36 



that time called,) was led by the King in person, and the rear was 

 commanded by the Earl of Northumberland.^ 



The van of the Earl of Richmond's army, consisting also prin- 

 cipally of archers, was commanded by the Earl of Oxford, the main 

 body by the Earl of Richmond and his uncle, Jasper, Earl of Pembroke, 

 the right wing by Sir Gilbert Talbot, and the left by Sir John Savage. 



Cannons and other descriptions of fire-arms were in common use by 

 the English in war at that period, and we cannot dispute the fact of 

 their having been used at the Battle of Bosworth, because we know, 

 from the accounts handed down to us by Philippe de Commiues, the 

 historian, that the King of France, besides advancing money, furnished 

 the Earl of Richmond with some pieces of artillery for his expedition 

 against Richard, " une bonne somme d' argent, et quelques pieces d' 

 artillerie, et ainsi fut conduict, avec le navire de Normandie, pour 

 descendre en Galles, dont il estoit;"' besides which, guns are mentioned 

 in the act of attainder of 1st Henry VII. ,^ passed against the adherents 

 of Richard who took part in the battle ; and cannon balls of a small size 

 have been dug up upon Bosworth Field.* 



The principal commanders on the part of Richard were the Duke of 

 Norfolk* (slain in the battle), his son, the Earl of Surrey,* the Earl of 



' Baker in his Chronicles, fol. 232, states that Richard's " Vanguard was led by the Dulie 

 of Norfolk, which consisted of one thousand two hundred bowmen, flanked with two hundred 

 cuyrassiers, under the conduct of the Earl of Surrey ; the battel Kin^ Richard led himself, 

 which consisted of a thousand billmen, empaled with two thousand pikes; the rere-ward was 

 led by Sir Thomas Brackenbury, consisting of two thousand mingled weapons, with two wiigs 

 of horsemen, containing fifteen hundred, all of them cast into square maniples, expecting the 

 Lord Stanley's coming with two thousand, most of them horsemen." Instead of Sir Thomas 

 Brackenbury, Baker probably meant Sir Robert Brackenbury, who lost his life in the 

 battle ; but in either case he appears to be in error as to the commander of the rear of 

 Richard's army, which, not only other old historians, but even Baker, on the next page, 

 states to have been commanded by the Earl of Northumberland. " In this battel, Henry, 

 Earl of Northumberland, who led k-ing Richard's rere-ward, never strook stroke." — Baker, 

 fol. 233. 



* Philippe de Commines, 5me. livre, fo. 151. 



= Rot. Pari. 1, Henry VII., (A.D. U85,) vol. 6. folios 27fi and 276. 



* Hutton's " Bosworth Field," pp. 82 and 97. 



' John Howard was a son of Sir Robert Howard, by Margaret, daughter of Thomas 

 Mowbray, Uuke of Norfolk, and was a faithful supporter of Edward IV., who created him a 

 Baron in 1401. Richard HI. created him Duke of Norfolk on the 14lh of June, 1483: 

 he had the honour of being placed in the vanguard of Richard's army at the Battle of 

 Bosworth. 



* Thomas Howard, son of Johu Howard, Duke of Norfolk, before mentioned, was created 

 Earl of Surrey in the first year of Richard III. ; he also had the honour of having a 

 principal command in Richard's vanguard, and, according to some accounts he was taken 

 prisoner, but according to others he escaped from the field, and afterwards, upon an amnesty 

 being published, he submitted to Henry. He was imprisoned for a considerable period, but 

 was at length reconciled to Henry VII., and was made Lord Treasurer of England in the 

 16th year of his reign, and was created Duke of Norfolk in 1514, the fifth year of the reign of 

 Henry VIII. 



