Gairdner J. History of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third: To which is Added the Story of Perkin Warbeck from Original Documents

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

33O PERKIN WARBECK.

souvenir, quand je parti de vous avec Berlo

pour aller en Anvers,

vous me deistes adieu en plorant, et mon pere me convoia jusques

a la porte de Marvis; et aussi de la derniere lettre que me

escripvistes de vostre main a Medelbourcq que vous estiez ac-

couchie'e de une fille, et que pareillement mon frere Thiroyan et ma

soeur Jehenne moururent de la peste a la procession de Tournay;

et comment mon pere, vous et moi allasmes demeurer a Lannoy

hors de la ville; et vous souvienne de la belle Porcquiere. Le Roi

d'Engleterre me tient maintenant en ses mains; auquel je ay

declare' la ve'rite' de la matiere, en lui suppliant tres humblement

que son plaisir soit moi pardonner le offense que lui ai faicte,

entendu que je ne sui poinct son subject

natif,

et ce que je ai faict

a este" au pourchas et de'sir de ses propres subjectz. Mais je ne ai

de lui encores heu aucune bonne response, ne ay espoir de avoir,

dont je ai le coer bien dolant. Et pourtant, ma mere, je vous prie

et requier de avoir pits' de moy, et pourchasser ma delivrance. Et

me recommandez humblement a mon parin Pierart Flan, a Maistre

Jean Stalin, mon oncle, a. mon compere Guillaume Rucq, et a

Jehan Bourdeau. Je entends que mon pere est alle" de vie a

trespas (Dieu ait son ame!), qui me sont dures nouvelles. Et a

Dieu soyez. Escrips a Excestre, le

xiij'

jour de Octobre de la

main de vostre humble filz,

'PlERREQUIN WERBECQUE.

' Ma mere, je vous prie que me voelliez envoier un petit de

argent pour moi aidier, afin que mes gardes me soient plus

amiables en leur donnant quelque chose. Recommandez-moi a

ma tante Stalins, et a tous mes bons voisins.

'A Mademoiselle ma mere, Catherine

Werbecque, demourant a Saint

Jehan supz

1'Escauld.'

The original of this letter is not extant, but I imagine it

will hardly be called in question as a forgery. The mere fact

Compare the following passage in Warbeck's confession: 'And after

that I returned to Tournay by reason of the wars that were in Flanders.

And within a year following I was sent with a merchant of the said town of

Tournay named Berlo, and his master's name Alexander, to the mart

of Antwerp.'

HIS LETTER TO HIS MOTHER. 331

that two separate copies of it have long existed in two different

Flemish towns,

yet that it has never been used till now, either

for the purpose of romance or for the perversion of history, is

surely the most satisfactory evidence, that it was a genuine

letter of Perkin Warbeck sent to his mother immediately after

his capture. Indeed, the incidents of family history that the

writer recounts in order that his mother may be assured the

letter really comes from her sori, are a little too ingenious for

fabrication. And the close agreement of these in many points

with the confession is too remarkable to be overlooked. In

both we have his mother's Christian name given as Catherine;

in both we have an uncle named Jean Stalin. In both we

have the family connected with the parish of St John upon

the Scheld. The confession mentions a grandmother, who

married one Peter Flamme, and the letter mentions one

Pierart Flan as the writer's godfather. The confession men-

tions a merchant of Tournay named Berlo, who took him

from Tournay to Antwerp; the letter recalls the very same

fact and mentions Berlo's name in the same way. The only

slight discrepancy between the two documents refers to

Warbeck's father, whom the confession, as I have already

pointed out, speaks of in the present tense, while the letter,

In the first edition of this book I unadvisedly spoke of these two

copies as having been preserved 'in the archives of two different Flemish

towns,' whereas they are both in private collections. The inaccuracy

led one of my reviewers to question the importance of this piece of

evidence, as the letter was written when Warbeck was a prisoner in

Henry's power, and it might be supposed that it was drawn up under

dictation for the express purpose of being communicated to the authorities

of the different towns in the Low Countries. Even if this had been the

case,

it seems to me in no degree to weaken the evidence as to the truth of

the facts, of which the authorities at Tournay at least must have been very

good judges. But in point of fact there is no ground for supposing that the

letter was ever used in such a fashion, or was anything but a private letter

from the pretender to his mother. Neither of the two copies, Mr Weale

tells me, is in a contemporary handwriting, but they agree exactly, except

that a passage in the Tournay MS. is omitted in the copy at Courtray.

332 PERKIN WARBECK.

which if genuine was written somewhat earlier, mentions the

news of his death. It is evident, however, that this was quite

recent intelligence and might have been a false report. In

all material respects it must be considered that this letter

corroborates the confession, and that the confession, in its

turn, is in itself no small evidence of the authenticity of the

letter.

The imposture was now at an end. From Exeter Perkin

was brought up to London and paraded on horseback through

the streets. Hall tells us that people flocked to see him 'as

he were a monster, because he being an alien of no ability by

his poor parents (although it was otherwise talked and dissimu-

lated),

durst once invade so noble a realm.' Another chronicler,

who evidently wrote at the very time, says he was conveyed

about the city and Westminster 'with many a curse and

wondering enough." But if little sympathy was shown by

the people, he was not treated with extreme severity by the

king. He was kept in the king's court, and no restraint seems

to have been put upon his liberty beyond the fact of keepers

being appointed to watch him. Next year, however, on the

9th June

he managed to escape, and fled by night, but got no

further than Sheen, where he put himself under the protection

of the prior, and implored his intercession with the king.

He was again brought to London, and even yet his life was

spared for a time. The punishment he was made to undergo

was only a public repetition of

his

confession and a more rigorous

confinement afterwards. On the 15th June, the Friday after

his capture, a scaffolding was reared on barrels in Westminster

Palace, on which Perkin was placed in the stocks for a good

part of the forenoon

. On Monday next he was exhibited on

MS. Cott. Vitellius, A. xvi., f. 171.

Fabyan.

Hall says he was set in the stocks 'before the door of Westminster

Hall, and there stood an whole day.' But the strictly contemporaneous

chronicle in the Cottonian MS. is probably more accurate.

END OF THE STORY. 333

another scaffold in Cheapside from ten in the morning till three

in the afternoon, after which he was conveyed to the Tower

and imprisoned there in a place where he could see neither

sun nor moon. One day, however, he was sent for and brought

to the king's presence. Archduke Philip's Ambassador, Henry

de Berghes, Bishop of Cambray, had expressed a desire to see

him, having formerly had to do with him in the Low Countries.

Perkin was asked in his presence why he had deceived the

Archduke and the whole country. He solemnly swore in

reply that the Duchess Margaret knew just as well as himself

that he was not King Edward's son. The king then told the

Bishop of Cambray that Perkin had deceived the Pope, the

King of France, the Archduke, the King of the Romans, the

King of Scotland, and almost all the princes of Christendom

except the Spanish Sovereigns, whose Ambassador, De Puebla,

was present at this interview

. 'Deceived,' of course, was

polite diplomatic language, the statement only meaning that

all those sovereigns had at one time or another countenanced

his pretensions; but how far they were really deceived is a

matter of speculation. Henry's friendship, however, was now

more valuable abroad; and even his old ' Juno,' the Duchess

Margaret of Burgundy, was compelled to write to him and ask

his pardon for her past intrigues".

After his escape and recapture more than a year elapsed

before he was brought to trial, 16th Nov. 1499, for trying to

escape from the Tower by corrupting his keepers. Hitherto

the king had spared him contemptuously; but this time, as

there is too much reason to believe, an opportunity was

purposely afforded him to plot for his liberty again in concert

with the unfortunate Earl of Warwick, confined in a neighbour-

ing apartment of the same prison. It was Warwick who had

been all along the real source of danger to the king, and

Warbeck was now used as an instrument in Warwick's

Bergenroth, 185-6.

lb., 196.

334 PERKIN WARBECK.

destruction, being involved along with him in an alleged plot

to seize the Tower. Thus did 'this winding ivy of a

Plantagenet kill the true tree

itself

On the 23rd Nov.

Perkin and his friend John a Water or Walters, mayor of

Cork (for he had been elected mayor again that year), were

hanged at Tyburn. Both of them confessed their offences

before they suffered and asked the king's forgiveness.

Postscript.—Besides being indebted to Mr Weale for the

very important letter of Perkin Warbeck to his mother, printed

in the foregoing pages, I am also enabled by his kindness

to print the following notices of Warbeck's family which

he has transcribed from the records of the town-of Tournay :—

Registres des Reliefs et A chats de Bourgeoisie, Tournay

(Archives de Lettres).

1459 (1460, n. St.). 9 Feb. Pierart Flan, pireman, fils de feu

Pierart, natif de Conde.

1459.

9 Feb. Pierart Faron, piereman et cureur de toilles, fils de

feu Regnault.

1474.

11 May. Jehan de Werbecque, pireman, fils de feu Diericq

de Werbecque, a

releve"

sa bourgeoisie comme fil de bourgois

n€ en bourgoisie, et en a fait le serment en tel cas introduit.

Registre de la lot de la ville de Tournai.

1475,

12 Fevrier (1476, n. St.).

Jehan Werbeque, pireman, Coulongne.

Noel Werbeque, wantier, Rouen.

Tout a la ville, le dit Jehan, tarit pour avoir feru du poing

Bernard du Havron, que depuis avec ledit Noel et autres

fait astives de ferir dun hef icellui Bernard du Havron et

autres ; et ledit Noel pour avoir, avec ledit Jehan son frere

et autrez, feru dune espee apres icellui Bernard et autres.

Pronuncie* ledit xii jour de Fevrier.

Bacon's Henry VII.

TOURNAY RECORDS. 335

Pierart Flan \ tout piremans, chascuns c.s., estassavoir

Bernard du Havron

le dit Flan pour astives par lui faictes

Oudart du Havron J de ferir dun vouge ledit Bernard du

Havron et autry, et lesdits Bernard et Oudart du Havron

pour aucunes astives par eulx faictes de injurier Noel

Werbeque et autrez, et avec et par ledit Bernard feru du

poing Jehan Werbeque.

Publye" ledit v' jour de Fevrier mue ausdits du Havron,

estassavoir ledit Bernard a Siesse, et ledit Oudart a Bou-

longe, comme clers a la ville.

1475 (H76) 5 Fevrier.

It is curious to note in connection with the above extracts

a remark of Walpole's in a footnote to his Historic Doubts

(2nd ed. p. 94 note):

'If diligent search was to be made in the public offices and

convents of the Flemish towns in which the Duchess Margaret

resided, I should not despair of

new

lights being gained to that part

of our history.'

The new lights expected by Walpole were to vindicate the

truth of Warbeck's pretensions, and the Flemish towns which

he thought would yield them were those in which the Duchess

Margaret resided. But two Flemish towns in which she did

not reside contain evidences of an opposite tendency; and

of new evidence in the adventurer's favour there is absolutely

none.

APPENDIX.

NOTE

RICHARD'S

RELIGIOUS FOUNDATIONS AND

THE

DEATH OF

CLARENCE.

(See

page 37.)

LEGGE in The Unpopular King, vol. 1. p. 156, says that

Richard must have entertained these pious intentions ' before

the death or even the impeachment of Clarence, since they

received/$£

sanction

of Parliament' (the italics are Mr Legge's)

'on the 16th of January, 1478. The death of Clarence occurred

more than a month later.' Mr Legge is not very careful in the

use of his evidences. The Parliament only met on the 16th

January, 1478. The Commons elected their Speaker next day,

and the business of the session only commenced on Monday

the 19th. At what date the Parliament was dissolved does not

appear, and neither do I know positively on what precise day

it gave its sanction to Richard's projects—or rather (which is

a somewhat different thing) passed an Act to enable him more

easily to carry out

one

such project at a place nowhere named

in the Act (see Rotuli Parliamentorum vi. 172). But that one

project, being expressly stated to be for a college with a dean

338 APPENDIX.

and twelve priests, was distinctly the Barnard Castle project,

which clearly was somehow connected with the death of

Clarence, who had previously owned half the lordship.

Perhaps, from the place not being named, and also, perhaps,

from the fact that the Duke of Clarence is named in the

Act, we may infer that the Duke at that time was alive; but

assuredly the Act was not passed, as Mr Legge would have

us believe, a month before his death. Moreover if the Duke

was then alive, and if Richard had definitely fixed in his own

mind that the site of the college with the twelve priests was to

be Barnard Castle, the case looks rather worse than it did

before. For it would mean that he expected his brother's

death and made preparations beforehand to atone for it.

NOTE II.

UNPOPULARITY OF THE WOODVILLES.

(See

page 44.)

I have met with a very curious evidence of the unpopularity

of the queen's relations at the very end of Edward IV.'s reign,

in a MS. volume in the Public Record Office, bearing the press

maik 'Augmentation, No. 486/ In it are contained a number

of papers relating to the Earl of Rivers and the Marquis of

Dorset, among which are no less than four copies of the

document which follows. This, it will be observed, is a

recantation before a very full council, summoned by the

king, at Westminster, of certain calumnies which one John

Edward had propagated at Calais against those two noblemen

and Robert

Radclif.

What those calumnies were, and what

THE WOODVILLES. 339

semblance of probability they had, we do not know; but the

remarkable point is that in disowning them, John Edward

pleads, in his excuse, that he only uttered them for fear of

his life, apprehending that he would be put to the torture

in the town of Calais. Thus, unless we conceive the fact to

have been just the contrary—that is to say that the calumnies

were true and were only disowned through fear—we must

suppose that the Woodvilles were so exceedingly unpopular

that calumnies against them were welcome intelligence even

to the authorities of Calais at a time when Edward IV. was

still king.

' This is the confession of John Edward, at Westminster, made

the 8th day of August, the 22nd year of the reign of our sovereign

liege lord, King Edward the Fourth, in the presence of our said

sovereign lord, my Lord Chancellor, my Lord of Ely, my Lord of

Chichester, the Earls of Lincoln, Essex, and Kent, my Lord

Dacres, my Lord Ferrers, my Lord Gray Ruthyn, Sir Thomas

Burgh, knight, Sir Thomas Mountgomerey, Master Thwaytes,

Master Gunthorpe, Master Danet, the Pope's Collector, Master

Langton, Sir Laurence Raynford, Walter Hungerford, Thomas

Fenys, Aluet Malyvere, William Griffith, Master Daubeney, and

many other,—that all manner of confessions and depositions that

he hath made and said touching the Lord Marquis Dorset, the

Earl .Rivers, and Robert

Radclyf,

made and written at Calais

before the king's council there at divers days, as it appeareth by

the writing of the confession of the said John Edward more plainly

at large, is utterly false and untrue, as he hath openly knowledged

it in the said presence, and over that hath cried the said parties

mercy in the said presence, saying he did it of his own false

imagination for fear of his life and putting him in the brake at

Calais, In witness

whereof,

as well our said sovereign liege lord

as all other before written to this present bill have set their

sign-manuals the day and year above said at Westminster.'

22—2