wherein she was araigned. Neither her eyes anything moistened with tears although the two gentlewomen, Mistress Tilney and Mistress Ellen wonderfully wept. Jane carried a book in her hand whereon she prayed all the way to the said scaffold"

Another source writes

'She conducted herself at her execution with the greatest fortitude and godliness.'

Jane was the daughter of Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk and Francis Brandon, she was also the pawn of her father in law, John Dudley, the Duke of Northumberland whose actions cost her her life, and she is only really remembered in history for two things, firstly as the queen who reigned for just nine days and secondly, the aforementioned manner in which she died.

During the first few months of 1553, Edward VI under the influence of Dudley, had made an amendment to his Devise for the Succession in which he disinherited his half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth and named Jane his heir. By the May of that year and as part of his master plan Northumberland arranged the marriage of his son Guildford to Jane. Two months later, the boy king was dead and Jane was proclaimed queen and in a surprising act of defiance refused to allow Guildford to be named king, therefore scuppering Northumberland's plans to control both Jane, Guildford and England. Soon after events took a downturn with surprising speed. By July Jane was deposed, by November she had been tried and found guilty and by the beginning of February she was awaiting the day of her execution.

It would seem that the masses were not aghast by the death of this queen, for they new little of her, the traitorous acts of Northumberland and the failed Wyatt revolt saw to it that Jane's sad tale quickly faded into obscurity.

What we should now remember about Jane is that she was an intelligent and feisty girl who left a lasting impression, notably on John Feckenham the Catholic priest Queen Mary sent to convert her and that she was one of many Tudor women whose wants and needs were overridden by the actions of the self-serving Tudor man. She was not the first to die because of the ambition of others, and she would not be the last.

An interesting side note on Jane's death is the death of Richard Morgan the judge who condemned her, he, by all accounts, died tormented by guilt two years later -

"touching the condemnation of this lady Iane, here is to be noted, that the Iudge morgan who gaue the sentence of condemnation against her, shortly after hee had condemned her, fell mad, and in hys rauing cryed out continually to haue the Lady Iane taken away from him, and so ended hys lyfe.

This account appears in John Foxes Actes and Monuments another appears in Holinshed's Chronicle. Jane's death made her a Protestant martyr, and there can be no better way to brand the Catholic religion as evil than to point out the horrible death those who do not follow the new true faith.

Jane Grey was buried along with her husband in the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula.

Their grave is not marked.

Deaths of Richard Empson and Edmund Dudley

15/8/2017

Thomas Penn, in his book The Winter King, referred to Henry VII as a miser and stated that ‘money was dearest to his heart.’

In the image below we can see Henry with two of his ministers, Edmund Dudley and Richard Empson, no doubt discussing fiscal policy.

Richard Empson was in charge of recovering money owed to the king and was associated with Edmund Dudley in this capacity. When Henry VII died in the April of 1509 and his son ascended England's throne, both Empson and Dudley's days were numbered.

Henry VIII had both men arrested the day after he became king, and they were the first to fall victim to Henry ridding the court of men who were disliked in his fathers time, and who he considered would damage to his new reign.

Dudley, whose descendants would go on to do rather well in the reign of Edward VI and Elizabeth I, was thought to pay too much attention to feathering his own nest and both men were considered to be tough enforcers of the law.

Following their arrest they were convicted of treason in the October of 1509 and executed this day in 1510 on Tower Hill.

Execution of Thomas Percy

23/7/2017

It was today, three days following the Battle of Shrewsbury, that Thomas Percy, Earl of Worcester was executed.

Battle of Shrewsbury from the Beauchamp Pageant

Thomas Percy was the younger son of Henry Percy of Alnwick and Mary of Lancaster. As with many a younger son Thomas had little in the way of land and the income that was gained from it. He was the uncle of Henry (Hotspur) Percy.

When Henry, his elder brother inherited their fathers titles in 1368, Thomas was probably in Spain fighting under the banner of the Black Prince, and on his death in 1376 Thomas transferred his loyalties to his son, Richard II. In his years of service under Richard he was rewarded with lordships in Wales and a number of castles and following his support of Richard during an attempted overthrow in 1397, Thomas was granted the title of Earl of Worcester.

Surprisingly, following the murder of Richard II on the order of Henry Bolingbroke in 1400 and his usurpation of the crown Thomas Percy did not suffer any consequences, in fact he was given a number of prominent position in Henry's court including Lieutenant of Wales.

Percy was still in this position in the spring of 1403, and we can only wonder if he had any knowledge of his nephew's grievances with Henry IV's rule. The discontent that Hotspur felt culminated in a rebellion against Henry and eventually his death at the Battle of Shrewsbury on the 21st July. The seeds of Thomas's part in the rebellion may have been set four months previously when the king replaced him as lieutenant of Wales, however he did remain in the kings service until the 17th, but by the 20th Thomas was riding with his nephew against the king.

Percy (played by David Hayman in the Hollow Crown) can be seen being led to his execution.

Henry Hotspur died in battle, Thomas was captured and decapitated, his head eventually stuck on a pole in London where it remained until the end of the year. He was laid to rest Shrewsbury Abbey.

What were the reasons Thomas Percy changed sides? I like to think that his reason was his loyalty to Richard II, maybe he, like me, thought Henry IV shouldn't have been king at all.

History doesn't tell us why Thomas changed his allegiances, but it does tell us battles were won and lost on the actions of men like Thomas Percy - sadly in this battle all Thomas lost was his life.

Death of Mary Queen of Scots

1/2/2017

Mary, Queen of Scots was executed on the 8th February 1587.

Seven day earlier, William Davison, Elizabeth I's secretary, was asked by the queen to bring Mary's death warrant in order that she could sign it. Elizabeth handed it back to Davison for safe keeping. However, contrary to her order the warrant found its way into the hands of William Cecil. Cecil was quick to act upon Elizabeth's wishes stated within the warrant....

“repaire to our Castle of Fotheringhaye where the said Queene of Scottes is in custodie of our right trustie servant and Counsellor Sir Amyas Poulet Knight, and then taking her into your charge to cause by your commandment execution to be done upon her person”.

It is clear that Elizabeth certainly had some doubts about Mary's execution. Although there is no evidence, it is probable that William Cecil and Francis Walsingham used their positions to influence the Privy Council to convince the queen Mary's death was necessary, and her Parliament to get the warrant approved.

By the 7th February, Elizabeth's representatives had arrived at Fotheringhay Castle, and in the presence of Poulet, Mary was informed that they would proceed with her execution the next morning before eight o'clock.

According to French nobleman Pierre de Bourdeille, who had been with Mary during her imprisonment, the Scottish queen welcomed the news of her demise, stating that she 'longed for an end to her miseries, and had been prepared for death ever since she had been sent as a prisoner to England.' She asked for time to prepare herself, but this was not granted, Mary was told in no uncertain terms

'No, no, Madam you must die, you must die! Be ready between seven and eight in the morning. It cannot be delayed a moment beyond that time.'

Later that evening Mary would write to Henry III of France, the younger brother of her first husband Frances II stating

Tonight, after dinner, I have been advised of my sentence: I am to be executed like a criminal at eight in the morning. I have not had time to give you a full account of everything that has happened, but if you will listen to my doctor and my other unfortunate servants, you will learn the truth, and how, thanks be to God, I scorn death and vow."

As arranged, Mary arrived at the scaffold the next morning accompanied by her ladies in waiting. Mary rejected the offer of a Protestant minister to pray for her soul, but asked that Elizabeth spare her companions. Those who gathered around the scaffold gave an audible gasp as Mary removed her black dress to reveal a red petticoat that symbolised Catholic martyrdom. Mary was dying for her faith, and in doing so she kissed her crucifix and stated

‘Even as Thy arms, O Jesus, were spread here upon the cross, so receive me into Thy arms of mercy and forgive me all my sins.'

Mary knelt, and as a cloth was tied across her eyes she felt for the block and laying her head down she repeated

‘In manus tuas, Domine’ - ‘Into thy hands, Lord’

With more than one stroke of the axe Elizabeth's nemesis was dead.

Mary's executioner is said to have picked up her severed head and, showing it to those present shouted

"God save Queen Elizabeth! May all the enemies of the true Evangel thus perish!'

Despite her famous reaction on finding out her cousin was dead, it is clear from the death warrant what Elizabeth's wishes were. Cecil, Walsingham and Davison, all staunch Protestants, had their reasons to rid of the country of the Catholic heir to the English throne. They knew that Elizabeth's hesitation could prove problematic, and they acted fast. However, Cecil and Walsingham would not feel the wrath of a distraught and guilt racked queen, but Davison would.

Mary was buried in a Protestant service at Peterborough Cathedral, her body would later be exhumed and reinterred in Westminster Abbey. Her crucifix and cover of her prayer book were quickly taken from the scene, no doubt by her loyal ladies for safe keeping, but you can see in the above image that most of Mary's belongings were burnt to prevent them becoming Catholic icons.

Execution of a Favourite.

8/5/2016

Death of Sir Robert Deveraux

On the 25th of February 1601 Robert Devereux, second earl of Essex, was executed for treason. He was a soldier and politician and one of Queen Elizabeth I's favourites. This made no difference to the queen when it came to signing his death warrant, she showed no regret in executing Essex like she had fourteen years earlier with the execution of her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.

Elizabeth knew Essex very well, at the peak of their friendship she had lavished gifts and lands on him for he appealed to
her flirtatious nature. He could be charming, he was handsome and intelligent and in 1586 he had been the queens constant companion, so much so that one of his servants is said to have remarked

"my lord is at cardes or one game or another with her, that he commeth not to his owne lodginge tyll the birdes
singe in the morninge"

But there was another side to Essex, he could be argumentative, moody, difficult and very impulsive. It was this last fault that lead, eventually, to his death. Being the queens favourite had caused divisions, some courtiers gathered under Robert Cecil and others under Devereux. Elizabeth tried hard to calm the tension within her court but Essex was all prestige and glory, charging around the court full of self importance. He had returned from Ireland without permission and later bust into the queens bedchamber whilst she was dressing and at one time, during an argument, drawn his sword on her. His arrogance caused him to take no advice from his friends, he overstepped the mark once to often.

Devereux was interrogated in the Tower of London and then confined elsewhere. It was during this confinement that his
ideas of a 'military coup' were probably planned. He later put his plans into action leading over two hundred soldiers through London. He was captured and interrogated again but this time his crimes brought him into the courtroom at Westminster Hall on the 19th February. He was accused of high treason, found guilty and sentenced to death, his death warrant signed the next day.

Four days later the Earl of Essex, climbed the scaffold and famously said:

“My sins are more in number than the hairs on my head. I have bestowed my youth in wantonness, lust and uncleanness;
I have been puffed up with pride, vanity and love of this wicked world’s pleasures. For all which, I humbly beseech my Saviour Christ to be a mediator to the eternal Majesty for my pardon, especially for this my last sin, this great, this bloody, this crying, this infectious sin, whereby so many for love of me have been drawn to offend God, to offend their sovereign, to offend the world. I beseech God to forgive it us, and to forgive it me – most wretched of all.”

In the courtyard of Tower Green, only a small gathering watched as Essex's head was separated from his body.

He was later buried at the chapel of St Peter ad Vincula.

Thomas of Lancaster

22/3/2016

Executed this day in 1322.

"And now I shall tell you of the noble Earl Thomas of Lancaster. When he was taken and brought to York, many of the city were full glad, and upon him cried with high voice "Ah, Sir Traitor! Now shall you have the reward that long time you have deserved!"

It was in 1322 at Pontefract Castle, King Edward I's ‘key to the north’ that Thomas of Lancaster finally received his 'reward.'

Lancaster had been a supporter of Edward II, but like many within the realm he was angered by the kings reliance on his favourites, namely Piers Gaveston. Lancaster was among a number of men who were intent of seeing off Gaveston, they succeeded in 1312, when he was executed near Kenilworth in Warwickshire, on land belonging to Lancaster. Gaveston's death is thought to be at the top of the list of reasons as to why Lancaster was executed.

Thomas of Lancaster would not be the last to meet his death because he was prepared to stand up to a monarch who was influenced by others, Richard Fitz Alan, one of the founding members of the Lords Appellant was executed in 1397 for standing up to Richard II and Richard Duke of York's revenge death in 1460 is another example.

Lancaster has been called a

"coarse, selfish and violent man, without any of the attributes of a statesman."

However, history it is said, is written by the victors, we can only wonder what would have been written of them if they had succeeded.