Secrets INSIDE EDWARD VI’S TOMB. Death of Edward VI. Funeral of Edward VI. Where is Edward VI buried

He had a wretched death, a contested funeral, a grave that was desecrated by the Puritans and dug up by the Victorians, and today on History Calling I'm going to share all the gory details with you. This is the story of the afterlife of Edward VI, including what was found inside his tomb in the 1860s, apart from him obviously, and what the condition of the last Tudor king's body told onlookers about the manner of his death. I'll provide a first-hand account of this disinterment of his remains, show you pictures of items retrieved from the grave, discuss why the first Protestant king of England doesn't have a monument, and why his tomb is hidden and not under the marker bearing his name. Before we dig in, no pun intended, please remember to give the video a like and subscribe to my channel with the notification bell switched on so you never miss an upload. You can also join my YouTube membership for extra perks, or find me over on Patreon where I release even more bonuses, including early access to ad-free videos and extra podcasts. The link is below for you, as is a link to my website, historycallingofficial.com, where you can get two complimentary downloads by signing up to my free mailing list. For those of you with Irish ancestry, you might also want to check out my book, Find Your Irish Ancestors, online. Details are also below. Edward VI was the only surviving son of Henry VIII by his third wife, Jane Seymour, and was born at Hampton Court Palace in October 1537. His mother died of childbirth complications twelve days later, and when he was nine years old, his father died too, leaving Edward to become the last Tudor king, and indeed the last monarch of England or Britain, but not Scotland, to ascend to the throne as a minor, at least so far. His reign lasted from January 1547 until 1553, at which point the 15-year-old Edward lay dying at Greenwich Palace, probably of tuberculosis, though as often happened with deaths of famous people in the past, there were of course rumours of poison. See my video on whether Catherine of Aragon was murdered for another example of these kinds of stories. The accounts of his final weeks, during which he threw up green, yellow, black, and even blood-stained gunk from his lungs, are pitiful indeed. On the 30th of May, the Imperial Ambassador, whose name I cannot pronounce but it looks like Ye Henshive, wrote that, The King of England is wasting away daily, and there is no sign or likelihood of any improvement. Some are of opinion that he may last two months more, but he cannot possibly live beyond that time. He cannot rest except by means of medicines and external applications, and his body has begun to swell, especially his head and feet. His hair is to be shaved off, and plasters are going to be put on his head. The illness is judged to be the same as that which killed the late Earl of Richmond. Side note, by Earl of Richmond, I think he means Edward's paternal half-brother, Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond, who had died in 1536 at the age of 17. See my episode all about his life to learn more. I'll leave it linked for you. By the 11th of June, Edward's condition was graver and graver. A few days later, the same ambassador wrote that, His condition continued to deteriorate until he and his doctors literally weren't sure if he'd make it from one day to the next, and Edward himself said that he was done for. He made an appearance at a window, somewhere between the 27th of June and the 1st of July, to prove he was still alive, but he was quote, They were right, and in such misery, it was perhaps a relief to the King to finally expire on the 6th of July. He was given an autopsy, and the claim that he had been poisoned was reiterated, with the Duke of Northumberland suspected by some of having administered it. This is because he was the father-in-law of Lady Jane Grey, who was the focus of a brief coup after Edward's death, when an attempt was made to put her on the throne, in the place of his sister, Mary I. That was not one of the charges which resulted in his execution on the 22nd of August though, and I'd like to emphasise again that Edward had been ill for many months, with symptoms which matched TB. If someone was trying to kill him with poison, that would have been a ridiculous amount of time to take doing it, given that you'd have to keep administering it and hope that no one caught you. Anyway, after being examined, the body was possibly embalmed, which I say because that would be the normal thing to do, but I didn't come across a source stating outright whether this did or didn't happen. It was wrapped in seercloth, and it was placed in a lead coffin, housed within an outer wooden one. Then, everything stopped. The reasons for his funeral obsequies stalling like this were partly political and partly religious. The need for Mary to deal with the attempted Lady Jane Grey coup meant that burying the boy whose actions had caused it, because Edward had tried to overturn the succession laws established during his father's reign and ratified by Parliament, was not a priority. Even once Mary was in control of her capital though, her brother's funeral proved tricky to organise on account of the fact that he had been an ardent Protestant, and she was just as strong a Catholic, who wanted him buried according to the rights of her church, not his. Letters written by the Spanish ambassadors during these weeks give us an insight into Mary's struggles, both on account of her conscience, and because it would do her no good politically to be seen to be apparently endorsing the Protestant religion by allowing her brother to be buried according to its rights. Writing on the 24th of July, the Spanish ambassadors told their master, Mary's cousin, Charles V of Spain, Sire, my lady has asked our opinion as to the funeral of the late King of England, and has informed us of her intention to have it performed with the prayers and ceremonies observed by those who practice the old religion. Her mind appears to be almost made up, so if your majesty thinks she had better not put her intentions into execution, you might write to her on the subject, or order us to inform her of your opinion, for we hear from several sources that if she inaugurates her reign in this fashion, she will render herself odious and suspect. Nine days later, the matter still wasn't settled, despite the fact that the ambassadors had in the meantime told Mary that it would risk violence in her realm if the funeral was Catholic, and that quote, the ceremonies observed at funerals touch religion less nearly than others, and therefore are less objectionable to conscience. Moreover, the King died professing the new religion, so the ceremonies used at his burial must be judged superfluous. In other words, they told her that as he died a Protestant, Edward's soul was a lost cause anyway, and it didn't matter what funeral rites were used for him. She didn't need to feel bad about them not being Catholic. Still, Mary was holding out. On the 2nd of August, 1553, the ambassadors wrote to Charles again that, It would too sorely violate her conscience to allow the late King, her brother, to be buried otherwise than as religion dictated, for she was bound by the late King Henry's will, in which he left instructions for masses and prayers to be said. If she appeared to be afraid, her subjects, particularly the Lutherans, would only become more audacious, and would proclaim that she had not dared to do her own will. She was determined to tell her council that she was going to have a mass said at the funeral for her own peace of conscience, and out of respect for the will of the late King Henry, her father. Religion, she would tell them, had been changed in England since her father's death and during her brother's minority because the late protector would have it so. She wished to force no one to go to mass, but meant to see that those who wished to go should be free to do so, and she would soon make a public proclamation of her intentions in order to avoid the drawbacks that Your Majesty or ourselves might anticipate. In an extra document enclosed with this same letter, the ambassadors touched on the matter of the funeral again, and more explicitly raised the issue of the political fallout which might occur if it was conducted in the Catholic manner, saying, Sire, touching the matter of the mass, which Her Majesty desires to reintroduce in her court, and wishes to have celebrated at the funeral of the late King, her brother, Her Majesty has already seen a certain writing in which this question was dealt with. If one considers the condition of this country, the troubles connected with the succession, the dissensions prevalent with regard to religion, the lack of concord in the council, how little that body is to be trusted, and how uncertain are the inclinations of many among her subjects, it is impossible not to be apprehensive of the consequences if it were attempted to make the funeral an opportunity for reintroducing a religion of which the most important features are the mass and other papal traditions, a reappearance of which might cause Her Majesty's subjects to waver in their loyal affection. The result might be not only to endanger her person, but to compromise her accession to the throne. For many people have been heard to lament the possibility, whilst others who fear to be punished for their misdeeds would ask no better than to see a popular rebellion and a revolt of the nobility. Even if Her Majesty desired to have mass sung later in her court, it would be less dangerous than to begin at the funeral, at which the people and nobility will assist. Were any scruple of conscience to arise because of the late King Henry's will, or any private consideration, it seems Her Majesty might well avoid being present at the funeral in person, either on the ground of an illness, or because it is not the custom for princesses and ladies to attend funerals in person. At the same time, a service might be held in the tower in whatever form Her Majesty and her council might devise. It had better be considered whether it would not be advisable, in case mass were to be said at the funeral, to proclaim that every man should be at liberty to hear it or not as he pleased, for the results might be of importance. Little by little, Mary was brought around to the idea of allowing a Protestant service, which she would of course not have to attend. She may have wanted a purely Catholic service, but it simply was not worth the risk to her crown and even her person to be seen to be pushing Catholicism too fast on the English people, who had by now become used to the newer religion introduced by her father and greatly expanded upon during her brother's reign. On the 8th of August, with a plan at last settled upon, and more than a month after his death, Edward was laid to rest. His body had been taken to Whitehall Palace and it was from there that his funeral began, with a procession which took him to Westminster Abbey, where it had been decided to inter him. This was arguably a little strange when you think that he could have been put with both his parents in St George's Chapel at Windsor, but I suppose the Abbey was more convenient. We have a detailed first-hand description of this procession in the diary of Henry Macken or Machen. He was a citizen and merchant tailor of London and who left us the following account of Edward's final journey. The 8th day of August was buried the noble King Edward VI and seven year of his reign, and at his burying was the greatest moan made for him of his death as ever was heard or seen. Both of all sorts of people, weeping and lamenting, and first of all went a great company of children in their surplus and Clark singing, and then his father's bed men, and then two heralds, and then a standard with a dragon, and then a great number of his servants in black, and then another standard with a white greyhound, and then after a great number of his officers, and after them comes more heralds, and then a standard with the head offices of his house, and then heralds. Noray, meaning the Noray King at Arms, bare the element and the crest on horseback, and then his great banner of arms in brewery, I'm sorry I don't know what that means, I'm reading this directly from the original 16th century spelling and there's the odd word that I'm just not sure how to modernise or explain, and brewery is one of them, and with divers other banners, and then came riding master Clarence House with his target, with his garter and his sword, gorgeously and rich, and after garter with his coat armour in brewery, not brewery, and then more heralds of arms, and then came the chariot with great horses, trapped with velvet to the ground, and every horse having a man on his back in black, and every one bearing a banner roll of divers king's arms, and with scutians on their horses, and then the chariot covered with cloth of gold, and on the chariot lay on a picture lying piteously with a crown of gold and a great collar, and his sceptre in his hand lying in his robes, and the garter about his leg and a coat in embroidery of gold, about the corpse were born four banners, a banner of the order, another of the red rose, another of queen Jane, see more, another of the queen's mother, this is Catherine of Aragon and to be honest, I don't know why her banners were being displayed at Edward's funeral unless it was just because she was the mother of the new queen or as a little revenge from Mary for the fact that Edward had called her parents marriage void, after him went a goodly horse covered with cloth of gold unto the ground and the master of the horse with a man of arms in armour which was offered both the man and the horse, there was set up a goodly hearse in Westminster Abbey with banner rolls and pencils and hung with velvet about, Machen wasn't at the church service itself of course but if he had been he would have seen that in a concession that must have been very tough for the new queen to swallow It was conducted in English rather than Latin and was overseen by Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury who Mary later burnt at the stake and using the book of common prayer It included a communion which the Greyfriars Chronicle would record was done poorly and a good sermon by the Bishop of Chichester As planned the queen did not attend but soothed her conscience and did what she considered the right thing for her brother by having masses said for his soul at the Tower of London which we could argue was actually quite magnanimous given that she believed Edward was a heretic and she knew he tried to prevent her from taking the crown After the service the king was interred in the chapel of their grandfather Henry VII and although a wax and wooden effigy of him was created for the occasion of his funeral it has long since been lost The Spanish ambassadors reported that the funeral was conducted with small ceremony and noted that the decision to have masses said for his soul by the Bishop of Winchester, that's Stephen Gardiner at the tower had caused a good deal of murmuring even among the queen's bodyguard Edward was placed in a small arched tomb supported by two rings of half brick which measures seven and a half feet long by two and a half feet wide and which is so shallow that its floor is just a matter of feet below the pavement that the tourists walk on It is so small in fact that no other coffin could ever be fitted into it It is positioned at the head of the tomb of Henry and his wife Elizabeth of York and under normal circumstances if we weren't talking about a royal that is that would have been that However, when you're a king quite often your burial is just the beginning of a new and exciting chapter for your earthly remains and such was the case for Edward Unlike his sisters and paternal grandparents who are all buried in the same room as him there was never any dedicated memorial erected for the first Protestant king though there were plans at one point to create one as shown by a surviving drawing by Cornelius Cure in the Bodleian Library dated circa 1573 Probably this was not followed through on due to a lack of space though it must be said too that Elizabeth I never showed any interest in putting up monuments to her family doing nothing for her parents or Mary either The Henry VII and Elizabeth of York monument which would have been right next to it is pretty big already however and another large monument would not only have looked cluttered but might have impeded access to one or more subterranean vaults Instead Edward was buried beneath an elaborate brass altar created by Italian sculptor Pietro Torrigiano He had actually died back in 1528 so this altar was presumably already in place and was just lifted out of the way then put back on top of the vault once Edward was in it No doubt the king would have hated the fact that in Mary's reign at least it would have been used to say Catholic masses directly over his remains It was destroyed by the Cromwellians during the 1640s but parts of it survived and you'll hear more about what happened to them in a few minutes It is ironic though that of all the grave markers which is what the altar was functioning as to destroy the Puritans opted to dismantle one sitting over the top of the first Protestant king We now fast forward to the reign of Queen Victoria and to early 1869 At this point the tomb of James I aka James VI of Scotland was being searched for in the chapel of Henry VII where it had been discovered that he was not buried with his wife Anne of Denmark and the worry was that the Cromwellians had stolen his remains Also I think the Victorians were just nosy and wanted to answer this little mystery As part of the search the tomb of Edward VI the location of which was already known was opened up One of those present Arthur Penryn Stanley Dean of the Abbey later wrote an 1868 book about its memorials though it is in an 1869 supplement to that book that he included a first-hand account of what was discovered in the boy king's grave He said that upon lifting the floor a shallow vault immediately appeared containing one leaden coffin only rent and deformed as well as wasted by long corrosion and perhaps injured by having been examined before The wooden case had been in part cleared away and the pavement had evidently been at some previous time wholly or partially removed Over the coffin were a series of Kentish ragstone which had been steps one or more shaped with octagon angle ends and the fronts of them bordered with a smooth polished surface surrounding a frosted area of a light grey colour within the border These were probably the original steps of the dais and must have been placed in this position at the time when in 1641 the Puritans destroyed the monumental altar under which Edward VI was buried This conclusion was greatly strengthened by the interesting discovery that the extreme piece of the covering at the foot was a frieze of white marble three feet eight inches long seven inches high and six inches thick elaborately carved along the front and each end while the back was wrought to form the line of a segmental vaulted ceiling and the ends pierced to receive the points of columns These features at once marked it as part of the marble frieze of Torrigiano's work for this matchless altar as it was deemed at the time The carving is of the best style of the early Renaissance period and is unquestionably Italian work It combines alternations of heraldic badges the Tudor roses and the lilies of France placed between scrollage of various flowers It still retained two iron cramps which were used to join a fracture occasioned by the defectiveness of the marble and it also exhibited the remains of another iron cramp which was used to connect the marble with the entire fabric Deep stains of iron at the ends of the marble had been left by an overlying bar probably a part of the ancient structure which was placed on the carved surface seemingly to strengthen the broken parts I just want to pause for a moment here to make sure we're all following what Stanley is saying The fact that part of the original altar was inside the tomb indicates that the vault had been opened up at least once before and in the 1640s when the Puritans had control of the Abbey When it transpired later on that James I was in the Henry VII tomb Stanley also surmised that Edward's tomb had been opened in 1625 in order to obtain access to the larger vault to deposit the first Stuart King of England there and I would add to that the little known fact that Elizabeth I was initially interred with her grandparents in 1603 then moved to her current grave in 1606 so it's entirely possible Edward had to be lifted out of the way in those years too in order to access the larger tomb depending on how it was opened up Perhaps there were other grave goods with him initially but we'll never know now what the Stuarts or Cromwellians might have stolen or whether it was they who ruined the wooden coffin which he was also placed in or if it just naturally deteriorated hurried along by the constant disturbances Back to Stanley though who continued by saying Underneath these fragments lying across the lower part of the coffin was discovered curiously rolled up but loose and unsoldered the leaden coffin plate It was so corroded that until closely inspected in a full light no letter or inscription was discernible With some difficulty however every letter of this interesting and hitherto unknown inscription was read The letters all capitals of equal size one by one were deciphered and gave to the world for the first time the epitaph on the youthful king in some points unique amongst the funeral inscriptions of English sovereigns On the coffin of the first completely Protestant king immediately following the royal titles was the full and unabated style conferred by the English Reformation On earth under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland supreme head Such an inscription marks the moment when the words must have been inserted in that short interval of nine days whilst the body still lay at Greenwich and whilst Lady Jane Grey still upheld the hopes of the Protestant party In a footnote Stanley gives a transcription of the inscription in Latin but I'm going to read you out an English translation because I don't hate you It said Edward VI by the grace of God King of England, France and Ireland Defender of the faith and on earth under Christ supreme head of the Churches of England and Ireland And he migrated from this life on the sixth day of July in the evening at the eighth hour in the year of our Lord 1553 and in the seventh year of his reign and in the 16th year of his age He also recorded in a footnote a little detail about the corpse which I found very interesting and would have put into the main text but each to their own He said that When the stone covering was removed at the back of the coffin the skull of the king became visible The seer cloth had fallen away and showed that no hair was attached to the skull Stanley found this interesting and you might too because accounts of Edward's specifically state either that his hair was shaved off or that it fell out and this lack of hair in the skull might support those statements though I think in fairness we should also say that after more than three centuries in the ground the hair might have just deteriorated too Annoyingly he didn't make a drawing of the inside of the tomb and at this point I think it's unlikely it will ever be opened again unless maintenance work needs to be done on the chapel After all there's no room in there to add in anyone else As for why the seer cloth had come unwrapped so that the skull was exposed I have more than a passing suspicion that the Puritans might have done that to have a nosy Looking at corpses especially those of famous people seems to be an irresistible pastime for those of later generations who get the chance to do it as my studies of what happened to the remains of the likes of Queen Catherine Parr and King Charles I have shown I don't see any other reason why the seer cloth just around Edward's head would have come undone if the coffin and the body had been left in peace And even if Edward's hair wasn't removed during his lifetime I wouldn't be surprised if the Cromwellians cut it off for souvenirs because that's something else people who open up royal tombs seem to love to do Nicking bones and teeth is another popular pastime Again watch some of my episodes about other royal corpses and you'll understand why I say that Now came the decision as to how to treat and mark the grave going forwards and what to do with the altar frieze and the leaden scroll which had been discovered The Abbey website gives a nice little summary for some of this saying A large fossil marble slab was laid over the spot with a copy of the plate inscription on it but this was soon obscured by the new altar put up by the Dean in 1870 Part of the original frieze of Torrigiano's altar destroyed by Cromwell during the Civil War was found in the grave and is still preserved in the present modern altar put up in 1935 So the altar frieze which was never intended to be below ground and was not part of the original burial in fact it surely preceded it by decades considering when Torrigiano died was not put back in the vault and now sits above it once more in the modern altar As for the coffin plate it was treated with a solution of shellac to prevent further corrosion and put back with Edward's remains being now screwed onto a marble slab on the coffin Another slab was added too which gave details of the 1867-68 opening of the tomb So if Edward's grave is hidden away under the altar with no marker on it to clearly state that this is where the boy king is interred then why is there a plaque in the floor a few feet away which does not actually mark the spot of his burial? Well this is most easily answered by telling you what the plaque says which is as follows In memory of King Edward VI buried in this chapel this stone was placed here by Christ's Hospital in Thanksgiving for their founder 7th of October 1966 As for the location I guess they put it here because it wasn't possible to lay the plaque in the floor directly over the tomb Still it is a little confusing and I don't mind telling you that when I was in the chapel I assumed that the vault was beneath the plaque and didn't realise it's under the altar until I was researching this episode I hope you enjoyed that study of the death, burial and tomb of Edward VI Let me know in the comments if you think there should be a dedicated memorial to him over his grave rather than an altar and for more from me I recommend you check out my episodes on the tomb of Edward's sisters Mary and Elizabeth Tudor and on what the Victorians found when they dug up Anne Boleyn not long after Edward's vault was opened Whatever you choose please enjoy and until next time keep learning