Occurring in Lincolnshire in the spring of
1470, the Welles uprising provided Richard NEVILLE, earl of
Warwick, with a second opportunity to overthrow EDWARD IV.
Richard Welles (1431-1470), seventh Lord
Welles, was a prominent Lincolnshire nobleman and a former
Lancastrian. His father, Lionel, the sixth Lord Welles, had been
killed fighting for the house of LANCASTER at the Battle of TOWTON
in March 1461. Although Welles was attainted by the first
PARLIAMENT of Edward IV, his son Richard, who had himself fought
for HENRY VI at the Battle of ST. ALBANS in 1461, submitted to the
new king and regained his father's lands. Perhaps because he was
related to the NEVILLE FAMILY, Welles was also allowed to assume
his father's title in 1468.
Early in 1470, Welles, his son Sir Robert
Welles, and his brothers-in-law Sir Thomas Dymmock and Sir Thomas
de la Lande attacked the manor house of Sir Thomas Burgh, a
Lincolnshire gentleman who was Edward IV's Master of Horse. The
attackers destroyed Burgh's house, carried off his goods, and
forced him to flee the county. Later official accounts of the
incident claimed that Welles was acting on behalf of his kinsman
Warwick; the earl was seeking another opportunity to draw the king
into the north, where he could be surprised, defeated, and
dethroned in favor of George PLANTAGENET, duke of Clarence, who was
Edward's brother but Warwick's ally. Some modern historians have
dismissed this claim as Yorkist PROPAGANDA and have argued that
Welles's attack on Burgh arose from some private feud, a common
occurrence in the fifteenth century, and that Warwick simply made
use of the incident when the king decided to intervene to support
his servant.
Edward summoned Welles and Dymmock to LONDON,
but the two men initially refused to comply, pleading illness.
Changing their minds, both took SANCTUARY at Westminster, which
they were induced to leave by promise of a pardon. Meanwhile, Sir
Robert Welles, now likely acting in concert with Warwick and
Clarence, issued proclamations throughout Lincolnshire in early
March for men to join him in resisting the king, who, it was
claimed, was coming north to punish the men of the shire for their
support of the ROBIN OF REDESDALE REBELLION in 1469. Already
marching north when he learned of Sir Robert's defiance, Edward
ordered that Lord Welles and Dymmock be brought up from London.
Forced to write to his son, Lord Welles declared that he and
Dymmock would die if Sir Robert did not submit. Upon receiving this
letter, Sir Robert, who had been maneuvering to trap the king
between his rebels and the oncoming forces of Warwick and Clarence,
retreated, allowing the royal army to intercept him on 12 March.
After summarily executing Lord Welles and Dymmock, the king
attacked and destroyed the rebel force at the Battle of LOSECOTE
FIELD, where both Sir Robert and documentary evidence of Warwick
and Clarence's complicity were captured.
On 14 March, Sir Robert Welles confessed to
the king that Warwick and Clarence were the "partners and chief
provokers" (Ross, p. 141) of his treason, and that the purpose of
the entire enterprise was to make Clarence king. On 19 March, as he
prepared to pursue the earl and the duke, Edward had Welles
executed before the army. With the Welles uprising crushed and
their plans in ruins, Warwick and Clarence fled into the West
Country where they took ship for FRANCE. In 1475, a bill of
ATTAINDER (later reversed under HENRY VII) was passed against Lord
Welles and his son, and the Welles estates were granted to William
HASTINGS, Lord Hastings.
Further Reading: Haigh,
Philip A., The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the Roses (Stroud,
Gloucestershire, UK: Sutton Publishing, 1995); Ross, Charles,
Edward IV (New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 1998).
No comments:
Post a Comment