In a first report after the Battle of Boworth, Francis Lovell and John de la Pole were erroneously named among the dead. At least for the latter, this was almost certainly a political move, to prevent anyone from immediately rallying behind Richard`s heir, who with his death was de jure king, and throw all of Henry Tudor`s enemies into confusion. In reality, John was not only not dead, he was not present at the battle.
There is less certainty about why Francis was named as dead.That it had a political motive is contradicted by Francis`s inclusion as alive in William Catesby`s will, made shortly before his execution three days after the battle. There was no attempt made to censor this will or not have its contents known to those who could be potential enemies. This suggests that Francis being named dead was an honest mistake, and seems to confirm that despite speculation to the contrary, he did fight at Bosworth. That is also supported by the suggestion that Francis arrived at St.John`s Abbey in Colchester, where he was to stay in sanctuary for the next months, together with Humphrey and Thomas Stafford, who definitely were at the battle.
In that case, Francis`s survival is notable, as it seems to indicate that he did not ride alongside Richard during his last charge, as those known to have done, like his secretary John Kendall and his comptroller Robert Percy, all died with him. Even had Francis managed to avoid that fate, he would have found himself surrounded by enemy fighters and been almost certainly been taken prisoner. He was the only man of those close to Richard who were present and yet did not join his last charge. Either this was because he had been seperated from Richard earlier and was physically incapable of joining him, or it was a last gesture of affection from Richard towards his friend, trying to make sure that even if his charge failed and he died, Francis would live.
A last gesture of affection shortly before Richard`s death, which is unconfirmed and which we are unlikely to ever learn for a fact, but which would fit very well into the relationship the two men enjoyed, which was clearly marked by mutual love and trust.
The greatest, most obvious sign of this is, naturally, Francis`s steadfast refusal to stop trying to avenge Richard after his death. Instead of trying to make peace with Henry VII or even taking the pardon offered to him by the new king, as noted by Anne Sutton and Livia Visser-Fuchs, Francis chose to rather be attainted than break his loyalty to Richard. He then was involved in staging two rebellions, the first one in 1486 without even a rival claimant to the throne, and one assassination attempt, until he vanished and probably died after the Battle of Stoke in 1487.
While it is hard to top such a display of loyalty and affection, there were other signs of such. Notably, Richard almost certainly used his influence with his brother Edward IV to see Francis elevated to viscouncy. The only other option is particularly distinguished service during the
fighting against the Scots in the years from 1480-2, which Richard of Gloucester
was praised for in Parliament that year. However, since many men of
higher birth, such as the king`s cousin (and Francis`s brother-in-law)
were equally present during the fighting, it seems that either Francis
did something particularly remarkable, which is possible but for which
no evidence exists, or that it was indeed Richard who was responsible for this. This is especially interesting as it was a signal honour, bestowed on only one other man during Edward`s reign.
Richard also saw to it Francis was given a position of honour in his coronation procession, among men of much higher standing, such as the Duke of Suffolk, his son the Earl of Lincoln, the Duke of Norfolk and his son, the Earl of Surrey. As Anne Sutton and P.W.Hammond note in their book
“The Coronation of Richard III: The Extant Documents”, he was the only one in Richard`s immediate train to have been given his role - as bearer of the "third sword" - not for any political reason, but for personal affection. They also note that his place should have been in the queen`s train but this was explicitly changed for him, for no other obvious reason than Richard wishing to honour him.
Richard also chose him, probably in his position as lord chamberlain which gave him control over Richard`s money, to purchase the ring needed for the coronation of his wife, Queen Anne. While the task in itself was nothing very out of the ordinary, it is notable that, as mentioned in the above-named book, there is an indication Richard wished it to be especially stressed the ring had been purchased by Francis and even personally wrote a note about it.
Francis continued to be favoured and placed in positions of trust by Richard all during Richard`s reign. Not only did Richard make him lord chamberlain - the same post William Hastings had held under Edward IV - which was a job neccessitating, as Charles Ross states, close personal contact on a daily basis with the king, he also gave him military jobs during both the Buckingham rebellion and the Tudor invasion. During the latter, he was to guard the coast ast Southhampton, which he did but which sadly failed to stop the invasion as Henry Tudor was tipped off.
Richard even continued the signs of personal favour for Francis for no political reason during his reign, such as he did when he chose to stay in Francis`s ancestral home of Minster Lovell Hall during his 1483 progress, making it the only personal home of a courtier he stayed in. This was despite the fact that the manor did not have a place of strategic importance from where he could have easily ridden out to larger cities. Richard stayed there as Francis`s guest for four days, according to John Ashdown-Hill, which was longer than he stayed in most cities he visited on that progress.
Naturally, less survives about their relationship before Richard became king, when they were less in the limelight, but even so we have evidence as to their close relationship. When Richard knighted Francis in 1481 - coincidentally, on the 22nd August - he then gave him special permission to knight to other men himself. At least one of those - Richard Ratcliffe - had at that point a known connection with Richard but not Francis, which suggests that allowing Francis to knight him was a special honour to please a friend, not done out of a wish to acknowledge the bond between Francis and Richard Ratcliffe.
Since Francis`s whereabouts in the 1470s are largely unknown, we sadly cannot say when the friendship of the two men started, if it was during childhhod/adolescence as is often assumed or later, but from 1480, when Francis, then 24, starts turning up in more sources than before, it can be assumed that they were close, as almost every time Francis`s whereabouts are known, he was with Richard.
Sadly, we cannot know what it was that made them become so close. It can be speculated that it were shared interests, for we do know that both men enjoyed hunting and Francis, like Richard, appears to have been very pious and have had an interest in scholarship - Francis sponsored a scholar at Magdalen College, among other things - but it can no longer be said with any certainty.
It can be said, however, that clearly the two men enjoyed a very close and loving friendship
No comments:
Post a Comment