Richard III & Anne Neville


Richard III

Born: October 2, 1453 at Fotheringay Castle, Northamptonshire

Died: August 22, 1485 at Bosworth Field

Reign: June 26, 1483 – August 22, 1485

Coronation: July 6, 1483

Father: Richard, Duke of York

Mother: Cecily Neville, Duchess of York

Siblings: Henry of York; Anne of York, Duchess of Exeter; Edmund, Earl of Rutland; Elizabeth of York, Duchess of Suffolk; Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy; William of York; John of York; George, Duke of Clarence; Thomas of York; Richard III; Ursula of York

Spouse: Anne Neville

Wedding: c. Spring 1472

Marriage: Contentious, as his brother, George, Duke of Clarence, was married to Anne’s Neville sister, Isabel, and didn’t want to split the sisters’ inheritance with his brother. Legend has it Anne was discovered living as a servant in London, either put into hiding or hiding herself, and was discovered by Richard. There is no recorded date for their wedding, but they were believed to have been married in London in the spring of 1472 before retiring north. It is unclear whether or not it was a love match. The couple knew each other as children and Richard is reported to have mourned Anne deeply at her death, however he was also putting out feelers to remarry within a few months and rumors circulated that he was pursuing his niece, Elizabeth of York.

Children: Edward of Middleham, Prince of Wales

Famous for: Stealing the throne from his 13-year-old nephew and, quite possibly, having him and his younger brother murdered; loyalty to his brother, Edward IV; military prowess


download (1)

Anne Neville

Born: June 11, 1456 at Warwick Castle in Warwickshire, England

Died: March 16, 1485 at the Place of Westminster in London, England

Consort: June 26, 1483 – March 16, 1485

Coronation: July 6, 1483

Father: Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick

Mother: Anne Beauchamp, Countess of Warwick

Siblings: Isabel Neville, Duchess of Clarence

Spouse: 1. Edward of Lancaster, Prince of Wales; 2. Richard III

Weddings: 1. December 13, 1470; 2. c. Spring 1472

Marriages: It is unclear what Anne’s feelings were towards either of her husbands. She was forced to marry Edward, Prince of Wales in 1470 when her father broke with the House of York and sought to replace Edward IV with Henry VI. By 1471 her father and husband were dead and Edward IV was back in the power; as the widow of the crown prince of the losing side, it behooved Anne to make a prudent marriage as quickly as possible.

Children: Edward of Middleham, Prince of Wales

Famous for: Being the daughter and wife of her father and husbands, unfortunately. There is very little known about Anne’s personality or her reaction to the events of her life.


Related posts:

4 thoughts on “Richard III & Anne Neville

  1. Pingback: Critical Math: The Birth Order of the Woodville Children – Rebecca Starr Brown

  2. Pingback: The Rise of the Dukes of Norfolk: The Marriage of Thomas Howard and Anne of York – Rebecca Starr Brown

  3. I don’t understand why most people believe the boys were killed. I think Richard moved them to Burgundy with his sister. He remaining silent. Rumours arose we are told. So what? Bones found in a ten foot pit are supposed to be the Princes? What? Consider the time and effort what with buckets, ladders, shoring up the sides to dig a hole ten feet deep. All this went on, yet when Henry Tudor arrives no one seems to have said ‘Hey fellas look over there where they were digging..I bet that’s where they put the bodies’
    Didn’t anyone notice all that digging? The skeletons are probably a seventeenth century hoax. Like Bigfoot. Henry never does seem to get any testimony from the hundreds of employees at the Tower. Not one word. He extracts a fake confession under torture we are told but Dighton named as a co murderer is never arrested. Fuñny that.
    No one talks because they are still loyal to King Richard. The whereabouts of the boys will be a secret forever.


    1. Hi Cassandra – thanks so much for visiting and for your comment. To answer why most people assume the boys were murdered, it’s mainly because of their abrupt disappearance and the fact that there’s never been enough evidence to prove their existence after 1483. That said, there are definitely plenty of people who believe, as you do, that the boys (or at least one of them) escaped, Burgundy being a possible landing point. I’m curious, though, whether you believe the Perkin Warbeck theory? And, if so, what do you think happened to Edward V?

      Certainly Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy remained loyal to the Yorkist cause well after 1485. However, given that she lent her support to Warbeck, whose story was not that he was living in Burgundy under Margaret’s protection until he went public in 1490, it begs the question of why she would back up a man she then knew was an imposter. And if she had been given the boys in 1483, why was that not publicly established in 1485 after Richard’s death?

      Part of the reason why the mystery continues is because, at some point, someone acted very strangely or made a very serious miscalculation. Who exactly that was is unclear, but if Richard had sent the boys abroad, it’s strange that he didn’t do anything to combat the rumors that he had killed them – not out of the realm of possibility, particularly if he was more focused on solidifying the Yorkist base, but strange nonetheless.

      As for the logistics of digging a hole for the skeletons – well, as you note, it’s entirely possible that those skeletons don’t belong to the princes. I’ll admit I don’t know details on how the Tower residences and grounds were staffed off the top of my head, but I would imagine that if a murder and burial took place in 1483 it was kept extremely close to the vest and likely didn’t happen all at once. It’s also possible that the bodies were disposed of outside of the Tower. As you note, though, it’s an enduring mystery as to how and why no one came forward during Henry VII’s reign with more information beyond the much later Tyrrell confession (which can’t taken as gospel).

      I do agree with you that it’s unlikely we’ll ever know for certain what happened to the boys, particularly since forensic evidence is off the table – even to test the 17th century skeletons. I also agree that it can’t be stated with 100% certainty that Richard killed them. I tend to lean towards that theory more than others only because of how other parties behaved post-1485. That said, there are enough holes in the Richard theory to make other options compelling.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s