Marriage and the Nevills - John Nevill and Isobel Ingoldisthorpe

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

Due to a surprising number of people finding there way to the Feast by googling Isobel Ingoldisthorpe (and finding nothing but two fleeting references) and also in order to avoid working on chapter 5, I've pushed this post up the list a bit.

There seems to be a fairly widespread consensus of opinion that John Nevill and his wife, Isobel Ingoldisthorpe, were fond of each other. I think this is based on two lone facts: in the thirteen or so years of their marriage they produced seven children, and despite Isobel's second marriage, she was buried with her first husband. That's a fairly reasonable interpretation and one I don't intend to argue with.  However, their marriage was based on practical, financial and political concerns as much as any other at the time amongst the nobility of England. The number of children born to the couple on its own isn't enough to base the argument on. If you factor in John's work and life in the north of England, a sensible conclusion which can be drawn is that, for a lot of that time, Isobel was with him, or living as close as it was safe for her and the children to be. One such place was Seaton Delaval, just north of Newcastle, about a day's ride from Alnwick castle. She wasn't only buried at Bisham but died there. As her second husband, William Norreys, was a local man, she was possibly living there for much of that marriage. I doubt if the decision to bury her with John was his.

At 26 or 27, John Nevill was quite old for a first marriage. I've mentioned before the difficulties the Salisburys seemed to have finding suitable partners for some of their children. After the three oldest children (Joan, Cecily and Richard) married well, the pool seems to have dried up somewhat. Isobel Ingoldisthorpe was the neice of John Tiptoft, earl of Worcester and, at the time of the marriage, a royal ward. Her father was recently deceased, but her mother lived until at least 1485. Isobel was born in Borough Green, Cambridgeshire and was 15 at the time of her first marriage.

John Nevill was required to pay queen Margaret 1,000 pounds in 10 installments for the marriage, subject to any future ruling that deemed payment unnecessary. This was despite Isobel having reached the majority age for women. Far from disapproving of the match, Margaret would have welcomed it as a way of keeping the Nevills loyal to Henry VI. Richard duke of York's marriage to Cecily Nevill was a good example of this practice. At the time, it was the Nevills whose loyalty was unquestioned and the young York who needed to be kept close to the throne. By the time John married, it was the Nevills' loyalty that needed to be secured. Isobel was an heiress of some note and a very suitable bride.  Eight manors were settled on them in jointure.

They were married on 25 April 1457 at Canterbury Cathedral. The Archbishop, Thomas Bourchier, officiated. The venue was probably chosen because John's brother, the earl of Warwick, was due to depart for Calais shortly thereafter with his wife and two young daughters. Who else might have been in attendance I'm not sure, but this would have been the last chance the family had to be together for some years to come. Though Arundel was a good three days' ride away, Joan countess of Arundel may have made the journey to her brother's wedding. Margaret and Katheryn were still living at home with their parents, so they too probably attended. Alianor, married to Thomas Stanley and probably living at Tatton Hall in Cheshire, may not have.

Far from the image of the hardbitten, career northerner and full-time soldier, John was involved in matters of high politics and state from time to time, including a role in an embassy appointed by the king to investigate breaches of the truce with Burgundy.

After Blore Heath, John was taken prisoner, along wth his brother Thomas, and held in Chester Castle. 

Marriage and the Nevills - Richard Nevill and Anne Beauchamp

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

Richard Nevill and Anne Beauchamp were betrothed in 1434 when he was 6 and she was 9. Two years later, in a double ceremony shared with her brother Henry and his sister Cecily, they were married. As brother- and sister-in-law had the same relationship in the eyes of the church as a brother and sister, a double wedding was the only way to get around the need for a dispensation, which was probably the main reason it took place when the pair were so young.

They didn't live in the same household, however, and as the marriage may well have been carried out by proxies, they might not even have met each other at this point.

On the death of their father, Henry Beauchamp became duke of Warwick. (The original rank was an earldom, and it was to this it reverted when Henry died, leaving his young daughter briefly his heir.) Cecily and Henry had one child, Anne, who died in 1449.

The elder Anne, as Henry's full sister, succeeded him, though her older half sisters disputed her claim for some years. Warwick, as much in an attempt to keep the earldom and the wealth of both the Beauchamps and the Despensers (Anne's mother's family) for himself as for the benefit of his wife, defended her claim with vigour and determination.

One of Anne's half sisters, Eleanor, was married to Edmund Beaufort duke of Somerset; another was married to the earl of Shrewsbury. This property dispute was the genesis of Warwick's long term quarrel with Somerset, which was something he shared with his uncle, Richard duke of York, and helped to bring them into alliance.

Young Warwick served, alongside his father the earl of Salisbury, in the west March towards Scotland and it was here, some time before 1450, that his illegitimate daughter Margaret was born, probably in or near Carlisle. Her mother is unknown. (I've worked out the latest likely year of Margaret's birth based on her marriage year of 1464, but she may have been born some time before this.)

On succeeding to the Warwick title, Richard and Anne took up residence in Warwick Castle. They owned a great deal of other property almost the length of England.

In September 1451, their daughter Isobel was born.

In 1455, after the first battle of St Albans, Warwick was named Captain of Calais. Unlike previous incumbents, he made the decision to take up residence there, his wife and infant daughter with him. This could be an indication that the couple were close, though a more cynical mind might suggest that Warwick was loathe to waste the countess's childbearing years. If that was the case, his confidence was misplaced, as he and Anne had only one more child, another daughter, named for her mother, in June 1456. An entry in the Warwick household accounts mentions a dispensation for the countess to have eggs during lent due to 'childbirth'. As the entry is dated neither 1451 nor 1456, she may well have had an unsuccessful pregnancy or a still birth at this time.

Isobel and Anne spent a good part of their childhoods in Calais, where they would have witnessed first hand the affect and benefit of their father's power and privilege. Popular fiction often portrays the sisters as quiet and timorous, foregrounding both their early deaths and the seemingly entrenched view that they were pawns in their father's game. The countess of Warwick is often similarly portrayed. I can't quite see this, myself. As daughters of the premier earl of England, who - through his wife - was also the richest man in England, they would have been very aware of their high status. Add to this the popularity their father enjoyed, his closeness to the duke of York and his own family's status, particularly in Yorkshire, and you get a very different picture of Isobel and Anne.

The sisters would have been brought up to know that they were destined to marry well. Perhaps their parents shared their choices with them, though Warwick was known to be a quick thinker on his feet and Anne's first marriage, to Edward Prince of Wales, was negotiated and concluded so quickly that there doesn't seem to have been much time for discussion.

At the end of 1460, the Nevills suffered great loss with the deaths of Salisbury, York, Thomas Nevill, Edmund earl of Rutland and Katheryn's young husband William Bonville at the battle of Wakefield. Shortly after that, Warwick suffered defeat at the second battle of St Albans, though Margaret of Anjou didn't take advantage of her victory and Warwick was able to secure London. When news came of Edward's (duke of York since his father's death) victory at Mortimer's Cross, Warwick and his brother George, archbishop of York and chancellor of England, began to consider promoting Edward as the next king. George delivered a sermon at Paul's Cross, the subject of which was Edward's right to the crown. (I haven't accessed a copy of this sermon to date, but I am working on it.)

In the early years of the reign of Edward IV, Warwick spent a great deal of his time, along with his younger brother, John, in defending and liberating the northern castles of Alnwick, Dunstanburgh and Bamburgh. Based in Warkworth, Warwick made the long round trip each day to resupply the castles, which changed hands several times over the next few years. During this time, the countess and their children based themselves at Middleham castle.

Alice Montacute, countess of Salisbury, died in 1462. She was buried at Bisham, the Montacute family mausoleum, along with her husband and son, Thomas, whose bodies were moved from their burial place at Pontefract. The funeral was quite lavish, though somewhat hurriedly organised. Thomas's widow, Maud Stanhope (now remarried), didn't attend, nor did the countess of Warwick or her daughters. There may not have been sufficient time for them to get there.

From 1464, relations between Warwick and the king began to deteriorate, Warwick withdrew to his estates and the girls would have seen far more of their father than they were used to. The countess was nearing forty, and any hope of more children, and for Warwick more specifically a son, were fading. In a family where bastards were not just acknowledged but drawn fairly close (both Salisbury's and Fauconberg's Thomases lived and died for the family cause), even an illegitimate son would have been welcome, but Warwick's one slip had resulted in a daughter, Margaret.

Though there's no evidence of more direct political activity, during the years of Warwick's rebellion the countess remained very much by his side. She was there when her daughter, Isobel, married George duke of Clarence against his brother's wishes. (Though Edward does seem to have forgiven that fairly quickly. His mother was sent to Canterbury probably in an attempt to talk George out of it, but may well have actually attended the wedding.)

Warwick's attempted coup in 1469/70, with Clarence as his alternate king, failed and the family were forced to flee to Calais. Warwick collected his wife and daughters, Isobel now eighteen and heavily pregnant, from Warwick castle and they made for Sandwich. John Wenlock, long loyal to Warwick, refused him entry to Calais harbour and later sent him a secret message warning him away. Isobel, no doubt under extreme stress, gave birth on the ship. The child (who doesn't seem to have been given a name) didn't survive and was buried at sea. Some writers, misreading the sources, say that the child was a girl named Anne, but most agree that it was a little boy. Isobel and George's distress can only be imagined. The countess, known for her skills in childbirth, would have taken charge, thirteen year old Anne assisting as and when she could. This must have been a very bleak time for the family.

For Warwick however, 'bleak' was always a temporary state of affairs. Ditching the Clarence plan without a backward glance, he made his way to France and, through Louis XI, brokered a deal with Margaret of Anjou. He would back Henry VI's return to the English throne. In order to seal the deal, a marriage was arranged between his younger daughter, Anne, and Henry's son, Edward Prince of Wales. The countess and her daughters were guests of the queen of France while final preparations and plans were being laid.

Anne and Edward were married in December 1470. Margaret had stipulated that consummation of the marriage be delayed, but both Anne's parents would have stressed to her how much her future, as Edward's wife and potentially queen of England, rested on that event. Should Margaret's no doubt very real doubts as to Warwick's trustworthiness prove founded, the marriage would have been in real danger of annulment. I'd back the determination of a young woman against the resolve of a seventeen year old boy any day of the week, however closely watched they were.

Meanwhile, Warwick and Clarence had returned to England, freed Henry VI from his imprisonment and had him hastily crowned. Edward, caught between Warwick and his brother John, was forced to flee to Flanders with his brother, Richard duke of Gloucester, William Hastings and others.

Edward returned and made several attempts to bring an end to the situation, including offering one last chance of pardon to both Warwick and Clarence. Warwick refused, but in the end Clarence was worn down and returned to his brother's side. Warwick and Edward met in battle at Barnet in April 1471. Both Warwick and his brother John were killed. They were buried at Bisham.

On the day of the battle, the countess of Warwick landed at Sandwich. Upon hearing the news of her husband's death, and fearing for her own safety, she took to sanctuary.

Margaret and her forces, long delayed, were met at Tewkesbury by Edward, Gloucester and Hastings, fresh from their victory at Barnet. Here her son was killed, and all of Margaret's hopes were dashed. Anne, now a young widow, was sent to the custody of her sister, the duchess of Clarence. With the countess in parliament declared as good as dead, the Beauchamp, Nevill and Despenser fortunes were in the hands of the Clarences. Anne brokered a deal with the young duke of Gloucester, which resulted in their marriage and a good part of the disputed property in his hands.

Despite several attempts, the countess was not allowed to leave sanctuary. This had very little to do with any threat she might have posed to Edward's regime, and everything to do with his desire to see his brothers enriched.

The Gloucesters lived for some years at Middleham, the Clarences having control of Warwick castle. The countess was eventually allowed to leave sanctuary and live in the custody of her daughter Anne and her husband. Some writers have portrayed these years as difficult for her, others say she had her own household. Either way, she was forced to live on the generosity of a daughter and son-in-law who had conspired to impoverish her.

Isobel died in 1476, leaving behind two surviving children and a husband unhinged by grief.

When Gloucester took the throne in 1483, one of Warwick's greatest ambitions was achieved though, of course, he was not alive to enjoy it. Anne and Richard had one son, Edward, who died when he was around eleven. Anne herself died in 1485, Richard III dying in August that year at the battle of Bosworth.

Henry Tudor, now king, gave countess Anne an annuity and she lived more independently and comfortably for her remaining years. In 1487, the family's property was restored to her, though she immediately handed most of it back to the crown. She died in 1492 and was buried at Bisham.

If measured by the countess's movements, the Warwick marriage would seem to have been close. I am unsure whether her burial site was her choice or if the decision was made after her death. As she outlived both of her daughters, close family was not involved in the choice. Warwick, a man who promoted fidelity within marriage and chastity without, seems to have come to a decision at some point early in the couple's life together that he would follow his own dictum. Though with no son, and a bastard would surely have been acknowledged, he as always made the best of what he had and threw his energy behind promoting his daughters' fortunes and providing himself with the most promising and politically beneficial sons-in-law. Perhaps Anne believed the Warwick myth as much as her husband did. In which case, the news of his death at Barnet would have left her directionless and shell shocked. That she turned to neither of her daughters (or sons-in-law) for support and shelter may indicate that her dependence on Warwick was absolute.

Anne was born the youngest child of a rich and powerful man and, as such, could not have imagined the life that was ahead of her. Her marriage to young Richard Nevill in 1436 was a side show to the one that really mattered at the time - that of her brother to Richard's sister. No-one involved could have foreseen that the deaths of Henry Beauchamp and his daughter would throw this young couple into the spotlight.

Marriage and the Nevills - Katheryn Nevill and William Bonville

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

This ought to be a short one...

Katheryn Nevill's first marriage lasted barely two years. I haven't managed to find out a great deal about it, as her second marriage to William Hastings, seems to eclipse it in all the literature.

We do know that her husband, William Bonville (later lord Harrington on his grandfather's death) was born in Chewton Mendip in Somersetshire, that they were married in Salisbury and that their daughter, Cecily, was born at Shute Manor in Devon on 30 June 1460.

We also know when, how and where young William died, but of the marriage itself there is little mention.

Both Katheryn and William were born around 1442, so were 16 at the time of their marriage. William's father and grandfather (William lord Bonville) had a connection with the Nevills, supporting them and the duke of York during the first protectorate in 1454, more specifically during the rebellion of Henry Holland duke of Exeter. William sr, along with Thomas Stanley (Alianor Nevill's father-in-law) had been commissioned to help keep the peace in Lancashire and Yorkshire. Discussions regarding a marriage between young William and Salisbury's daughter may have begun around this time. The marriage itself, conducted in Salisbury, took place in 1458 (though some genealogies say 1457).

Also in 1458, William's maternal grandfather, lord Harrington, died and he inherited the title (his mother having died some time before this.)

The young couple then took up residence at Shute Barton. Here their daughter Cecily was born. (I have previously said that Katheryn was 16 when her daughter was born, but I didn't have my Simple Maths head on - she and William were both 18.) The property was part of young Cecily's inheritance and passed into the control of her husband (Thomas Grey) after their marriage. When her great-granddaughter, Lady Jane Grey, was executed in 1554, the property was given to the Poles, who still own it today.

William remained a loyal supporter of his father-in-law. In 1460, he and his father joined the duke of York at Sandal Castle. Captured after the battle of Wakefield, both Bonvilles were executed. (William's grandfather was later executed after the second battle of St Albans. This particular act has often been cited as an example of the cruelty of Margaret of Anjou, but I think that's more to do with the reason for the execution than the death itself. Bonville was guarding the captive Henry VI at the time, and was executed on Margaret's orders for allowing the king to be captured - by Margaret's forces. This sort of thinking was not uncommon at the time, but this particular example does seem to have touched a chord.)

Cecily Bonville was six months old when her father died.

Katheryn was only one of a number of widows after Wakefield. Her mother, Alice Montacute countess of Salisbury, her aunt, Cecily Nevill duchess of York, and her sister-in-law, Maud Stanhope, all lost their husbands on the same day. Alice and Cecily, from what I can work out, were in London at the time, Maud was at her home in Nottinghamshire and Cecily was probably at Shute Barton. It was an uncertain time for all of them, and rumours of the deaths of both Katheryn's brother, the earl of Warwick, and cousin Edward earl of March (later Edward IV) wouldn't have made things any easier. As we have no idea how Katheryn and William felt about each other, it is impossible to say whether deep personal grief added to this stress.

Katheryn later married William Hastings but that, as they say, is a whole nother story.

Marriage and the Nevills - Cecily Nevill and Richard Duke of York

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

There has been a great deal written about Cecily Nevill. Google her (with the inevitable final 'e') and you'll get nearly 98,000 results, most of them discussing her in relation to the men (husband, sons and brothers) in her life. She outlived all but one of her children, and spent thirty five years in widowhood. Two of her sons became kings of England, a granddaughter was queen, as she herself almost was.

Cecily was born on 3 May 1415 at Raby Castle in Yorskhire, the youngest of Ralph Nevill's 23 children (and the youngest of her mother, Joan Beaufort's 10). In 1424, she was betrothed to the young duke of York.

Richard duke of York, born 21 September 1411, was the only son of Richard earl of Cambridge and Anne Mortimer. He had an older sister, Isabel, who married Henry viscount Bourchier, and a half sister Alice from his father's second marriage to Matilda Clifford. Cambridge was executed in August 1415 when Richard was only four. Matilda wasn't even a year old.

York's wardship was given first to sir Robert Waterton, then sold in 1423 to Ralph Nevill, who died two years later, bequeathing the wardship to his widow. York was sent to the household  Henry Percy earl of Northumberland, soon to be Joan Beaufort's son-in-law through his marriage to her daughter Eleanor. He was knighted in 1426 and attended Henry VI's coronation in 1429, but very little else is known of him during these years. Sometime before October 1429, he and Cecily were married.

York was a very wealthy man and had property all over England, particularly in the north, as well as in Wales. The young married couple probably spent most of their time over the next decade living between Fotheringhay castle and Ludlow, though they would have visited many of their other properties from time to time.

On 10 August 1439, their oldest daughter Anne was born at Fotheringhay. Why there were ten childless years between their marriage and Anne's birth is a mystery. There may have been unrecorded miscarriages and stillbirths. Joan Beaufort, and her later daughter-in-law Alice Montacute, seems to have been careful not to expose her daughters to childbirth too early in their lives, but this can only go part way to explaining this decade long lack of children. As the Yorks eventually had 12 children between 1429 and 1455, if it was a case of non-specific infertility it righted itself with a vengeance. (I have found one source that names a daughter, Joan, born c1438 who didn't survive, but this is the only reference I've come across, and as I just jotted it down without noting where it came from, I can't share this with you - sorry. I don't know how much credence it might have, probably none.)

The marriage does seem to have been extraordinarily successful and companionable, and is frequently potrayed in fiction as particularly loving. (I am as guilty of that as the next person.) When York was sent to France as governor of Normandy in 1440, Cecily and their infant daughter accompanied him. This was to be a pattern throughout their married life. In Rouen, where they were based, four more children were born: Henry (who died in infancy), Edward, Edmund and Elizabeth. The scuttlebutt surrounding the conception, birth and christening of Edward are easily discounted, despite Tony Robinson's slick channel 4 documentary. (But I'm not going to get into that particular stoush here - suffice it to note the following points: York was not that far away from his wife at the time of Edward's conception - "five days" Robinson says, which would have had York travelling approx 10 miles a day; he was not the only tall blonde in the family; and they'd lost a son a little more than a year earlier - I'd be a bit gun shy and tempted to rush a christening under those circumstances as well. As a populiser of history, however, Robinson probably convinced a lot of people - 104,000 hits when I googled 'Tony Robinson Edward IV', - this is deeply depressing!)

I'm not going to go into great detail about York's time in France, as this is a post primarily about his marriage. I might do something more about his career at a later date. It should be noted, however, that it was from around this time that his difficulties with the Beaufort dukes of Somerset started.

The duke and duchess of York greeted and entertained Henry VI's young bride, Margaret of Anjou, in Rouen. For a time, it seems, the duchess of York and the young queen were on friendly terms. (For more, see Medieval Woman here.)

The Yorks returned from France in 1445 when his term as governor expired. He fully expected that his appointment would be renewed. To his disappointment and anger, the post was eventually given to the earl of Dorset in December 1446. Meanwhile, Cecily had spent her 35th birthday giving birth to a daughter, Margaret, again at Fotheringhay. (A son, William, was also born around this time.)

In 1447, York bought young Henry Holland's wardship and marriage from his father, John duke of Exeter, for 4,500m, of which only 1,500 were ever paid. Exeter died shortly after this, his son succeeding him. Anne was now duchess of Exeter. Also this year, York was appointed governor of Ireland for a period of ten years. It would be two years (and another child, John, who also died young) before the Yorks got there.

They set sail in May 1449, with four children in tow, the oldest 10 and the youngest just 3. I don't know if Henry Holland accompanied them. Cecily was pregnant again and gave birth to George on 21 October in Dublin. Governing Ireland was no easy task, as there were various warring factions to contend with, and York wasn't sent sufficient funds to do the job properly. (For a more detailed account of his time in Ireland than I can give here, you should read this post by Brian Wainwright at the Yorkist Age.) Rather than failing at his task, given the lack of funds, York returned to England in the autumn of 1450, without permission but with a view to remedying the situation.

It was around this time that York's career as opposition began to take off. In 1450, Jack Cade's rebellion was carried out largely in his name, though there is no suggestion that York was behind it. He does seem to have come to the realisation, however, that he had some popularity in England and was being seen as an alternative to the current government of Henry VI. The refrain that was to last until almost the end of York's life - complaints that his enemies were trying to have him accused of treason, and protestations of love for and loyalty to the king, had its genesis in this difficult time. Time and again, he went to the brink of open rebellion, only to pull back when given assurances that his loyalty was not in question.

In c1451, another child, Thomas, was born and died. The Yorks' home base at this time was Fotheringhay, where their remaining children were to be born, though while in London they stayed at Baynard's castle.

Meanwhile, York was stepping up his campaign against Edmund Beaufort, duke of Somerset, attempting several times to have him answer charges stemming from the loss of English territories in France.

Early in 1452, York attempted to gather a force and march on London, but, under the king's orders, the city resisted him. The two forces confronted each other at Dartford. The earls of Salisbury and Warwick (Cecily's brother and nephew), not yet associated with York as they would be later, were sent to negotiate. York presented his demands and his articles against Somerset and for a time believed he was going to get his wish. Instead, he was forced to make a public declaration of loyalty at St Paul's and Somerset kept his position as Henry's chief councillor.

There is a letter from Cecily to the queen from around this time (its dating is disputed), asking her to intercede with the king on her husband's behalf. I'll be blogging about that one a bit later.

Their last surviving child, Richard, was born on 2 October 1452 at Fotheringhay.

In April 1454, during the king's first bout of illness, York was appointed protector and defender of England, responsibly solely for matters of defence, both internal and external. Though he'd been out of favour and power since Dartford, he got the position for a number of reasons: he was a natural choice by virtue of his high rank; few of the other lords were prepared to take on the responsibility of government; even fewer wanted Somerset in the position; and, despite a possibly natural claim as queen and mother of the heir to the throne, Margaret of Anjou's bid for a regency was rejected, partly due to her sex, but also to the all encompassing nature of her proposal. York appointed Salisbury his chancellor, which surprised and shocked everyone, as the position had traditionally been filled by a high ranking lord spiritual.

Cecily joined her husband in London, and possibly travelled with him when he was summoned to a meeting with some of the council, though her main order of business at the time was attending the queen's churching. This was an occasion of high ceremony, and as duchess of York, Cecily took a prominent role. She carried the young prince's christening gown to the Abbey, where it was given as an offering. York, too, played a prominent role, though Margaret's churching was not recorded in the same rich detail that Elizabeth Wydeville's was some years later.

York achieved several things during his first protectorate, some of which had unfortunate repercussions. His dealings with the Nevill-Percy feud in the north of England will be dealt with in a later post. One of the more difficult things he faced was the attempted rebellion of his son-in-law, Henry Holland, duke of Exeter. Relations between York's daughter, Anne, and her husband were never good and would deteriorate to the point of separation and divorce. How on earth they managed to conceive a child, the lord only knows, though I doubt it was a happy experience for Anne, and probably not for Henry. As Exeter was hand and fist with the Percies during this time, I'm not going to go into any great detail here. The upshot was that, with the arrest of the Percy brothers, Thomas lord Egremont and Richard, the rebellion collapsed. Exeter returned to London and took sanctuary in Westminster and was later sent to imprisonment in Pontefract castle. He was later sent to Wallingford and, after the king's recovery, released.

York's other great triumph at this time, largely due to the work of John Mowbray, duke of Norfolk, was the arrest of Somerset. He was, however, never brought to trial. The reason York gave for this was that it was a full council that had charged him and it should be a full council that tried him. As council and parliament weren't well attended during the protectorate, this was a circumstance that never presented itself. York may well have been hesitant to take the matter any further, Somerset being out of the way in the Tower of London possibly enough to satisfy him, at least for a time.

Henry recovered over the new year period and York resigned the protectorate in January 1455, Salisbury resigned the chancellorship shortly afterwards.

The first battle of St Albans in May 1455 saw the triumph of York's party, now firmly including Salisbury and Warwick, less firmly viscount Bourchier and with the duke of Norfolk hovering around the edges. Somerset was killed, possibly by Warwick, and, coincidentally, so too were two of the Nevills' staunchest enemies - Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, and lord Clifford. Somerset and Northumberland were no doubt targetted, their deaths being closer to political assassinations than honest deaths in battle, though Clifford was probably a lucky accident.

York's second protectorate was very shortlived, and once again he lost political power and authority.

Cecily gave birth to a daughter, Ursula, in July 1455, though she didn't survive. The York's first grandchild, Anne Holland, was also born that year, though I can't find a more specific date.

Just when York's thoughts began to turn to kingship, as opposed to head of government, no-one knows. All of his actions before 1460 were taken in the name of the king and with assurances of loyalty. When the change came, it seemed both abrupt and inevitable. However, Cecily has been described as sitting almost as a queen, bestowing audiences and benevolences to all and sundry - very queenlike behaviour.

In 1459, York and his supporters met at Ludlow. Parliament ('the parliament of devils') had attainted a good many, including the countess of Salisbury, and once more York, Salisbury and Warwick were working to present themselves as loyal liegemen and natural holders of power. Popular mythology has Cecily and her younger children at Ludlow, left to the tender mercies of queen Margaret's army after the flight of the men. It's a pretty picture, brave duchess, her children pressing around her skirts, facing down the spite and cruelty of the she-wolf. I'm pretty sure she was actually in London at the time.

When the members of the Calais garrison deserted them on a promise of pardon - much to Warwick's anger and chagrin - the Yorkists had no choice but to flee. Warwick, Edward earl of March and Salisbury took to the channel and eventually Calais, while York and his son Edmund earl of Rutland crossed over to Ireland (possibly with the countess of Salisbury with them, who may have been at Ludlow). As York's ten year term as governor hadn't expired, Ireland was the safest and most logical place to go. He immediately started to take charge, appointing Edmund his chancellor, though there were probably others who did the actual work.

Cecily, along with the other wives (apart from Alice Montacute) was specifically excluded from the attainder, was granted an annuity and sent to live with her sister, Anne duchess of Buckingham. Anne was just a year older than Cecily and, though they had opposing political views, her 'captivity' doesn't seem to have been particularly onerous.

The Calais earls - Warwick, Salisbury and March - launched a successful invasion in June 1460, taking the time to collect the Cross of Canterbury along the way. While Salisbury held London, Warwick and March went north, fought and won the battle of Northampton and took the king back to London, essentially their prisoner. George Nevill, Warwick's youngest brother, was named chancellor and once again, the Yorkists were back in power.

York returned to England on 9 September and made a slow progress to London, gathering followers along the way. Cecily set out to meet him on 23 September, leaving her younger children in the care of their brother, Edward. Warwick met with York at Shrewsbury, where their next step was discussed. It was likely at this point that the plan was laid for York to claim and seize the throne. He rode into London in procession, his sword carried in front of him (by Cecily? I seem to recall this detail, but I can't retrieve it). He then went to Westminster and made his claim. It was not supported. Warwick had failed to get the archbishop of Canterbury (Thomas Bourchier) on side and without him the whole scheme was doomed. York, however, was not so quick to recognise this and it took some persuading, with a closed session with Thomas Nevill (and wouldn't I love to know what was said!) finally convincing the duke that the plan had to change.

He presented his credentials to parliament, who sent them to the king for his consideration. Henry essentially shuffled the whole mess back to the lords. York's claims were challenged one by one and adroitly answered.  I think this is another rich vein, so I'm going to defer further discussion here and flag it for the future. (Besides, I'm running out of space and my hands are getting tired.) In the end, it was decided that Henry would be king for life, but that York (or his heirs) would succeed him. The disinheritance of her son did nothing to endear Margaret of Anjou to the duke of York.

Christmas 1460 saw the Yorkist party split: York, Salisbury, Thomas Nevill and Rutland were at Sandal castle; Warwick was holding London and March was somewhere in Wales. Cecily and the children were in London. At Wakefield, York met his end, along with his son, brother-in-law and nephew. With Warwick's loss at the second battle of St Albans, it looked like the cause of York might well be lost.

Cecily sent her youngest sons, George and Richard, to Burgundy for their safety. Edward won the battle of Mortimer's Cross, Margaret of Anjou failed to capitalise on her victory at St Albans and Warwick was able to retake London. At a meeting at Baynard's castle, a decision was taken to declare young Edward king, which George Nevill did in a sermon at Paul's Cross. Edward and Warwick won a decisive victory at Towton and it looked, this time, like the cause of Lancaster was lost.

Cecily Nevill was now the mother of the king of England, rather than queen as she had surely hoped. She took over the queen's quarters at Westminster, refusing to move even when Edward married Elizabeth Wydeville four years later. She redesigned her personal arms to include the arms of England, reflecting her view that her husband had been rightfully king.

During Warwick's years of rebellion, Cecily attempted to make peace between the parties, succeeding in the end in helping bring her son George (by now Warwick's son-in-law) back into the fold. Edward had originally refused to allow George to marry Warwick's daughter, Isobel, and Cecily was sent to Canterbury in a last ditch attempt to stop it, though she may well have been at the wedding itself (begun in England and finalised in Calais).

After Edward's death in 1483, Cecily actively supported her youngest son Richard's claim to the throne. At this time, suggestions of Edward's bastardy came once more to the fore (Warwick having attempted that line earlier when he was considering George as England's next king), and there is some suggestion that Cecily herself colluded with this. Whatever the truth of that, and whatever her motives, Cecily had a decided reluctance to support her grandson's right to the throne.

After Richard III's death at Bosworth, Cecily went into retirement at Bermondsey Abbey where she led a quasi religious life. She did, however, continue from time to time to dabble in politics, plotting against Henry Tudor and joining her daughter, Margaret duchess of Burgundy, in support of anyone who would (or could) challenge him.

Cecily died on 31 May 1495, barely a month after her 80th birthday. Of her children, only Elizabeth duchess of Suffolk survived her. She was buried with her husband and son, Edmund, at Forheringhay.

Marriage and the Nevills - Richard Nevill and Alice Montacute

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

In 1420, Richard Nevill, oldest son of the earl of Westmorland and Joan Beaufort, married Alice Montacute, only child of the earl and countess of Salisbury. He was either 20 or 21 and she was 14. This was only one of a string of fortuitous marriages contracted for their children by Ralph Nevill and his second wife. (He had a number of children with his first wife, but as they are the Wrong Nevills, they're probably not going to loom very large in my consciousness.) Anne married Humphrey Stafford, duke of Buckingham, Eleanor married Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, William married Joan Fauconberg and Cecily married Richard duke of York.

Between c 1423 and c 1444 Richard and Alice had 10 surviving children, four sons and six daughters. There is some speculation that their daughter Cecily and oldest son Richard may have been twins. There also might have been twins in the bottleneck between 1428 and 1431 when Thomas, Alice (later Fitzhugh) and John were born, but none of this is recorded.

Alice's father, Thomas Montacute, died in 1428 and she inherited his title, which her husband held in her right. She inherited estates in Berkshire, Wiltshire and Hampshire, and at Bisham, site of the Montacute, and later Nevill, family mausoleum.

The earl of Salisbury had one acknowledged illegitimate son, Thomas, who may have been born prior to or in the early years of their marriage. There is no basis for this suggestion except that he was the only bastard Salisbury acknowledged and that he was at least as old as their oldest legitimate son, Richard earl of Warwick. He seems to have been under Warwick's command, certainly after their father's death, and was killed at the battle of Ferrybridge in 1461. Just one more in the long list of Nevills killed in or in the immediate aftermath of battle.

The Salisbury's first child (probably Joan, though some sources say Cecily) was born c 1423 when Richard was 23 and Alice was 17. They would have been 44 and 37 respectively when their last child, Margaret, was born in 1444.

If there were any twins in the family, it wasn't of sufficient importance to be recorded anywhere, especially as both sets would have consisted of a boy and a girl, and therefore not significant in matters of potential disputed inheritance.

The Salisburys owned property in both the south and north of England but seemed to have spent most of their married life in Yorkshire. For large stretches of his adult life, Salisbury held the wardenship of the west March, as his older sons did later, and Alice seems to have lived mainly at Middleham and Sheriff Hutton.

In the 1459 Parliament of Devils, Alice was the only woman included in the attainders of her husband, sons, brother-in-law York and others and was forced to leave the country. There is no clue in the Parliamentary Rolls (or anywhere else) as to Alice's specific treasonous acts:

And forasmoch as Aleyse the wyf of the seid Richard erle of Salesbury, the first day of August, the yere of youre moost noble reigne xxxvij at Middleham in youre shire of York... falsely and traiterously ymagyned and compassed the deth and fynall destruccion of you, soverayne lord; and in accomplisshment and executyng therof, the seid Aleise, at Middleham aforeseid the seid first day of August... traterously labored, abetted, procured, stered and provoked the seid duc of York, and the seid erles of Warrewyk and Salesbury, to doo the seid tresons, rebellions, gaderynges, ridynges and reryng of werre ayenst youre moost roiall persone, at the seid toune of Blore and Ludeford: to ordeyne and establissh, by the seid auctorite, that the same Aliese... for the same be reputed, taken, demed, adjugged and atteinted of high treson.


Included with the charge against Alice were William Oldhall and Thomas Vaughan, though their labouring, stirring and provoking was done in London, not in Yorkshire.

Alice may have been with the Yorkist party at Ludford and gone with York to Ireland, or she may have made her own way there later. All the other wives were excluded from the attainder and allowance was made for them to keep their jointures, except the duchess of York, who had none, but was granted an annuity.

When Warwick went to Ireland to confer with the duke, he brought his mother back with him to Calais where she was reunited with her husband.

Alice spent Christmas 1460 in London, perhaps with her daughters-in-law, Maud Stanhope and Isobel Ingoldisthorpe. We can only imagine her distress when news of the deaths of her husband, son, nephew, son-in-law and brother-in-law reached her.

Alice died in 1462 and was buried, along with her husband and son, Thomas, with great ceremony at Bisham. She may have been the only woman attainted during the Wars of the Roses, but she was by no means the only women involved in the political lives of their husbands. While some of them seemed to have kept well in the background, fulfilling their more traditional roles as wives and mothers, others - Cecily Nevill, Alice Fitzhugh and Alice Montacute - were in it up to their necks. The countess of Salisbury was the only one who suffered the same penalty as her husband.

Marriage and the Nevills - Thomas Nevill and Maud Stanhope

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]


Nevill begins with the attack at Heworth on the wedding party of Maud Stanhope and Thomas Nevill by the Percies in August 1453. It wasn't the opening salvo in the Wars of the Roses as has been suggested, but that event, one of a number of examples of bad behaviour (both on the part of the younger Percies and John and Thomas Nevill), did help to establish the seeds of opposition on a wider, national stage. It also allows the reader's first view of the family to be through the eyes of an incomer - weddings are very useful for that.

Maud was the neice and co-heir (with her sister Joan) of Ralph lord Cromwell. There is apparently an article about the Stanhope sisters in The Journal of Prosopography, rumoured to be available online, but hunt as I might, I have yet to track it down. As any other information about her is scant, I have a desperate burning need to find it! Thomas Nevill is almost as obscure as his wife. If it hadn't been for that attack, and the subsequent fining of Thomas Percy lord Egremont, we'd know even less.

In 1448/9, Maud married Robert lord Willoughby, who was somewhere in his sixties. She wouldn't have been much more than 14 or 15, which makes her a few years younger than her second husband. The Willoughbys had no children.

Cromwell was the instigator of the match, needing the support of the Nevills in his ongoing dispute with the duke of Exeter over property at Ampthill in Bedfordshire. The wedding took place at Tattershall Castle and, stoutly escorted by well-armed and well-trained retainers, the newlyweds set off north to York and Sheriff Hutton. (In order to not terminally confuse my reader, I have shifted some action to Middleham Castle. I do it here principally because they're not at SH long before heading for MC, which was the family's main base in the north.)

This attack, though there were no reports of serious casualties, seems to have shaken the earl of Salisbury into taking action. He sent for his oldest son, who was on his way back from Wales where he was himself involved in a bitter property dispute with the duke of Somerset. Diverted north by his father's urgent summons, Warwick was at Middleham in record time. The Nevill men, along with retainers and close family connections Fitzhugh and Scrope of Bolton, then headed out to the village of Sandhutton where there was some kind of standoff with the earl of Northumberland (nearby in Topcliffe House), which resulted in a temporary truce between the two families and Thomas returning safely home to his bride.

A hell of an introduction to her new family!

We have no idea, of course, whether Maud and her first husband had a full and satisfying sex life, but I like to think of the young and virile Thomas as somewhat of a revelation. With only a sister of her own, the at least five half and fully grown Nevills in her new home might have overwhelmed her.  With a sister-in-law and her growing brood just up the road, Maud's time at Middleham would have been full of noise and warmth, and not a little drama.  Having four years of married life behind her, and the responsibilities that went with that, the redoubtable and energetic countess of Salisbury might not have overawed her as perhaps she later did young Isobel Ingoldisthorpe.

From what I can work out, Thomas and Maud eventually went to live in or near Rolleston in Nottinghamshire, though during his time as Salisbury and Warwick's lieutenant in the Marches, she might have based herself further north. As they were childless, we don't have the birthdates/places of children to help us track their movements. Thomas does seem to have owned a house in Rolleston and Gervase Clifton, Maud's eventual third husband, lived not far away in Clifton Hall. It might have been a house Maud brought to the marriage, or part of their jointure.  Until I come across anything that contradicts this, Rolleston would seem to be the logical place for the young couple's first independent household.

In the first year of their marriage, Thomas, along with his brother John, spent a great deal of his time chasing Egremont and his brother Richard around Yorkshire, eventually catching up with them near Stamford. John, who seems to have been the driving force in the troubles, was with him when the Percy brothers were captured, taken to Middleham then later to York for judgement. Egremont was given an extortionate fine for his attack on the Nevills and, because there was no way he could afford to pay it, sent to Newgate prison in London from where he later escaped. The seeds of the quarrel would seem to have been sown in the Marches, where the earl of Northumberland (Egremont's father and Salisbury's brother-in-law) rode into the west March without giving Salisbury notice. The younger sons quickly took up and escalated the conflict, with various Nevill supporters being harrassed, captured and assaulted by the Percies, and both Catton House and Topcliffe being attacked by John Nevill, who at one point threatened to hang every tenant he could get his hands on unless they handed Egremont over to him. Sounds to me a bit like four young men with way too much energy and far more time on their hands than was good for them.

After first St Albans, Thomas was given a number of lucrative posts, including joint Chamberlain of the Exchequor and joint Keeper of the Royal Mews (with his father).

Whether their childlessness put a strain on the marriage, I don't know, but it must have been difficult for them. As unsuccessful pregnancies, stillbirths and even, in many cases, the birth of children who didn't survive to be christened often went unrecorded, it's impossible to say whether their infertility was absolute or not. Maud's third marriage was also childless.

In 1459, after the battle of Blore Heath, Thomas and John Nevill were captured and imprisoned in Chester Castle. Some reports suggest they got carried away in the rout and stumbled into the enemy; others that one of them was wounded and they were captured while seeking help. They remained in captivity until the return to England of the Calais earls the following year.  Everyone knows where Cecily duchess of York was during this time, the countess of Warwick was in Calais and the countess of Salisbury was first in Ireland then in Calais, but where Maud was (or for that matter Isobel Ingoldisthorpe) isn't recorded. She was probably at home in Rolleston worried sick about her husband, her own future and the rest of the family. The news of Alice Montacute's attainder must have been a shock for all the Nevill women, suddenly their gender no longer gave them immunity from the consequences of political action. Maud's activities in this area, as in just about all others, are unknown. Her choice of third husband doesn't seem to have been predicated on political grounds and her very absence from the story at this point would seem to suggest she kept well out of things.

Thomas and John were released after the battle of Northampton in July 1460. York and the Nevills immediately took up the reins of government once again. There would have been time and opportunity for Maud to reunite with her husband, either in London or Nottinghamshire, but their remaining time together was brief.

On 30 December 1460, Thomas was killed, along with his father, uncle, cousin and brother-in-law, near Sandal Castle. Maud was possibly in London with the rest of the family for Christmas. She would have returned to Rolleston at some point, losing not only her husband but the family that she'd been part of for seven years.  In 1462/3, she married for a third time. It is possible that she already knew Gervase Clifton. He had been married twice before and had at least one child. Maud would have been not quite thirty when they married.  She didn't attend the Nevill funeral at Bisham.

Clifton was a Lancastrian who was several times exposed to charges of treason. In an attempt to keep him safe from threats of forfeiture, and under some considerable pressure, Maud surrendered her inheritance to the crown. Clifton fought at the battle of Tewkesbury, after which he was captured and executed.  I have yet to find any record of Maud receiving an annuity.

She died on 30 August 1497 having lived in the reigns of four kings. I don't know where and how she spent the last twenty six years of her life. A widow for the third time before she was forty, she didn't remarry after Clifton's death. Her future must have looked so promising on that day in August 1453, riding behind her young second husband, surrounded by the might of the Nevills. She outlived just about all of them, only Katheryn Hastings, Margaret countess of Oxford and Alice Fitzhugh remained. If she had a good relationship with her stepchild, there might have been grandchildren to comfort her, but apart from that, all that would have remained were the memories of a turbulent life.

Marriage and the Nevills - Anne Nevill and Richard Duke of Gloucester

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

Ok, she says sighing heavily, let's get this over with.

This is a marriage about which a great deal has been said, written and speculated.  For the True Believer, there are some basic 'facts' that no-one wants to question.  It would be so easy just to go with the flow - the shared childhood, the cookshop, the bitter tears at the funeral - but quite apart from whether any of it's even vaguely true, it's not nearly so much fun as trying to work the angles, weasel out the probable from the improbable and coming up with something that's real, believable and matches my own perspectives.  (And as the author, my perspectives are at least as important as anyone else's.)

First, here are the things we don't know:

•  how Anne felt about her first husband; how she felt about his death;
•  when the marriage actually took place;
•  how and when the couple communicated before Anne's complicit abduction (rescue?) to sanctuary;
•  which of them was the instigator of the plan;
•  just who might have been aware that not all the correct dispensations were acquired;
•  how they felt about each other;
•  why Anne agreed to what were some pretty unfavourable conditions to the marriage;
•  whether Richard would have divorced her (he actually had fairly strong grounds for an annulment) and what (if any) relationship they might have had subsequently;
•  how much Anne was aware of any thoughts he might have had about divorce.

The things we do know:

•  at the time they married, it was a mutually beneficial plan and they both went into it with their eyes open;
•  at least until the death of their son, the marriage seems to have been successful;
•  their grief at their son's death was profound, though how much of it was shared I'm not sure.

[My book will end with Anne's death and I might try to pull some kind of dying-person-catches-a-glimpse-of-the-future (ie Bosworth) in a weird-arse dream.  Or I might just leave it all up in the air, depending on how I feel at the time.  I'm not losing sleep over it just at the moment.]

Looking at their respective ranks, Anne and Richard were a natural pairing. He was the king's brother and she was the widow of the Prince of Wales, and Warwick's daughter, with everything that came with that.  Richard might have eventually married a minor foreign noblewoman, but the Nevill wealth was far too tempting a prize to let slip.  The Nevill brothers weren't attainted after Barnet, which was a lucky break for John's widow and a bonanza for whoever got their hands on Warwick's daughters.  George already had Isobel and I'm sure this was a factor in not only Richard's decision making processes but also Anne's.

Much has been said about the treatment of the countess of Warwick, which was appalling however you look at it, but I find I don't have quite the required level of sympathy for her.  I don't see her as an unwilling victim, dragged from pillar to post.  She was with her husband every step of the way, from good to bad to horrendous.  He died at Barnet; she scuttled into sanctuary.  I'd have a lot more sympathy for her if she'd stood up and faced what she feared so much was coming.  Anyway, her daughters' complicity in her dispossession is clear.  To me that points to a couple of things:  the girls had shifted their loyalties entirely from their parents to their husbands; and they were a couple of opportunistic, status and wealth driven women - very much their father's daughters.

Richard probably didn't give much thought to Anne until she made first contact.  No doubt he was irritated that brother George had both the Nevill girls in his control, but I'm not sure that  I know, I'll marry her was his first thought.  Remarriage would very much have been on her mind and in her interests.  She needed a champion who could match George and Isobel; she needed someone of status and rank; she saw both of these things in Richard. Edward IV's part in all this is intriguing.  Whatever might be said about the brothers' relationship, Edward's affection for George and Richard (at this point at least) can't be denied.  He did some pretty shonky things in order to enrich them.  Despite his stated disapproval of George's marriage to Isobel, he didn't try too strenuously to stop it, and seems to have accepted it with fairly good grace in the end (but that's a different post).

Despite claims from some that the difference in their ages would have meant they had very little to do with each other as children at Middleham, there can be no doubt that Anne and Richard were at least aware of each other's existence.  They were at the same table at Cawood for George Nevill's enthronement feast, for instance. They might even have got on well, given the half-grown boy, little girl dynamic.  That doesn't mean that they had any stronger feelings beyond a vague lopsided fondness.  He might have been the object of fluttery hero worship (I've been a young girl and I know how peculiarly their minds can work) but their future marriage doesn't need to be foregrounded in any way.  They knew each other, they probably didn't have any strong feelings of either affection or dislike. End of story.

Despite the strictures placed on the consummation of her first marriage, I think it's possible that the hormones of the teenagers were hard to subdue. It makes it more interesting if Anne didn't go to her second marriage a virgin.  It strengthens, for me, the likelihood that she had reasons other than I've already stated for wanting to be a wife once more.  I'm not sure how I see Edward PoW at this point. He's as one dimensional in most fiction as a lot of the minor characters.  The whole "he likes to chop heads off" thing is usually quoted out of context and not in full.  There's more to this boy than meets the eye.  I think her first marriage meant a lot to Anne, not least it being one in the eye for big sister.  (There's a lot of fun to be had there, two sisters, all they have left of family, who don't draw together for comfort.  I think Anne's birth was a huge blow to Isobel, one she never quite recovered from.  If she'd had a little brother, I don't think it would have been quite so bad, her position as first child and Daddy's Little Girl would have been safe.)

The marriage of the duke and duchess of Gloucester was, for the most part, a successful one.  Whether they loved each other deeply or not, they suited each other in many ways.  Anne got the status and security she wanted, Richard got the wealth and the reflected glory in the north of his late father-in-law.  Any thoughts he might have had about divorce (he was a childless king; he'd disinherited his brother's children on the grounds of bastardy; his own marriage wasn't quite as unchallengeable as he might have liked) need not imply that he didn't care about her.  Business, as they say, is business.  Anne would have thought very differently about it, but her death overtook events and, in the end, that was one humiliation she didn't have to face.

Whatever their feelings for each other might have been, the death of their son was a watershed.  It blew the marriage out of the water (if I can be allowed the occasional mixed metaphor) however much they drew together at first.  This wasn't just a much loved child who died, it was the sole hope that Richard had of a dynasty.  The countess and earl of Salisbury had ten surviving children; the duke and duchess of York had seven.  The granddaughter of one and the son of the other managed one between them. The sole male hope of the Nevills was John's son George.  (That Alice, Alianor, Katheryn and Joan had sons meant nothing in this context; the existence of the young earl of Warwick hardly mattered; the duchess of Suffolk's abundance of sons meant a little more, but had John de la Pole succeeded his uncle that would have been a whole nother kettle of fish.)

I think Richard did quietly grieve for his queen when she died - for lost opportunities; for the support she surely was to him in the turbulence of his reign; for their son, both her hope and his of immortality; and for the strength of mind and personality she must have had in order to instigate their marriage and pave the way for him to rule so successfully, as duke of Gloucester, in the Nevill heartland.

A marriage that evolves, changes from pragmatic considerations, to a strong sense of shared purpose, if not love, to grief and breakdown and almost to divorce is a far more interesting proposition than dewy eyed youngsters, adoring each other since childhood.  I'll leave that for the Suffolks, they deserve it far more than anyone else.


I am much indebted to Michael Hicks (as usual) and would recommend his biography of Anne Nevill to anyone.  It is cogent and well considered, though of necessity highly speculative.  It certainly pulls Anne out of the shadows and into a sometimes harsh light.

Marriage and the Nevills - Alice Nevill & Henry Fitzhugh

[This blog has moved to http://nevillfeast.wordpress.com/]

The sons in law of the countess and earl of Salisbury are an interesting bunch of guys.  In some small way, they represent a cross-section of the nobility of the time - of loyalties and partisanship.  My interest in the Wars of the Roses, and the Nevills in particular, has been pretty much lifelong and there's no sign that that's going to change.  Until I started my current project, my focus had always been on the major players.  Now that I'm starting to take a good hard look at some of the other people involved, I'm finding it even more fascinating.  One of the things that's surprised me is that, given the available evidence, the Nevills seem to have had pretty successful marriages, though with some the information is very scant. 

Alice was one of the middle children.  Her position in the family isn't all that clear - some sources suggest she was born in the 1440s, others that she born in 1429 or 30.  As she had her first child in 1448, I've slotted her into the family between Thomas and John.  Lord Henry Fitzhugh was about the same age.

He lived just up the road from Middleham at Ravensworth Castle - about 27 km (16 miles).  There were close connections between the two families - Henry was one of Salisbury's retainers (later Warwick's) and it's more than probable that Alice and Henry knew each other all their lives.

After Joan Nevll's marriage to William Fitzalan, earl of Arundel, the supply of titled spouses seems to have dried up and the Salisburys had to set their sights lower for their younger children.  Margaret, the youngest child, did end up with an earl, but neither Thomas nor John had the good fortune of their father and brother, Katheryn's first husband was a lord and Alianor* married a mere knight.

Between 1448 and 1465, Alice and Henry had ten children - five boys and five girls.  Anne married her father's ward, Francis Lovell, and Richard fought at Bosworth but soon made his peace with the new regime and became Henry Tudor's lieutenant in the north.  Henry Fitzhugh died in 1472.  Alice never remarried.  No-one knows where he was buried or whether Alice was buried with him when she died in 1503.  She probably was, and they possibly lay together at Jervaulx Abbey.

Henry had a tough time of it during the Wars.  He wasn't with the Yorkist lords at first St Albans.  Though there's no clear cut evidence he took the field, he was with Henry VI's army at Wakefield.  Whatever his political views, it can't have been easy for him witnessing the deaths of his father in law and two brothers in law (Thomas Nevill and Katheryn's young husband, William lord Harrington).  While again at second St Albans and Towton there's no record of him taking the field, he was still in Henry VI's army.  He may have kept himself out of things or been kept out to prevent him changing sides.   After the Yorkist victory at Towton, he made his way to Edward IV and pledged his loyalty.  I suspect he stopped by his brother in law first and made a more personal, binding pledge to him - when Warwick rebelled, Fitzhugh was with him almost all the way.

During these difficult times, Henry managed to spend some time at home with his wife, as there was a son born in both 1459 and 1461.  It's quite possible that he was the one who broke the news to her of the disaster at Wakefield.

Henry fought at Empingham on his brother in law's side, fled to Scotland after the defeat, was pardoned (along with Alice, their children and their wards, the Lovells) and came home.  He seems to have fled to Burgundy at some point, but I need to find out a bit more about that.  Anyway, there was a second pardon and Henry came home again.

In 1471, he fought at neither Barnet nor Tewkesbury.  As he died the following year, he may have already been too sick to travel.

Alice and Henry were married for twenty seven years.  Alice was a widow for thirty.  As there's no record of his will, we don't know whether it was simply her choice not to remarry or if Henry left conditions that made the prospect difficult.  All of her children were born at Ravensworth and she lived there throughout her marriage, though in widowhood she lived, probably with her daughter Anne, at West Tanfield.  I like to think of Alice and Henry building a strong marriage on the basis of a shared childhood, a deep love of Ravensworth, Wensleydale and Yorkshire; weathering the storms that buffeted them and destroyed a good many of their family; taking comfort in each other in the bad times and joy in the good.

*Spelling choice based on signatures.