© Richard Randall

Caribbean

Sundries

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

He reportedly had several illegitimate children:

• By Lady Eleanor Talbot

• Edward de Wigmore (d. 1468). Reportedly died as an infant along with his mother.

• By Elizabeth Lucy or Elizabeth Waite.

• Elizabeth Plantagenet. Born circa 1464. She married Sir Thomas Lumley in 1477..

• Arthur Plantagenet, 1st Viscount Lisle (1460s/1470s – March 3, 1542).

• By unknown mother. Recent speculations suggests them as children by Lucy or Waite.

• Grace Plantagenet. She is known to have been present at the funeral of her stepmother Elizabeth Woodville in 1492. No further information.

• Mary Plantagenet. She married Henry Harman of Ellam, son of Thomas and Elizabeth Harman and widower of Agness.

• A daughter said to have been the first wife of John Tuchet, 6th Baron Audley.

Perkin Warbeck, an impostor claimant to the English throne reportedly resembled Edward. There is unconfirmed speculation that Warbeck could be another illegitimate son to Edward.

Was Edward illegitimate?

Evidence of Edward's illegitimacy remain subjective and disputed amongst modern historians. Despite some concerns raised by some scholars, it was, and still essentially is, generally accepted that the issue was raised as propaganda to support Richard III.

In his time, it was noted that Edward IV resembled his father little. Questions about his paternity were raised during Edward's own reign, for example by Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick in 1469, and repeated by Edward's brother, George, shortly before his execution in 1478, but with no evidence; it must be noted that in propaganda wars, such as these, many statements were used that perhaps had no basis in truth (for example, Henry VI's heir, Edward of Westminster, was purported to have been a bastard of Margaret of Anjou and the Duke of Somerset's). It was suggested that the real father may have been an archer called Blaybourne.

Prior to his succession, on June 22, 1483, Richard III declared that Edward was illegitimate, and three days later the matter was addressed by parliament. In Titulus Regius (the text of which is believed to come word-for-word from the petition presented by Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham to the assembly which met on June 25, 1483, to decide on the future of the monarchy). It describes Richard III as "the undoubted son and heir" of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York and "born in this land" -- an oblique reference to his brother's birth at Rouen and baptism in circumstances which could have been considered questionable. Dominic Mancini says that Cecily Neville, mother of both Edward IV and Richard III, was herself the basis for the story: When she found out about Edward's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, in 1464, "Proud Cis" flew into a rage. Mancini reported that the Duchess, in her anger, offered to declare him a bastard. However, this is not supported in contemporary sources, but is most likely reflective of contemporary opinion. According to Polydore Vergil, Duchess Cecily, "being falsely accused of adultery, complained afterwards in sundry places to right many noble men, whereof some yet live, of that great injury which her son Richard had done her." If she had indeed complained--as would befit a high-ranking lady of renowned piety, as she had been regarded--these petitions may have had some effect: the allegations were dropped and never again pursued.

Historical novelist Sharon Kay Penman believes paid propagandists for Henry Tudor, after he became Henry VII (and King Richard was dead), concocted out of whole cloth the story that Richard III had said his brother Edward was illegitimate: "Tudor's official historian, Polydore Vergil, . . . contend[ed] that Richard based his claim to the crown upon his brother Edward's illegitimacy. This was, of course, an out-and-out lie." Richard III's claim to the throne is generally believed to be based upon his claim that Edward IV's children were illegitimate.

Additionally, Alexander Canduci, author of "Getting It Right... or Why The World is so Monumentally Screwed: The Manipulation of History" (Publisher: Lulu.com, ISBN 141164249X) makes the case that "...Edward IV was not the son of Richard, Duke of York and thus not one of the Plantagenet descendents. His two brothers were, however. Richard III would have been aware of this, but couldn’t say anything without destroying all that had been gained by the House of York during the wars [of the Roses], and calling into question the legitimacy of their claims as the rightful kings. So this was let go. But, after Edward’s death, Richard would have been all too aware of the children’s unlawful claim to the throne, due their father’s own illegitimacy. To ensure the continuation of the true Plantagenet line, he needed to remove the children and install himself as king, ensuring the true blood succession. (His elder brother George had been killed, and his descendents debarred from the throne). To this end, he probably fabricated the charges against the children and their mother."

The matter is also raised in William Shakespeare's Richard III, in the following lines from Act 3 Scene 5:

Tell them, when that my mother went with child

Of that unsatiate Edward, noble York

My princely father then had wars in France

And, by just computation of the time,

Found that the issue was not his begot

It is to be noted, however, that many of Shakespeare's issues were for the sake of drama, including that of his perception of Richard III himself--that immortalized image of Richard as the "crook-backed monster."

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oceania