I am reminded by reading this post of your Epilogue in “The Eagle and the Hart” of the comparison between the disturbance of the grave of Henry IV at Canterbury vs the that of Richard II at Westminster. I won’t spoil that Epilogue for those that have not read your wonderful history (which I highly recommend and is also why I subscribed to this newsletter). The desecration of Richard II’s tomb seems to me to owe more homage to Aristophanes than Homer. Just sayin’. 😝
Good point well put! And thank you very much for the extremely kind words. I have royal tomb-openings on the list for future post(s) - there are so many bizarre details and good stories...
The 'tomb talk' has made me think about Richard's re-burial by Henry V, and their relationship, which seems to have been more amicable than the one Richard ever shared with Henry Bolingbroke. Although the younger Henry was effectively Richard's hostage for his father's good behaviour when the king travelled to Ireland, Richard seems to have treated him well and, maybe surprisingly, did not execute him when he heard about his father's rebellion.(Of course Henry Bolingbroke had other sons, and may have been closer to his second son Thomas than his heir?).
Once Henry V succeeded to the throne he was also keen, early in his reign, to re-bury Richard in the tomb at Westminster that Richard had had created for himself. Maybe this was because Richard had treated him with kindness, maybe because, as a conventionally pious man himself, and a witness to his father's debilitating illnesses,Henry saw them as punishment for Henry IV's usurpation and regicide, and by burying Richard as he had wished hoped to atone in some way for his father and their dynasty? Maybe a bit of both.
Frighteningly revealing post on Richard's character,l,Helen.
I think the king's letter to Albert of Bavaria in particular is extraordinary both in it's delusion, and in it's vindictiveness towards the nobles Richard saw as his enemies, to the extent where their heirs were also expected to suffer for their crimes.
Richard must have been a truly frightening character as someone with not only the will but the power to cause his subjects substabtial harm.
I remember visiting that tomb and wanting to fall into the black hole of backstory it surely had! I remember how a postcard from that visit survived many purges because, unlike many cards, its hold on me had not let go. 27 years later, I thank you for filling in the blank.
For over 2 years, I have been trying to persuade anyone who will listen that there is an oubliette hidden in the bailey at Pontefract Castle. I have several witnesses, including an employee at the Duchy of Lancaster, so that clinches it, I think. Searching for the overgrown trapdoor is taking a strange amount of time. However, I found a YouTube video about excavating the drawbridge pit there and I believe it ties in very well with actual events and could reveal what actually happened to Richard in the last few days of his life.
Timeline for the creation of an oubliette at Pontefract Castle.
King Richard II was deposed in October 1399, and the Epiphany Rising against
King Henry IV took place on 6 Jan 1400.
The threat of future trouble made it urgent to remove him; he had to die in
a way that appeared natural.
Masons were already on site there where a drawbridge pit was being dug.
Artefacts found reveal that it dates from the end of the 14 century.
As the drawbridge pit was to be about 21 feet deep, there was a danger that
if it encountered unstable material, it could cave in. So it made sense to
first order enough stone blocks to quickly line the walls to prevent this.
As the masons were already on site, and time was a factor, it may be that it
was decided to dig an oubliette and use the stone blocks to line its walls.
The unusual wooden steps may also be a pointer to the haste which was needed
to forestall another rebellion; might it have been much quicker, and cheaper,
to use wood rather than fashion stone steps? Or perhaps timber already on site
was diverted to make the steps?
Richard was moved to Pontefract Castle where he died around 14 February 1400,
only 5 weeks after the Epiphany Rising.
If this theory is correct, the masons' marks on the stone blocks used in the
drawbridge pit should match those in the oubliette, dating it to about the
right time.
I believe this is a credible timeline and hope that the oubliette will be opened
again and masons' marks compared with those found in the drawbridge pit to confirm this.
Thank you Helen for this post, it is most interesting indeed and as you suggest the evidence of the two letters that you have unearthed certainly brings much needed light on the subject and pretty well puts a date on the epitaph and also leaves very little doubt in ones mind as to whom the said comments relate to.
i must admit that I personally have a more sympathetic view on Richard ii and his views and actions he took regarding the appellants, well the 2 main protagonists Gloucester and Arundel who seemed to thought that renewing the war with France was the right thing to do I am sure at that time moment in time to restart the war with France would have had disastrous results for England plus to be fair England could not possibly afford without imposing heavy taxes on the population. Another point worth considering is when The lords Appellants carried out their actions Richard was barely 20 and i might be wrong, but he had not even reached his majority to rule, because of their actions Richard lost most if not all of his advisors, that had been put into place to help him rule in his early years, most of them were executed or exiled and most were seen as Richards close friends. I have read several times that Thomas of Woodstock (Gloucester) even wanted to depose Richard at that time but the Earl of Derby ( Bolingbroke) advised strongly against it.
My thoughts and opinions regarding Richard aside, thank you once again for your most interesting and thought provoking post the 2 letters were indeed most enlightening and showed a rare glimpse into the mind of a medieval monarch .
Dear Helen,
I am reminded by reading this post of your Epilogue in “The Eagle and the Hart” of the comparison between the disturbance of the grave of Henry IV at Canterbury vs the that of Richard II at Westminster. I won’t spoil that Epilogue for those that have not read your wonderful history (which I highly recommend and is also why I subscribed to this newsletter). The desecration of Richard II’s tomb seems to me to owe more homage to Aristophanes than Homer. Just sayin’. 😝
Good point well put! And thank you very much for the extremely kind words. I have royal tomb-openings on the list for future post(s) - there are so many bizarre details and good stories...
That’s why I like your newsletter and also, your friend Dan Jones’. You offer good anecdotes and also explain why Medieval history resonates today. 👍
The 'tomb talk' has made me think about Richard's re-burial by Henry V, and their relationship, which seems to have been more amicable than the one Richard ever shared with Henry Bolingbroke. Although the younger Henry was effectively Richard's hostage for his father's good behaviour when the king travelled to Ireland, Richard seems to have treated him well and, maybe surprisingly, did not execute him when he heard about his father's rebellion.(Of course Henry Bolingbroke had other sons, and may have been closer to his second son Thomas than his heir?).
Once Henry V succeeded to the throne he was also keen, early in his reign, to re-bury Richard in the tomb at Westminster that Richard had had created for himself. Maybe this was because Richard had treated him with kindness, maybe because, as a conventionally pious man himself, and a witness to his father's debilitating illnesses,Henry saw them as punishment for Henry IV's usurpation and regicide, and by burying Richard as he had wished hoped to atone in some way for his father and their dynasty? Maybe a bit of both.
And to position himself as rightful heir to both, I suspect... Both/and/and!
wonderful, thank you.
Frighteningly revealing post on Richard's character,l,Helen.
I think the king's letter to Albert of Bavaria in particular is extraordinary both in it's delusion, and in it's vindictiveness towards the nobles Richard saw as his enemies, to the extent where their heirs were also expected to suffer for their crimes.
Richard must have been a truly frightening character as someone with not only the will but the power to cause his subjects substabtial harm.
I remember visiting that tomb and wanting to fall into the black hole of backstory it surely had! I remember how a postcard from that visit survived many purges because, unlike many cards, its hold on me had not let go. 27 years later, I thank you for filling in the blank.
For over 2 years, I have been trying to persuade anyone who will listen that there is an oubliette hidden in the bailey at Pontefract Castle. I have several witnesses, including an employee at the Duchy of Lancaster, so that clinches it, I think. Searching for the overgrown trapdoor is taking a strange amount of time. However, I found a YouTube video about excavating the drawbridge pit there and I believe it ties in very well with actual events and could reveal what actually happened to Richard in the last few days of his life.
Timeline for the creation of an oubliette at Pontefract Castle.
King Richard II was deposed in October 1399, and the Epiphany Rising against
King Henry IV took place on 6 Jan 1400.
The threat of future trouble made it urgent to remove him; he had to die in
a way that appeared natural.
Masons were already on site there where a drawbridge pit was being dug.
Artefacts found reveal that it dates from the end of the 14 century.
As the drawbridge pit was to be about 21 feet deep, there was a danger that
if it encountered unstable material, it could cave in. So it made sense to
first order enough stone blocks to quickly line the walls to prevent this.
As the masons were already on site, and time was a factor, it may be that it
was decided to dig an oubliette and use the stone blocks to line its walls.
The unusual wooden steps may also be a pointer to the haste which was needed
to forestall another rebellion; might it have been much quicker, and cheaper,
to use wood rather than fashion stone steps? Or perhaps timber already on site
was diverted to make the steps?
Richard was moved to Pontefract Castle where he died around 14 February 1400,
only 5 weeks after the Epiphany Rising.
If this theory is correct, the masons' marks on the stone blocks used in the
drawbridge pit should match those in the oubliette, dating it to about the
right time.
I believe this is a credible timeline and hope that the oubliette will be opened
again and masons' marks compared with those found in the drawbridge pit to confirm this.
Thank you Helen for this post, it is most interesting indeed and as you suggest the evidence of the two letters that you have unearthed certainly brings much needed light on the subject and pretty well puts a date on the epitaph and also leaves very little doubt in ones mind as to whom the said comments relate to.
i must admit that I personally have a more sympathetic view on Richard ii and his views and actions he took regarding the appellants, well the 2 main protagonists Gloucester and Arundel who seemed to thought that renewing the war with France was the right thing to do I am sure at that time moment in time to restart the war with France would have had disastrous results for England plus to be fair England could not possibly afford without imposing heavy taxes on the population. Another point worth considering is when The lords Appellants carried out their actions Richard was barely 20 and i might be wrong, but he had not even reached his majority to rule, because of their actions Richard lost most if not all of his advisors, that had been put into place to help him rule in his early years, most of them were executed or exiled and most were seen as Richards close friends. I have read several times that Thomas of Woodstock (Gloucester) even wanted to depose Richard at that time but the Earl of Derby ( Bolingbroke) advised strongly against it.
My thoughts and opinions regarding Richard aside, thank you once again for your most interesting and thought provoking post the 2 letters were indeed most enlightening and showed a rare glimpse into the mind of a medieval monarch .