Buckingham and Anne St Leger

Hi.

Some time ago I posted that during the Protectorate Richard ordered the
Bishop of Exeter to deliver his niece Anne St Leger (Duchess of Exeter)
to the Duke of Buckingham. This is in Harley 433.

I assumed from this that Buckingham did take custody of the child.

However, I've found the following purple prose on the Exeter Cathedral
website. It's from a bio of the Bishop of Exeter in question (Piers
Courtenay):
"It may be thought strange that he should assist at the splendid
coronation of Richard III at Westminster, on 6th July, 1483; for he knew
how the usurper had been prevented from gaining possession of Ann
Duchess of Exeter, a great heiress and his niece, through his cautious
policy, and therefore he was marked out for vengeeance by this usurper."

At least, that is their excuse for the Bishop having fled to Brittany in
November. Couldn't be that he was involved in Buckingham's Rebellion,
perhaps? The Courtenays were, of course, old Lancastrians, and the
Duchess' father, Thomas St Leger, and father-in-law, Dorset, were prime
movers.

I don't know how the Bishop came to be in possession of the Duchess in
the first place.

Marie

--- In , "marie walsh"
<marie@r...> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Some time ago I posted that during the Protectorate Richard
ordered the
> Bishop of Exeter to deliver his niece Anne St Leger (Duchess of
Exeter)
> to the Duke of Buckingham. This is in Harley 433.
>
> I assumed from this that Buckingham did take custody of the child.
>
> However, I've found the following purple prose on the Exeter
Cathedral
> website. It's from a bio of the Bishop of Exeter in question (Piers
> Courtenay):
> "It may be thought strange that he should assist at the splendid
> coronation of Richard III at Westminster, on 6th July, 1483; for
he knew
> how the usurper had been prevented from gaining possession of Ann
> Duchess of Exeter, a great heiress and his niece, through his
cautious
> policy, and therefore he was marked out for vengeeance by this
usurper."
>
> At least, that is their excuse for the Bishop having fled to
Brittany in
> November. Couldn't be that he was involved in Buckingham's
Rebellion,
> perhaps? The Courtenays were, of course, old Lancastrians, and the
> Duchess' father, Thomas St Leger, and father-in-law, Dorset, were
prime
> movers.
>
> I don't know how the Bishop came to be in possession of the
Duchess in
> the first place.
>
> Marie

According to my recent reading Piers WAS involved in Buckingham's
revolt, wasn't he? He was punished with the others and one of his
brothers was in it, so maybe it is nothing more than assumption, but
seems like afair assumption!
Brunhild