rewind.
Even for those familiar with the reign of Henry VII, the name Ralph Wilford is often forgotten; and this is despite him being one of three pretenders who conspired to seize the crown in the late fifteenth century. The obscurity of his venture is hardly surprising since it was very much in the shadow of the other two. Where Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck’s rebellions endured for years, Wilford’s only survived two weeks before it was swiftly dealt with.
You would be forgiven for thinking that this renders his enterprise a mere footnote in history. However, its importance did not lie in the threat of the conspiracy itself, but rather in the opportunities that his emergence presented to the first Tudor king.
Wilford’s existence did exacerbate the dangers that others posed to Henry and the fulfilment of his ambitions, yet his execution would also allow for their removal. Perhaps more intriguing is that the futility of his endeavour and its convenience to Henry has made historians question whether he was in fact a real figure. Instead, some believe him to be a Tudor government invention used to facilitate the king’s aims. Regardless, Wilford – or the story of him – would end up playing a highly underestimated role in shaping the events that unfolded in 1499.
Commoner Turned Impostor
Assuming his cause was genuine, it is worth examining the absurdity of his claim. Whether it was of his own volition or he was manipulated by others, Ralph Wilford, a twenty-year-old shoemaker’s son, first emerged in February 1499, parading himself as Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick: a well-known, surviving Yorkist claimant to the throne who was currently languishing in the Tower of London.
As a major threat to Henry’s crown, Warwick was imprisoned from the beginning of his reign, and it was not long before his whereabouts became public knowledge. Presented with the idea that the real earl had now miraculously escaped, many treated Wilford’s claim with a significant degree of suspicion, thereby explaining the lack of support that the young man received.
After the conspiracy’s easy suppression, the king’s choice of punishment for him at first glance seems excessively harsh. Lambert Simnel, who also claimed to be the Earl of Warwick in 1486, obtainedsecuri military support from both Ireland and Burgundy, and fought Henry’s royal forces on the field of battle; yet on account of him being considered misguided, he was shown leniency with a job in the royal kitchens.
As for Wilford, who received limited backing and got nowhere near as close to the crown, he was sentenced to execution, raising the question of what prompted the king to deal with him in this way?
The Spanish Marriage
Advocates of the official narrative point towards Henry growing weary of constant threats to his throne. For fourteen years, the king’s hold on the crown had been far from secure. As such, he was no longer prepared to take the chances he may have done in 1485.
Another incentive for Wilford’s swift removal was that these pretenders were now becoming a huge stumbling block to Henry VII’s foreign policy ambitions. Whilst Perkin Warbeck remained at large, the Spanish refused to finalise the marriage between the English king’s son, Arthur Tudor, and Catherine of Aragon. Even though he was eventually imprisoned, Warbeck and the Earl of Warwick still presented a risk to Henry’s security; and the emergence of another pretender only further impeded negotiations.
The king needed to prove to the Spanish monarchs that the situation was under control and, considering that the Wars of the Roses had left England on the edge of European politics, this pending alliance was hard fought for and significant. Henry was not prepared to sacrifice it for the sake of being merciful.
All three were executed in 1499.
Real or Imagined?
Some historians are more sceptical of this traditional narrative. John Ashdown-Hill, for example, would have it that Ralph Wilford was more likely a product of Tudor propaganda and used by Henry to justify ridding himself of the other dangers to his throne. However, there is one significant hole in this argument.
If the king was so determined to protect his marriage alliance with Spain and assure them that these threats were being handled, fashioning another one would hardly have been the best way to go about it.
Warbeck and Warwick were already in the Tower of London so, even if Wilford was a fabrication, he was not a necessity for dispatching them, but to do so legitimately Henry needed to show that they remained a persistent danger to him, even now. In pretending to be the Earl of Warwick, Wilford, however limited the threat he posed, was the perfect evidence. Yet the convenient timing of it does mean that Ashdown-Hill’s assertion cannot be ruled out.
This division over whether Ralph Wilford was real or a Tudor creation does raise the question about the other two pretenders. Philippa Langley has recently presented evidence, which suggests that the names Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck were also identities constructed to conceal the fact that the two princes in the Tower, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, had survived and returned to take back the crown for the house of York.
However, the general consensus is that the documents she unearthed are dubious in their provenance and prompt more questions than they answered. Therefore, concrete evidence to prove the Tudor narrative right or wrong remains to be found, if it ever will be. The same may go for the events surrounding Wilford.
What is certain is that his name would seal the fate of the person he claimed to be – the Earl of Warwick – and subsequently clear the way for the king’s improved security and the fulfilment of his dynastic aspirations. Thus, in the context of Henry VII’s reign, Ralph Wilford is a name that should hold much greater significance than it has previously been given.
Bibliography
John Ashdown-Hill, The Wars of the Roses (Amberley Publishing, 2017).
Nathan Amin, Henry VII and the Tudor Pretenders: Simnel, Warbeck and Warwick (Amberley Publishing, 2022).
Thomas Penn, Winter King: The Dawn of Tudor England (Penguin, 2012).
Philippa Langley, The Princes in the Tower: Solving History’s Greatest Cold Case (The History Press, 2023).