8 Comments
User's avatar
Gillian Fletcher's avatar

Fascinating bit of history - I love hearing these seemingly "untold" stories that sit at the edge of histories that are so commonly taught. Thank you!

Expand full comment
Nathen Amin's avatar

It’s what makes Substack so handy!

Expand full comment
Karen's avatar

Never heard of Wilbeck before thanks for enlightening me! Poor Warwick Such a sad story

Expand full comment
Banditqueen's avatar

Thank you for another interesting Substack. Rauf Wilford is the one I feel sorry for as he's the straw who broke the camels back. He was the last in a string of 3 Pretenders who must have been real pain in the butts regardless of whether they were genuine or not. At the end of the day, Henry himself had been that Pretender against the regime of Richard iii and in exile. Although he couldn't have pressed any claim before 1483 when his mother and Elizabeth Wydville conspired together for him to marry Elizabeth of York, Henry was technically a Pretender, but he was one who invaded and was successful. From the moment Henry took the crown, he had hoped to reconcile the warring factions and families and many had pledged their support. It didn't last long. It wasn't long before Henry had faced an assassination attempt and 1486 and 1487 must have seemed like one long conspiracy after another. In 1499 Henry faced a wide reaching plot involving men, some previously pardoned by the King, once again wanting to free and "restore" Edward of Warwick and there was a conspiracy around Warbeck "Richard of England" as well. This 3rd new Warwick was too much. Whilst dealing with the other 2 was essential, Henry had to make an example of this other young man. I can see this from his point of view and I don't blame him. Henry had his family to think off and sorry but rulers had a realm to take care off. They can't have every Tom, Dick and Harry claiming to be a popular alternative heir to their crown, regardless of the fact the real guy is locked up or barred by law. Henry had come to the point where he had no choice. Warwick was an innocent pawn, this guy possibly a deluded fool, Warbeck may have been who he said he was or he might not, but they had a following, although this one had none or may command a following. For Henry's own safety this had to stop. Not only was Wilford executed but Warwick and Warbeck would be as well. Not pleasant. Necessary.

Expand full comment
James Dixon's avatar

What an interesting read, and you were right… It was a name I had never heard of. 👍 thank you 👍👍👍

Expand full comment
Amanda Squire's avatar

So interesting, thank you. Can’t help but feel pity for these victims of history, especially Warwick who was doomed solely because of his heritage and his name.

Expand full comment
Nathen Amin's avatar

Yes, Warwick was, like his cousins the Princes in the Tower, doomed by failings of the adults they depended upon.

Expand full comment
HistoryGirl199 (Lisa)'s avatar

Very interesting!

Expand full comment