# 02 — The Gelderland manuscript and the documentary record around "Perkin Warbeck" Research notes. Conventions: **VERIFIED** = I read the text cited (URL / edition / page given); **UNVERIFIED** = reported at second hand or from memory, not read in the original; **SECONDARY** = modern narrative or commentary. Partisanship is flagged where it bears on reliability. All quotations of primary sources are verbatim from the edition named; translations are mine unless attributed. Working copies of the raw downloads are not included in this folder. Editions used (all VERIFIED unless stated): - Madden, F., "Documents relating to Perkin Warbeck, with Remarks on his History", *Archaeologia* 27 (1838), pp. 153–210 — archive.org item `s2id13276860` (djvu text). - Gairdner, J., *History of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third, to which is added the Story of Perkin Warbeck* (Cambridge, 1898) — archive.org `historyofliferei00gairuoft`. - Gairdner, J. (ed.), *Letters and Papers illustrative of the Reigns of Richard III and Henry VII*, Rolls Series, 2 vols (1861–3) — archive.org `letterspapersil01gair`, `letterspapersil02gair`. - Hall, E., *Chronicle* (ed. Ellis, 1809) — archive.org `hallschronicleco00halluoft`. - Kingsford, C. L. (ed.), *Chronicles of London* (1905), text of BL Cotton Vitellius A XVI — archive.org `chroniclesoflond00kinguoft`. - Pollard, A. F., *The Reign of Henry VII from Contemporary Sources*, vol. 1 (1913) — archive.org `reignofhenryviif01polluoft`. - Polydore Vergil, *Anglica Historia* (1555 text), hypertext ed. D. F. Sutton, with Hay's translation — https://www.philological.cal.bham.ac.uk/polverg/26lat.html and /26eng.html. - *Calendar of State Papers, Spain*, vol. 1 (Bergenroth, 1862); *CSP Milan* (Hinds, 1912); *CSP Venice*, vol. 1 (Rawdon Brown, 1864) — British History Online, page URLs given below. - Gelders Archief news item, 21 Nov 2023 (archive's own website); Omroep Gelderland (René Arendsen), 21 Nov 2023; NOS (Fleur Launspach), Nov 2023; Yvette Hoitink, dutchgenealogy.nl, 24 Nov 2023; Philippa Langley's project website (philippalangley.co.uk, "solved" page); Richard III Society press release 16 Nov 2023 (PDF). - Michael Hicks, "Historic doubts about the survival of the Princes in the Tower after 1485", *Historical Research* 97/277 (2024), 437–442 — abstract VERIFIED via OpenAlex and Crossref (doi 10.1093/hisres/htae009); full text behind paywall. - Tim Thornton, "Sir William Capell and a Royal Chain: The Afterlives (and Death) of King Edward V", *History* 109 (2024), 445–460 — VERIFIED. NOT accessed (lending-only or paywalled): Langley, *The Princes in the Tower* (2023; 2025 edn); Wroe, *Perkin* (2003); Arthurson (1994); Amin (2020); Lewis (2017); Great Chronicle (Thomas & Thornley 1938); *Ricardian Bulletin* June 2024. Where these are cited, the tag says so. --- ## 1. The Gelderland manuscript (Gelders Archief, Arnhem) ### 1.1 Archive reference and catalogue description - Reference: **Gelders Archief, toegang 0510 "Diverse charters / diverse aanwinsten", inventarisnummer 1549.** Permalink: https://permalink.geldersarchief.nl/F64A979DBCB749FEA86D788752068FC9 (the catalogue page itself is JavaScript-rendered; fetches returned no record text or an HTTP 503, so the description below is taken from the archive's news page and from Hoitink's citation of the record). **VERIFIED** for the reference: the archive's own news item says: "Het manuscript is gescand en is te vinden in de toegang 0510 Diverse Charters en Aanwinsten in inventarisnummer 1549" ("The manuscript has been scanned and can be found in record group 0510 Diverse Charters and Acquisitions, inventory number 1549"). Gelders Archief, "Stuk uit Gelders Archief werpt nieuw licht op Britse geschiedenis", 21 Nov 2023, https://www.geldersarchief.nl/over-ons/actueel/nieuws. Photo caption on the same page: "Manuscript met vertelling van Richard van York, 0510-1549." - Catalogue wording as cited by a professional Dutch genealogist (Yvette Hoitink, MLitt, CG), who read the record and images: "Unidentified author, story about Richard of York, circa 1500, with transcript, 1500s; call no. 1549, Diverse Charters and Acquisitions, Record Group 0510, Gelders Archief, Arnhem, Netherlands; finding aid and images" — https://www.dutchgenealogy.nl/new-dutch-evidence-for-the-missing-princes-in-the-tower/ (24 Nov 2023). **VERIFIED**. Note the three catalogue facts: author unidentified; **dated by the archive "circa 1500"**; accompanied by a **sixteenth-century transcript (afschrift)**. - The same item also contains photocopies of the 1951 Meij–Enklaar correspondence (see 1.3): Omroep Gelderland: "Het middeleeuwse document is keurig gedigitaliseerd in het Gelders Archief en voorzien van een briefwisseling tussen de professoren Meij en Enklaar uit 1951" ("The medieval document has been neatly digitised in the Gelders Archief and is accompanied by an exchange of letters between professors Meij and Enklaar from 1951"). **VERIFIED**: René Arendsen, "Gelders archiefstuk dat Engelse prinsenmoord ontkracht, was al langer bekend", Omroep Gelderland, 21 Nov 2023 (updated 22 Nov 2023), https://www.gld.nl/nieuws/8047660/gelders-archiefstuk-dat-engelse-prinsenmoord-ontkracht-was-al-langer-bekend. - Langley's own reference (project website): "Gelderland Witness Statement (semi-legal, 4 pages) – Richard, Duke of York: Proof of Life, 1494. Gelders Archief, Arnhem, Netherlands, 0510, Nr. 1549 Diverse charters/diverse aanwinsten." **VERIFIED** (https://www.philippalangley.co.uk — "The Princes in the Tower: solved" page). Elsewhere on the same page it is "Discovery 4: Richard, Duke of York: Proof of Life (aged 20), 1493" and "circa 1493-4"; the archive's date is c. 1500. This discrepancy is not addressed on the site. ### 1.2 Physical description, language, hand, date - Four pages; first-person narrative with a third-person heading; written in (Middle) Dutch. Sources: Langley site: "a four page, semi-legal manuscript ... a witness statement written in the first person and records Richard, Duke of York's story from the point at which he left sanctuary in Westminster in London as a 9 year-old boy in 1483, to his arrival at the court of his aunt, Margaret of York, in Burgundy in circa 1493-4" (**VERIFIED**). Language: Langley site says the transcription/translation "was checked for the TV documentary programme by Middle Dutch writing expert, Associate Professor Bart Lambert at the Brussels Centre for Urban Studies in Belgium. Professor Lambert made a few minor corrections which are now published in The Princes in the Tower: How History's Greatest Cold Case Was Solved (2025)" (**VERIFIED**). Soberton calls it "a four-page account in Dutch in the Gelderland archives at Arnham" (**VERIFIED**, https://thetudors.substack.com, 22 Nov 2025). HistoryHit (Amy Irvine) gives "Language: Middle Dutch" and "Verification: Confirmed by Dr. Janina Ramirez at Oxford and language experts from Belgium and the Bodleian Library" (**VERIFIED** via a page summary). Meij in 1951 quotes the Dutch spellings "Hinrijck und Thomas Parey" and "herthoginne van Burghoendiën" (**VERIFIED**, Omroep Gelderland), and Hoitink reports the original spells Buckingham "Buckgegem" (the sixteenth-century transcript "Buckeghem"; Langley's book prints "Buckgegen") (**VERIFIED**). The spellings quoted from Langley's translation ("cantelberch", "gloessester", "Braekeberij", "Parcij", "gylbart de braven") are consistent with a Dutch scribe rendering English names by ear. - Authentication claimed by Langley: "for the Gelderland manuscript three specialists at Het Gelders Archief: Dr Fred van Kan, archivist and general director, Marjolein Jacobs-Driessen, MA, historian and archivist, Leanne Eras, MA, conservator, and leading international specialist Dr Andrew Dunning, Curator of Medieval Manuscripts at the Bodleian Library in Oxford" (**VERIFIED**). NOS: "Deskundigen hebben vastgesteld dat het document inderdaad in de juiste periode is geschreven" ("Experts have established that the document was indeed written in the right period") — **VERIFIED**, NOS/Nieuwsuur, Fleur Launspach, Nov 2023 (JSON-LD articleBody). No expert report has been published; "the right period" is not further defined in any source I found, and the archive's own dating remains "circa 1500". - Copy, not original: Langley and Nijman themselves infer that the surviving document is a copy, because the third-person heading and the first-person text are in the same hand. As summarised by the pro-Ricardian blog sparkypus.com (6 Mar 2024, reporting Langley 2023 ch. on the manuscript): "the heading of the document written in the third person but in the same handwriting of the duke's narrative leads them to believe that it's a copy of an original document when a scribe wrote down the words dictated to him by Richard. Several copies may have been made of the original and distributed 'throughout Burgundy'" (**VERIFIED** as a report of Langley's argument; **PARTISAN**: the blog is avowedly Ricardian). ### 1.3 Discovery history - 1951: found by A. P. van Schilfgaarde, sent by P. J. Meij (post-war keeper of the Gelderland medieval archive) to Prof. D. Th. Enklaar (Instituut voor middeleeuwse geschiedenis, Utrecht). **VERIFIED**, Omroep Gelderland (Arendsen): "P.J. Meij beheerde na de Tweede Wereldoorlog het omvangrijke middeleeuwse archief van de provincie Gelderland. Hij schreef aan zijn collega professor Enklaar van het Instituut voor middeleeuwse geschiedenis aan de Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht dat er een opmerkelijk document was ontdekt door zijn collega Van Schilfgaarde." Meij's description of the contents: "Het verhaal dat ik voor me heb vermeldt echter dat Richard uit de Tower weggevoerd is onder leiding van 'Hinrijck und Thomas Parey', te Parijs verblijft, later via Brabant naar Middelburg gaat, naar Lissabon, naar Ierland, Frankrijk en tenslotte bij de 'herthoginne van Burghoendiën' belandt." ("The story I have before me states, however, that Richard was taken away from the Tower under the guidance of 'Hinrijck und Thomas Parey', stays in Paris, later goes via Brabant to Middelburg, to Lisbon, to Ireland, France and finally ends up with the 'duchess of Burgundy'.") Enklaar's reply: "Ik kan natuurlijk niet oordelen over uw archiefstuk zonder het gezien te hebben, maar ik vraag me af, of het een propagandastuk is om stemming te maken tegen Hendrik VII Tudor ... en het hem lastig te maken door een valse Richard van York naar voren te schuiven." ("I cannot of course judge your document without having seen it, but I wonder whether it is a piece of propaganda to stir up feeling against Henry VII Tudor ... and to make trouble for him by putting forward a false Richard of York.") Langley's book (as reported by sparkypus) quotes Enklaar as also asking "Is the case of the false York 'Perkin Warbeck' not already sufficiently known?" (**SECONDARY**, sparkypus citing Langley 2023 p. 190; not checked against the letter). - 2020: re-found online by Nathalie Nijman-Bliekendaal (Dutch Research Group). **VERIFIED**, Gelders Archief news item: "Ik deed de vondst eind 2020. Ik heb het document online gevonden. De omschrijving van het stuk was ontzettend intrigerend en zo onverwacht, 'een vertelling van Richard van York'." ("I made the find at the end of 2020. I found the document online. The description of the item was tremendously intriguing and so unexpected, 'a narrative of Richard of York'.") The archive notes she "had geen enkele ervaring met het doen van archiefonderzoek. Ze studeerde rechten en werkte bij Slachtofferhulp Nederland" ("had no experience at all of archival research; she studied law and worked at Victim Support Netherlands"), and that she was helped by the archaeologist/historical researcher Jean Roefstra; she co-wrote three chapters and the foreword of Langley's book. Langley's site dates the rediscovery to November 2020. ### 1.4 How it came to Guelders (provenance) - Unknown. Omroep Gelderland: "Hoe het middeleeuwse document in Gelderland terechtkwam is onduidelijk. Het stuk wordt bewaard onder de categorie diverse charters / diverse aanwinsten. De Dutch Research Group heeft de Nederlandse archieven uitvoerig onderzocht en het ooggetuigenverslag alleen in Arnhem gevonden." ("How the medieval document ended up in Gelderland is unclear. The item is kept under the category miscellaneous charters / miscellaneous acquisitions. The Dutch Research Group has searched the Dutch archives extensively and found the eyewitness account only in Arnhem.") **VERIFIED**. - Meij's 1951 speculation about Charles of Egmond, duke of Guelders: "Zou hertog Karel (van Gelre, red.) zich in de jaren toen hij aan het Bourgondische Hof vertoefde voor dit geval geïnteresseerd hebben? Voorlopig gaat het echter om de historische waarde en het eventueel bekend zijn van deze lezing." ("Might Duke Charles [of Guelders] have interested himself in this case in the years when he was staying at the Burgundian court? For the present, however, the question is the historical value and whether this version is already known.") **VERIFIED**. I found no evidence beyond this conjecture. (Charles of Egmond, born 1467, was brought up at the Burgundian court and was a prisoner in France from 1487 until 1492, when he became duke and turned against Maximilian — general knowledge, UNVERIFIED here; Maximilian's message of 11 July 1495 to Venice mentions "occupations in Guelders and the Low Countries" in the same breath as dispatching York — CSP Venice i no. 648, see §4. A Guelders interest in an anti-Habsburg or anti-Tudor pamphlet is therefore conceivable but undocumented.) The "diverse aanwinsten" series is, by definition, a collection of items acquired from miscellaneous sources; the item therefore carries no institutional provenance chain back to the ducal chancery. ### 1.5 What the text says (as far as published) No edition of the Dutch text has been published. Langley's book (2023; revised 2025) prints an English translation and, in the 2025 edition, images; the project website shows low-resolution images. Everything below is Langley's translation as quoted by third parties, or the Dutch phrases quoted by Meij (1951), NOS and Hoitink. **SECONDARY** throughout unless marked. Heading and narrator: "the Duke of York, son and heir of King Edward IV, Richard" (third person); the narrative is in the first person. Narrative sequence as summarised from Langley's translation by sparkypus (**VERIFIED** as a report; blog is Ricardian): - His mother "delivered me from the sanctuary of Westminster" to the Archbishop of "cantelberch" (Canterbury) and others; taken to "my uncle of gloessester" (Gloucester); then to his brother in the Tower, where John Norris and William Tyrwyth were waiting; the brother "often said melancholic words" and "prayed my uncle of gloessester to have mercy on him as he was an innocent person". - Then "we were delivered to Brackenbury, and then to sir James Tyrrell, and then to the Duke of Buckingham, by whose orders we were separated. And so they ordered my lord Foriest, Hamelett Maleven and Wylliam Puche by whom I was secretly taken into a room in a place where the lions are kept." (**VERIFIED** as quoted by Soberton, Nov 2025, from Langley's translation.) - NOS quotes the next passage in Dutch (its own rendering of Langley's translation, not the manuscript's Dutch): "Ik werd in het geheim naar een kamer gebracht op een plek waar de leeuwen werden gehouden ... Lord Howard kwam naar mij toe en sprak me moed in. Hij beval de bewakers te vertrekken en bracht vervolgens twee andere mannen naar mij toe. Ze heetten Henry Percy en Thomas Percy ... Ze zwoeren plechtig dat ze me zouden beschermen en verbergen totdat een aantal jaren voorbij waren. Ze schoren mijn haar en trokken me een armoedig en saai shirt aan en we gingen naar St. Katharine's [scheepsdok]." ("I was secretly brought to a room in a place where the lions were kept ... Lord Howard came to me and encouraged me. He ordered the guards to leave and then brought two other men to me. They were called Henry Percy and Thomas Percy ... They swore solemnly that they would protect and hide me until a number of years had passed. They shaved my hair and dressed me in a poor, drab shirt and we went to St Katharine's [dock].") **VERIFIED** (NOS). Note NOS's "Percy" against the manuscript's "Parey" (Meij) / "Parcij" (Langley). - Boat to Boulogne-sur-Mer; Paris ("a long time", until noticed by English people); Chartres, Rouen, Dieppe, Hainault, Brabant, Malines, Antwerp, Bergen (prolonged stay); Middelburg (Meij's summary); Edward Brampton's wife "ready to sail" with him and the Parcijs to Lisbon; aged about 14 in Lisbon he sent Thomas Parcij to England with messages for his mother, then in "retirement" at Bermondsey; Henry Parcij died of plague, telling him to go to Ireland to the lords of Kildare and Desmond; in Ireland he was recognised "for who he was", incl. by "gylbart de braven" (Gerald FitzGerald); Charles VIII promised to "assist and help me to claim my rights" but withdrew after a treaty with Henry VII; then to his aunt: "She recognised my rights and honesty. And by the grace of God, I received help, honour and comfort from my dear friends and servants that in a short time I will obtain my right to which I was born..." — end of text (sparkypus, quoting Langley 2023). - Langley's supporting correlations (as reported): John Howard's household accounts record clothing for "humble children of the stables" on 11 Aug 1483 (Howard Household Books ii. 426, per Langley); plague at Lisbon at the relevant time; Dr Argentine's report (Mancini) of Edward V's melancholy. ### 1.6 The archive's own view of the document's nature - The archive's news page makes no claim about authorship, date beyond the catalogue, or reliability; it reports the find and the book, and quotes Nijman-Bliekendaal's view ("zet serieuze vraagtekens bij de traditionele ... vertelling" — "raises serious questions about the traditional narrative"). **VERIFIED**. - The catalogue entry classifies it as a "story"/"narrative" (vertelling/verhandeling) by an "unidentified author", c. 1500, with a sixteenth-century transcript (Hoitink's citation). It does not call it a witness statement. - The only two Dutch scholarly readings on record are Meij's neutral summary and Enklaar's 1951 suggestion that it is a propagandastuk for a "valse Richard van York" (§1.3). Omroep Gelderland's headline makes the same point: the document "was al langer bekend" ("had long been known"). ### 1.7 Comparison with Warbeck's own public statements **(a) The Latin letter to Isabella of Castile, 25 August 1493.** BL Egerton MS 616 f. 3 (Madden: "From the Original in the British Museum"). Printed in full by Madden, *Archaeologia* 27, pp. 199–200 (**VERIFIED**, archive.org `s2id13276860`); calendared as CSP Spain i no. 85 (**VERIFIED**, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/spain/vol1 page for 1493, "8 Sept. B. M. MS. E. 616. f. 3. 85. Richard, Duke of York, (Perkin Warbeck,) to Queen Isabella of Spain"). Bergenroth's "8 Sept." is a misreading of "Octauo kallendas Septembris" = 25 August. Madden's text (abbreviations expanded in brackets): > Serenissima & excellentissima princeps: Domina & consanguinea plurimum honoranda. V[est]re Maiestati me plurimum co[m]mendo. Cu[m] p[ri]mogenitus quondam Regis Anglie Edwardi pie memorie: d[omi]ni et parentis mei carissimi Princeps Walie: miserando funere extinctus fuisset: Egoq[ue] eciam nonum fere agens annum traditus essem cuidam domino extinguendus: placuit divine clementie: ut ille dominus innocentie mee misertus: me viuum & incolumem seruauerit. cum tan[m]en p[ri]mo supra sacrum corpus d[omi]ni jurejurando me adegerit: ne nomen genus et familiam usq[ue] in annos certos cuippiam propalarem. Misit ergo me peregre: cum duobus viris qui me custodirent ac gubernarent. Inde ego pupillus: patre atq[ue] fratre Regibus orbus: exul Regno patria: hereditate: cunctisq[ue] fortunis expoliatus: per magna pericula p[ro]fugus in metu et luctu et merore egi miserum etatem. & fere annis octo per diversas provincias latitaui. Tandem altero eo[rum] qui me gubernabat defuncto: altero in patriam misso & nunq[uam] postea viso: vix puericiam egressus: solus utq[ue] egens: mansi ad tempus in Regno Portugallie; inde in Hyberniam nauigaui. Ybi cognitus ab Illustribus D[omi]n[i]s comite Exmonie et comite de Quildara: consanguineis meis: simul et ab alijs insule proceribus: magno gaudio et honore acceptus fui. Inde cum Rex Francie multis nauibus & comeatu me euocasset: pollicitus opem et auxilium contra Henricum Richemundie Regni Anglie iniquum detentorem: veni ad predictum Regem Francie: qui me ut cognatu[m] et beniuolum honorifice suscepit. Cumq[ue] minime auxilium pollicitum prestaret: contuli me ad Ill[ustrissi]mam p[ri]ncipem D[omi]nam Ducissa[m] Burgu[n]die parentis mei sororem: amitam meam carissimam: que pro sua humanitate et virtute: omni me pietate et honore amplexa est. Simul eius gratia Serenissimus Rex Ro[manorum]: eiusq[ue] filius archidux Austrie: et Dux Saxonie Consanguinei mei cari[ssi]mi Necnon Reges Dacie & Scotie: qui ad me oratores amicicie et confederationis gratia miserunt. Idem magni proceres Regni Anglie secreto fecerunt: qui huius Henrici de Richemundia superbam & iniquam tyrannidem execrantur. ... Ex opido Andermunda. Octauo kallendas Septembris. anno 1493. Addressed "Serenissimae & Excellentissimae principi. Domine Ysabel Regine Castelle. Aragonie. Sicilie. Granate, &c." Translation: "Most serene and excellent princess, lady and kinswoman most worthy of honour, I commend myself most heartily to your Majesty. When the first-born of the late King Edward of England of pious memory, my most dear lord and father — the Prince of Wales — had been done to death by a pitiable end, and I too, being then almost nine years old, had been handed over to a certain lord to be killed, it pleased the divine mercy that that lord, taking pity on my innocence, kept me alive and unharmed, having however first bound me by an oath sworn upon the holy body of the Lord that I should not reveal my name, birth and family to anyone until certain years had passed. He therefore sent me abroad with two men who were to guard and govern me. Thereafter I, an orphan, bereft of a father and a brother who were kings, an exile from my kingdom and country, stripped of my inheritance and of all my fortunes, a fugitive through great dangers, passed a wretched youth in fear, grief and sorrow, and for almost eight years I lay hidden in various provinces. At length, one of those who governed me having died and the other having been sent home and never seen again, scarcely out of boyhood, alone and in want, I stayed for a time in the kingdom of Portugal; from there I sailed to Ireland. There, recognised by the illustrious lords the earl of Desmond and the earl of Kildare, my kinsmen, and likewise by the other magnates of the island, I was received with great joy and honour. Then, when the king of France had summoned me with many ships and provisions, promising help and aid against Henry of Richmond, the unjust detainer of the kingdom of England, I came to the said king of France, who received me honourably as a kinsman and friend. And when he did not at all provide the help he had promised, I betook myself to the most illustrious princess the Lady Duchess of Burgundy, my father's sister, my dearest aunt ... Likewise, by her favour, the most serene King of the Romans and his son the archduke of Austria, and the duke of Saxony, my dearest kinsmen, and also the kings of Denmark and Scotland, have sent envoys to me for friendship and alliance. The great lords of the kingdom of England have secretly done the same ... From the town of Dendermonde, 25 August 1493." Gairdner (1898, p. 268 n., **VERIFIED**) on the age: "Warbeck, however, supposed the character he was personating to have been not quite nine years old in 1483; which, we may presume, nearly tallied with his own age. Moreover the Venetian ambassador who saw him in London in 1497 says that he was then 23 (Venetian Calendar, vol. i. No. 760). So that he seems to have been born in 1474." (Richard of Shrewsbury was born 17 August 1473 and was therefore nearly ten in summer 1483; Gairdner cites Madden, *Archaeologia* 27, p. 161 for the birth date.) **(b) The proclamation, 1497.** Pollard i no. 108, from BL "Birch MS." 4160 (transcribed 1616 from a Cotton original since burnt), with variants in Harl. 283 f. 123b and Egerton 2219; Pollard dates it July 1497 (**VERIFIED**, archive.org `reignofhenryviif01polluoft`, pp. 150–3). Opening: > Richard by the grace of God King of England, and of France, Lord of Ireland, Prince of Wales. To all those, that these our present letters shall see, hear or read, and to every of them greeting. And wheras We in our tender age, escaped by God's great might out of the Tower of London, and were secretly conveyed over the sea to divers other countries, there remaining certain years as unknown. The which season it happened one Henry son to Edmond Tydder — Earl of Richmond created, son to Owen Tydder of low birth in the country of Wales — to come from France and entered into this our realm, and by subtle false means to obtain the crown of the same unto us of right appertaining ... It goes on to list Henry's victims (Sir William Stanley etc.) and his low-born councillors, and mentions Sir Robert Clifford's defection. No names of rescuers, no itinerary. **(c) The confession, 1497** — see §3 for the text. Its itinerary: Tournai → Antwerp (John Stienbeck) → Tournai → Antwerp mart with Berlo → "Barowe marte" (Bergen op Zoom) → Middelburg (John Strewe) → Portugal "in the Cumpany of Sir Edward Bramptons wif in a Ship which was called the Quenes Ship" → Lisbon (Pero Vaz da Cunha, one-eyed) → Ireland with Pregent Meno → Cork. **(d) Henry VII's instructions to Richmond herald for Charles VIII (Madden, Appendix III, Cott. Cal. D. vi f. 18; VERIFIED):** the King of the Romans wishes "ayd[er] & fauourizer celluy qui se nomme Plantagenet, et estre filz du feu Roy Edo[uard], et qu'il est delibere de luy ayder de gens, de faveur, et de ce qu'il pourra. Et a [cette] intencion est alle en Flandres, auec bonne puissance" — i.e. the claimant was calling himself "Plantagenet" and son of Edward IV at the time Maximilian took him up (late 1493/1494; Madden's dating of the instructions not checked), and Charles VIII was passing this intelligence to Henry. **Is the Gelderland narrative independent of Warbeck's public story?** Point by point: | Element | 1493 Latin letter | 1497 proclamation | 1497 confession / Brampton 1496 | Gelderland text | |---|---|---|---|---| | Escape from Tower, sworn to silence "for certain years" | yes ("usque in annos certos") | yes ("remaining certain years as unknown") | — | yes ("secretly away for certain years") | | Two guardians, one dies, one sent away | yes ("duobus viris ... altero defuncto") | — | — | yes (Henry Parcij dies of plague; Thomas sent to England) | | Names of rescuers (Howard, Parcij), of gaolers (Brackenbury, Tyrell, Forest etc.) | no | no | no | yes | | Paris / Normandy / Hainault stages | no | no | no | yes | | Antwerp, Bergen (op Zoom), Middelburg | no | no | yes (confession: Antwerp, "Barowe marte", Middelburg; Brampton 1496: Middelburg) | yes (Antwerp, Bergen "prolonged", Middelburg per Meij) | | To Portugal with Edward Brampton's wife | no ("mansi ad tempus in Regno Portugallie") | no | yes (confession; Brampton and Rui de Sousa 1496) | yes | | Ireland, Kildare and Desmond | yes | — | yes (Desmond and Kildare named by the Cork men) | yes | | Charles VIII's promise and withdrawal | yes | — | (Hall: dismissed after the peace) | yes | | Margaret of Burgundy's recognition | yes | — | — | yes (ends there) | Assessment: 1. Every element of the Gelderland narrative that is also in the 1493 letter is told in the same order and with the same explanatory logic (oath of silence, two keepers, one dead, Portugal, Ireland, France, Burgundy). That is the claimant's official story of 1493, as issued from Dendermonde (Andermunda) — i.e. from Margaret's own household. The Gelderland text is therefore not independent of the pretender's own propaganda; at best it is a fuller version of it. 2. The elements that are *not* in the 1493 letter but *are* in the Gelderland text — the Antwerp / Bergen / Middelburg stages and the voyage to Portugal in the company of Brampton's wife — are precisely the elements of the 1497 confession and of Brampton's April 1496 deposition (§2), in the same sequence. Either the Gelderland author knew the real itinerary of Piers/Perkin Werbecque and re-told it as the prince's, or the confession borrowed it from the prince's story. The confession's version is corroborated from Portugal a year before Warbeck was captured (Rui de Sousa "confirmed that Warbeck arrived in Portugal with Brampton's wife" — Wroe pp. 525–8 via Amin; F&I to Puebla 14 Apr 1496 on de Sousa, VERIFIED). Nothing corroborates a royal child among Brampton's wife's servants. That makes the Gelderland text, on this point, a narrative that has absorbed the biography of the Tournai boy rather than an independent witness. 3. The genuinely new material — the names of English gaolers and rescuers in 1483 (Brackenbury, Tyrell, Buckingham, "Foriest", "Hamelett Maleven", "Wylliam Puche", John Norris, William Tyrwhitt, John Howard, the two Parcijs) — is uncheckable except in the sense that most of these were real people of 1483 in roles a well-informed Yorkist exile would know (Brackenbury as constable; Tyrell; Buckingham; Forest; Mauleverer; Norris and Tyrwhitt as household men). Two scholars have made opposite uses of it: Hicks notes it "is the earliest record connecting Richard, duke of York, with Sir James Tyrell and Miles Forest, who were among the killers accused much later by Sir Thomas More" (as quoted by Soberton; **SECONDARY**), and Thornton cites "the recently identified letter of Perkin Warbeck claiming to be Richard, duke of York, which describes Tyrell as one of his guardians or gaolers in the Tower" (Thornton, *History* 109 (2024), n. 50, **VERIFIED**). In other words, academic readers treat it as a Warbeck text whose interest is that it names Tyrell and Forest a generation before More. 4. Dating. The 1493 letter says "fere annis octo per diversas provincias latitaui" ("for almost eight years I lay hidden") — i.e. 1483–91 — then Portugal, Ireland (1491), France (1492), Burgundy (late 1492). The Gelderland text ends at Margaret's court in the same anticipatory tone ("in a short time I will obtain my right"). If it is a copy of a text composed at Malines in 1492–3 (Langley/Nijman), it is contemporary with the Latin letter and from the same workshop; the archive dates the extant copy c. 1500 and its transcript to the sixteenth century. Neither dating makes it a document of 1483. 5. Age: the Gelderland text has the narrator leave sanctuary "as a 9 year-old boy in 1483" (Langley's summary) and be "about 14" in Lisbon; the 1493 letter says "nonum fere agens annum" (almost nine) in 1483. Both fit a boy born in 1474 (Warbeck's own age per Trevisan) better than Richard of York (born August 1473). Bottom line for §1: the Gelderland manuscript is a Dutch-language, first-person narrative of the claimant's story, in a copy that the archive dates to c. 1500, of unknown provenance, discovered in 1951 and read then as Warbeck propaganda. Its skeleton is the 1493 letter to Isabella; its Low Countries–Portugal itinerary is that of the 1496–7 Tournai evidence; its only novel matter (names at the Tower in 1483) cannot be checked. It documents what was being said at Margaret's court about the claimant; it does not document anything that happened in the Tower in 1483 except on the assumption that the narrator is who he says he is — which is the question at issue. --- ## 2. The Setubal testimonies, April 1496 - The commission: in April 1496 a Spanish-instigated inquiry sat at Setúbal (near Lisbon) to establish the identity of "the so-called Prince Richard"; witnesses included Sir Edward Brampton (Duarte Brandão), Rui de Sousa (Portuguese ambassador to England in 1489), and the Portuguese herald Tanjar. **SECONDARY** — the depositions are printed/translated in Ann Wroe, *Perkin: A Story of Deception* (2003/2004), pp. 525–528 (per Nathen Amin, Substack, 11 Aug 2026, https://nathenamin.substack.com — **VERIFIED** as citation). I could not access Wroe (archive.org lending only) or the Spanish archival text. Archive reference of the depositions: not found (Amin says they appear in the Spanish version of the calendar, not in Bergenroth). **UNVERIFIED**. - Primary anchor that *is* verifiable: Ferdinand and Isabella to De Puebla, 14 April 1496, CSP Spain i no. 130 (**VERIFIED**, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/spain/vol1/pp89-99): "With respect to what you write, that the King of France has sent a paper, with the seal of his council, and a declaration from the King-at-arms of Portugal, stating that he of York is the son of a barber, and offering to send over his father and mother, &c., we have to observe, that if the King of England wish something of the kind we can do it much better than the King of France. We can send him the declarations of many persons who know him, amongst whom is a Portuguese knight, of the name of Ruy de Sosa. He is acquainted with the whole matter, and is a person of authority and good faith. Having been Portuguese ambassador in England, he knows the Duke of York very well, and has seen him there. Two years later he saw this other person in Portugal. You must speak of this matter to the King of England as though it all came from you, and inform us what he says in reply." (Note the tell-tale phrase "he of York" / "this other person".) Also no. 128, 28 March 1496: "Are astonished that it is not known in England where he of York is. The same uncertainty prevails in Spain." (**VERIFIED**, pp87-89.) - Content of the depositions as summarised by Amin from Wroe (**SECONDARY**): Brampton "said he had known the boy in Tournai where he lived below the St Jean Bridge, calling him Piris Uberque in the Iberian fashion. He knew Osbek had been placed in the household of an organist for sometime, before moving on to Middelburg where he found work with a craftsman who sold needles and purses. Brampton seemed to obtain this information from his English wife Margaret Beaumont, who lived opposite with an assortment of French boys in her service. He testified that Warbeck began associating with these boys, and when it was ready for Beaumont to return to Portugal to be with her husband, Warbeck boldly invited himself along for the journey. Brampton, however, had no need for another servant and so Warbeck was sent to the household of a one-eyed knight named Pero Vaz da Cunha. Brampton says he next saw Osbek during the marriage festivities of Prince Afonso in the autumn of 1490, where the Tournai youth he had known was observed wearing a opulent silk gown ... Brampton, who would have known the Princes in the Tower during his long service to their father, was also clear he believed those boys had died, calling it 'the worst evil in the world'. Other Portuguese were interrogated by the Spanish, with one Rui de Sousa noting he had actually met the real Prince Richard of York during a visit to England and that the Prince and Warbeck were, in his opinion, different people. He also confirmed that Warbeck arrived in Portugal with Brampton's wife. A Portuguese herald named Tanjar, meanwhile, said he knew Warbeck was from Tournai as he even knew his father, whose name he gave as John Osbeque. This John told Tanjar that he would recognise Warbeck for he had three identifiable marks." (Amin is an avowed Tudor-side author — **PARTISAN**, but he is quoting Wroe, who is not.) - Nick Lack, "Perkin Warbeck and Edward Brampton", British Historical Society of Portugal (2012), pp. 17–18 (**VERIFIED**): "In 1496, those agents of Henry VII who were scouring Europe to identify Perkin's origins, came to Portugal. The king of Portugal agreed to set up a commission of enquiry, which convened at Setubal. A key witness was Edward Brampton. He claimed scarcely to remember Perkin Warbeck. He admitted that, in 1487, he moved temporarily from Bruges to Middelburg to avoid the plague. Perkin was a servant in the house opposite, and on hearing of Brampton's impending trip, badgered the merchant into taking him along. However, the boy was a thorough nuisance, continually begging Brampton to adopt him as his son. Since 'I did not want another child', Brampton refused – and as soon as they arrived in Lisbon, he sacked Perkin." Lack then notes Brampton's motive to distance himself ("the Pretender was still at large, Brampton had made his peace with Henry VII"). - Weight: the Setúbal evidence predates the capture and confession by eighteen months, was taken in Portugal at Spanish instance, and converges with the Tournai records and with the confession on the same names (Tournai, St Jean, Middelburg, Brampton's wife, Pero Vaz da Cunha "one-eyed"). Brampton had a motive to disown a protégé; Rui de Sousa and Tanjar did not obviously. It is the strongest single body of evidence that the claimant was Piers Werbecque of Tournai. Caveat: I have not read the depositions themselves. --- ## 3. The confession (1497), the letter to his mother, and the Tournai municipal records ### 3.1 Confession — Cotton Vitellius A XVI (London chronicle), ed. Kingsford, *Chronicles of London* (1905), pp. 219–221, f. 169 (**VERIFIED**) > Here after ensueth the Confession of the said Perkyn and Pedygre. > "ffirst it is to be knowen that I was born in the Towne of Turney, and my ffaders name is called John Osbek; which said John Osbek was controller of the Towne of Turney. And my moders name is Kateryn de ffaro. And one of my Grauntsires vpon my ffaders side was called Deryk Osbek, which died; after whos deth my grauntmother was maried vnto the w[ith]in named Petir flamme; and that other of my grauntsires was called Petir flam, which was Receyvour of the forsaid Towne of Turney and Deane of the Botemen that be vpon the watir or Ryver of Leystave. And my Grauntsire vpon my moders side was called Petir ffaro, the which had in his kepyng the keys of the Gate of Seynt Johns, w[ith]in the abouenamed Towne of Turney. Also I had an Vncle named Maister John Stalyn dwellyng in the parisshe of Saynt Pyas w[ith]in the same Towne, which had maried my ffaders Sister, whose name was Johane or Jane, w[ith] whom I dwelled a certeyn season; and afterward I was led by my moder to Andwarp for to lerne flemmysshe in an house of a Cosyn of myne, officer of the said Towne, called John Stienbek, w[ith] whome I was the Space of half a yere. And after that I retourned agayn vnto Turney by reason of the warres that wer in fflaunders. And w[ith]in a yere folowyng I was sent w[ith] a Merchaunt of the said Towne of Turney named Berlo, and his Maister's name Alex., to the Marte of Andwarp, where as I fill syke, which sykenesse contynued vpon me v. monethes; and the said Berlo set me to boorde in a Skynners hous, that dwelled beside the hous of the Englessh nacion. And by hym I was brought from thens to the Barowe Marte, and loged at the Signe of thold man, where I abode the space of ij monethes. And after this the said Berlo set me w[ith] a merchaunt in Middelborough to seruice for to lerne the language, whose name was John Strewe, w[ith] whome I dwelled from Cristmas vnto Easter; and than I went into Portyngale in the Cumpany of Sir Edward Bramptons wif in a Ship which was called the Quenes Ship. And whan I was comen thider I was put in seruice to a knyght that dwelled in Lusshebourne, which was called Petir Vacz de Cogna, w[ith] whome I dwelled an hole yere, which said knyght had but one Iye; and than because I desired to se other Cuntrees I toke licence of hym. And than I put my silf in seruice w[ith] a Breton, called Pregent Meno, the which brought me w[ith] hym into Ireland. And whan we wer there aryved in the Towne of Corke, they of the Towne, because I was arayed w[ith] some clothes of silk of my said Maisters, came vnto me and threped vpon me that I shuld be the Duke of Clarence sone, that was before tyme at Develyn. And for as moch as I denyed it there was brought vnto me the holy Euaungelist and the Crosse by the Mayre of the Towne, which was [called John le Wellen ...]" Kingsford's footnotes record Hall's variants ("Turney in Flaunders", "name is John", "rowe", "Ryuer, called Leschelde"). The chronicle's own framing: the confession was read by Perkin at Westminster and Cheapside; the chronicler notes "moch wonderyng, and many a Curse throwen at his hede". ### 3.2 Confession — Hall's *Chronicle* (1809 edn), pp. 488–9 (**VERIFIED**; OCR page header garbled) > ... and there stode al daye and red openly his awne confession written with hys awne hande, the very copy wherof hereafter ensueth. First it is to be knowen, that I was borne in the toune of Turney in Flaunders, & my fathers name is Ihon Osbeck, which sayd Ihon Osbeck was co[m]ptroller of the sayde toune of Turney, & my mothers name is Katheryn de Faro. And one of my grauntsires vpon my fathers side was named Diryck Osbeck which dyed, after whose death my grauntmother was maryed vnto the withinnamed Peter flame, y[at] was receauer of the forenamed toune of Turney, & Deane of the botemen y[at] rowe vpon the water or Ryuer, called Leschelde. And my grau[n]tsire vpon my mothers side was Peter de Faro, whiche had in hys kepyng y[e] keyes of the gate of sainct Ihons w[ith]in the same toune of Turney. Also I had an vncle called master Ihon Stalyn, dwelling in y[e] parish of sainct Pyas within the same toune, which had maried my fathers suster, whose name was Ione or Iane, with whome I dwelled a certain ceaso[n] ... Hall continues to "in the companye of Syr Edward Bramptones wyfe in a shyppe whiche was called the queues shippe", Lisbon, "Peter Vacz de cogna ... had but one eye", Pregent Meno, Cork, the mayor John le Wellen, Stephen Poytron and John Water who "against my will made me to learne English, & taught me what I should do & saye. And after this they called me duke of Yorke, secod sonne of kynge Edward y. iiij. because king Rychardes bastard sonne was in y[e] hades of the king of Englad." Great Chronicle of London, ed. A. H. Thomas and I. D. Thornley (1938), pp. 284–6: same confession, same chronicle family — **UNVERIFIED** (not accessed; page numbers from secondary citation). ### 3.3 Letter to his mother, Exeter, 13 October 1497 (French) Gairdner 1898, pp. 330–1 (from two copies supplied by W. H. J. Weale from Tournai/Courtrai, neither in a contemporary hand — Gairdner's caution) = Pollard i no. 119 (**VERIFIED**, Pollard pp. 172–3): > Ma mere, — Tant humblement comme faire ie puis, me recommande a vous. Et vous plaise scavoir que par fortune, soubz couleur de une chose controuvee, que certains Engletz me ont faict faire et prendre supz moi que je estoie le filz du Roi Edouart d'Engleterre, appelle son second filz, Richart duc d'Yorck, je me trouve maintenant en tele perplexite que se vous ne me estes a ceste heure bonne mere, je suis taillie de estre en grand dangier et inconvenient, a cause du nom que je ay a leur instance prins supz moi, et de l'entreprinse que je aye faicte. Et afin que entendez et cognoissiez clerement que sui vostre filz et non aultre, il vous plaira souvenir, quand je parti de vous avec Berlo pour aller en Anvers, vous me deistes adieu en plorant, et mon pere me convoia jusque a la porte de Marvis; et aussi de la derniere lettre que me escripvistes de vostre main a Medelbourcq que vous estiez accouchiee de une fille, et que pareillement mon frere Thiroyan et ma soeur Jehenne moururent de la peste a la procession de Tournay; et comment mon pere, vous et moi allasmes demeurer a Lannoy hors de la ville; et vous souvienne de la belle Porcquiere. Le Roi d'Engleterre me tient maintenant en ses mains; auquel je ay declaré la verité de la matiere ... Et me recommandez humblement a mon parin, Pierart Flan, a Maistre Jean Stalin, mon oncle, a mon compere Guillaume Rucq, et a Jehan Bourdeau. Je entends que mon pere est alle de vie a trespas (Dieu ait son ame!), que me sont dures nouvelles. ... Escrips a Excestre, le xiije jour de Octobre de la main de vostre humble filz, PIERREQUIN WERBECQUE. ... A Mademoiselle ma mere Catherine Werbecque, demourant a Saint Jehan supz l'Escauld. ("Mother — as humbly as I can I commend myself to you. Please know that by fortune, under colour of an invented thing which certain Englishmen made me do and take upon me — that I was the son of King Edward of England, called his second son, Richard duke of York — I now find myself in such perplexity that unless you are now a good mother to me I am like to be in great danger ... And so that you may clearly understand and know that I am your son and no other, please remember, when I left you with Berlo to go to Antwerp, you said goodbye to me weeping, and my father accompanied me as far as the Marvis gate; and also the last letter you wrote me in your own hand at Middelburg, that you had been delivered of a daughter, and likewise that my brother Thiroyan and my sister Jehenne died of the plague at the Tournai procession; and how my father, you and I went to live at Lannoy outside the town; and remember the fair swineherd-girl ... Commend me humbly to my godfather Pierart Flan, to Master Jean Stalin my uncle ... I understand that my father has passed from life to death ... Written at Exeter the 13th day of October by the hand of your humble son, Pierrequin Werbecque. To Mademoiselle my mother Catherine Werbecque, living at Saint-Jean on the Scheldt.") Caveat (Gairdner's own): neither copy is contemporary; the private details (Marvis gate, Lannoy, the "belle Porcquiere", siblings dead of plague) are of a kind a Tudor clerk would be unlikely to invent, but the text's transmission is weak. ### 3.4 Tournai municipal records (Weale's transcripts, printed by Gairdner 1898, pp. 334–5) (**VERIFIED**) > Registres des Reliefs et Achats de Bourgeoisie, Tournay (Archives de Lettres). > 1459 (1460, n. St.). 9 Feb. Pierart Flan, pireman, fils de feu Pierart, natif de Conde. > 1459. 9 Feb. Pierart Faron, piereman et cureur de toilles, fils de feu Regnault. > 1474. 11 May. Jehan de Werbecque, pireman, fils de feu Diericq de Werbecque, a relevé sa bourgeoisie comme fil de bourgois né en bourgoisie, et en a fait le serment en tel cas introduit. > Registre de la loi de la ville de Tournai. 1475, 12 Fevrier (1476, n. St.). Jehan Werbeque, pireman, Coulongne. Noel Werbeque, wantier, Rouen. Tout a la ville, le dit Jehan, tant pour avoir feru du poing Bernard du Havron, que depuis avec ledit Noel et autres fait astives de ferir dun hef icellui Bernard du Havron et autres ... > 1475 (1476) 5 Fevrier. Pierart Flan / Bernard du Havron / Oudart du Havron, tout piremans, chascuns c.s., estassavoir le dit Flan pour astives par lui faictes de ferir dun vouge ledit Bernard du Havron et autry, et lesdits Bernard et Oudart du Havron pour aucunes astives par eulx faictes de injurier Noel Werbeque et autrez, et avec et par ledit Bernard feru du poing Jehan Werbeque. (Translation: 9 Feb 1460, Pierart Flan, boatman, son of the late Pierart, native of Condé [admitted burgess]; same day Pierart Faron, boatman and cloth-fuller, son of the late Regnault; 11 May 1474, Jehan de Werbecque, boatman, son of the late Diericq de Werbecque, renewed his burgess-right as a burgess's son born in burgess-right and took the oath; 12 Feb 1476, Jehan Werbeque, boatman, [banished to] Cologne, Noel Werbeque, glover, [to] Rouen ... for striking Bernard du Havron with the fist and, with Noel and others, attempting to strike him with a blade; 5 Feb 1476, Pierart Flan, Bernard and Oudart du Havron, all boatmen, fined 100 s. each ...) Gairdner's conclusion (p. 335): "of new evidence in the adventurer's favour there is absolutely none." These entries independently attest, before 1483, a Tournai boatman Jehan de Werbecque son of Diericq, a Pierart Flan (the confession's "Peter Flame", the letter's godfather "Pierart Flan"), and a Pierart Faron (the confession's "Peter de Faro"). Gairdner (p. 266–7) also notes "we have distinct and separate testimony from other sources, on more than one occasion during his career, to the fact of both Warbeck's parents being then alive". ### 3.5 Henry VII's inquiries at Tournai before the confession Hall, p. 462–3 (**VERIFIED**): Henry sent agents "to searche & prye oute of what progeny thys mysnamed Rycharde was disscnded ... And when certayne of them repayred to the toune of Turnay, they were there certefyed by the testimony of many honest persons, that this feigned duke came but of a lowe stocke, and of a base parentage, & was named there Peter Warbecke." Vergil XXVI §24–25 (**VERIFIED**, Sutton ed.): "Forte reperit iuvenem quendam hominem Tornacensem, forma non ineleganti, ingenio acuto, cui nomen erat Petrus, cognomine Varbechus, sed postea ob eius vecordiam contemptui ac ludibrio habitus appellatus est ab Anglis Perchinus, qui Anglicam nonnullasque alias callebat linguas" ("She chanced to discover a certain youth of Tournai, clever and not unhandsome, named Peter Warbeck, but afterwards, when mocked and scorned by the English for his folly, he was called Perkin. He was fluent in English and several other languages" — Hay/Sutton). And by April 1496 Charles VIII was supplying Henry with a sealed council paper and the Portuguese king-at-arms' declaration that "he of York is the son of a barber", offering "to send over his father and mother" (CSP Spain i no. 130, §2). So the Tournai identification was in circulation in France, Spain and Portugal from 1495–6, before the 1497 confession. Assessment for §3: the confession was produced under Henry's control and is self-serving; but its genealogical core is confirmed by municipal records transcribed in the nineteenth century, by the Setúbal witnesses of 1496, and by the French/Portuguese declarations of 1495–6. Its itinerary (Antwerp–Bergen–Middelburg–Brampton's wife–Lisbon–Ireland) is the same itinerary the Gelderland text gives its "Richard". --- ## 4. What the backers knew or said — and what each document proves For each item: what the document is; what it shows; verdict — (S) shows survival, (B) shows only that a backer said so / found it useful, (H) hostile source. **4.1 Margaret of York, dowager duchess of Burgundy.** - Letter to Isabella of Castile, 1493 (with Warbeck's of 25 Aug 1493): not printed in Bergenroth; its existence is attested by Ferdinand and Isabella's reply to Puebla, 20 July 1495, CSP Spain i no. 99 (**VERIFIED**, pp57-66): "Henry has complained that they correspond with the person who calls himself Duke of York. The fact is, the so-called Duke of York and the old Duchess Margaret had written to them once at Barcelona, asking their protection. They had sent no answer to the pretended Duke of York, but only to the Duchess, showing her that the whole affair was an imposture. The Duchess made no reply." Verdict: (B) — and the recipients, who had no stake, treated it as imposture. - Letter(s) to the Pope: not located (**UNVERIFIED**). Related: Cardinal Morton told Soncino (Milan, Sept 1497) that "the old Duchess Margaret of Burgundy, King Edward's sister ... has at times written to the Cardinal recommending Perkin as the son of King Edward, by whom the Cardinal was raised up. The Cardinal replied: But indeed he is not reputed the son of King Edward in this kingdom." (Soncino to the Duke of Milan, London, 30 Sept 1497, CSP Milan no. 545, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/milan/1385-1618/pp310-341, **VERIFIED**.) Verdict: (B). - Papal Penitentiary indult, 21 May 1494, to "the nobleman Richard, duke of York" (Clarke & Zutshi, *Supplications*, iii p. 127; via Richard III Society research blog and note 00): shows the Curia accepted the style — routine grace, no adjudication. Verdict: (B). - Puebla to F&I, 25 Aug 1498, CSP Spain i pp. 185–6 (**VERIFIED**, pp180-195): "The Bishop of Cambray, ambassador of the Archduke, wished to see Perkin, because he had formerly transacted business with him. The King, therefore, sent a few days ago for Perkin, and asked him in my presence why he had deceived the Archduke and the whole country. Perkin answered as he had done before, and solemnly swore to God that the Duchess, Madame Margaret, knew as well as himself that he was not the son of King Edward. The King then said to the Bishop of Cambray and to me, that Perkin had deceived the Pope, the King of France, the Archduke, the King of the Romans, the King of Scotland, and almost all Princes of Christendom, except your Highnesses." Verdict: (H) — a prisoner's statement in the King's presence; but it is the only direct testimony on what Margaret knew, and it says she knew. **4.2 Maximilian, King of the Romans.** - Naturelli to the Venetian envoys, 5 May 1495, CSP Venice i no. 641 (**VERIFIED**, pp203-226): "the Duke of York, son of the late King Edward, had taken the field against the King of England under the favour of the Archduke, and that the King of the Romans was nowise concerned therein." - Bishop of Brixen for Maximilian, 11 July 1495, no. 648: Maximilian delayed the diet "on account of other occupations in Guelders and the Low Countries ... and by having to dispatch the Prince of York, the new King of England, for the defence of his right". - Contarini and Trevisano, Worms, 17 July 1495, no. 649: Maximilian "rejoiced greatly, as he could dispose of this Duke of York ad libitum suum"; 19 July, no. 650: "With regard to the Duke of York we entertain great hopes that after obtaining the kingdom of England he will soon attack the King of France; and to this effect have we received every promise and certainty from the Duke aforesaid"; 16 Aug 1495, no. 652 (Dom. Angelo's reading): "should he succeed in his attack on England, Maximilian would admit him ... whilst on the other hand, should the Duke be worsted, the present King will be accepted in his stead." - 6 Jan 1496, no. 665 (**VERIFIED**, pp226-252): Maximilian's formal reply to Lord Egremont contained "a justification, purporting that the King of the Romans having no league or relationship soever with the King of England, the Duke of York (Perkin Warbeck), whom he firmly believes to be the son of King Edward, came to him; and that he considered it his duty not to abandon the Duke". - Brascha (Milanese ambassador in Flanders) to Sforza, Bois-le-Duc, 11 Feb 1495, CSP Milan no. 471 (**VERIFIED**, pp292-293): "His Majesty told me that this man [Clifford], when he was in England, divulged that this Duke of York was not the son of King Edward, but is the son of the Dowager Duchess of Burgundy and of the Bishop of Cambrai (la maesta del re m'ha detto che costuy, como e stato in Inghilterra, ha divulgato che questo Duca de Yorich non fu fiolo del re Adoardo, ma e fiolo de la Duchessa vechia de Burgogna et del vescovo di Cambray)." Pollard (i, p. xxii, **VERIFIED**): "a story ... in which no serious historian places any credence". - Maximilian's letter to Henry VII, 27 Nov–12 Dec 1493 (Austrian archives; found by Zoë Maula Dec 2020): per Langley's site, Maximilian says Henry will know Richard "is the true son of King Edward because he can be recognised by 'several signs' including three birthmarks or body marks that 'cannot be counterfeited'" (**UNVERIFIED** — from Langley's site only; compare Tanjar's "three identifiable marks" at Setúbal, §2, and Hicks 2024 on "blemishes"). - Verdict: (B) throughout. The despatches show Maximilian using the claimant as an instrument against France and Henry, keeping both outcomes open ("ad libitum suum"; "should the Duke be worsted, the present King will be accepted"), and asserting belief when it suited a formal justification. None records evidence of identity beyond the claimant's own marks. **4.3 Milanese and Venetian despatches from England, 1497.** - Soncino to the Duke of Milan, London, 8 Sept 1497, CSP Milan no. 540 (pp310-341, **VERIFIED**): "the youth, the reputed son of King Edward, has fled incognito, and his wife is said to be a prisoner, so that I consider that this youth called Perkin, has vanished into smoke"; no. 548 (Oct/Nov 1497, from the herald Richmond, present at the surrender): "the young man is not handsome, indeed his left eye rather lacks lustre, but he is intelligent and well spoken"; the King told him "We have heard that you call yourself Richard, son of King Edward. In this place are some who were companions of that lord, look and see if you recognise them. The young man answered that he knew none of them"; no. 550, 6 Dec 1497: "Perkin has been made a spectacle for everybody and every day he is led through London, in order that every one may perceive his past error. In my opinion he bears his fortune bravely." Also no. 545, 30 Sept 1497: "What I wrote about the captivity of Perkin's wife was not correct." - Trevisan (Venice), London 6 Nov 1497, CSP Venice i no. 759 (**VERIFIED**, pp252-266): Perkin "was now come to humble himself before King Henry, saying it was not true that he was the son of King Edward, but that he had been instigated by certain people in Cornwall"; no. 760: "He is a well favoured young man, 23 years old, and his wife a very handsome woman; the King treats them well, but did not allow them to sleep together." - Verdict: (H/neutral) — Italian observers with no stake report the recantation and his age (23 in 1497, i.e. born c. 1474). **4.4 Ferdinand and Isabella and De Puebla.** - No. 98, Puebla 19 July 1495 (the Deal landing): the villagers say the King "may go to his father and mother, who still live in France, and are well known; and they hold it to be as true as Gospel, as it really is, that this affair is like that of the Duke of Clarence, who was crowned King of Ireland, and afterwards discovered to be the son of a barber" (**VERIFIED**, pp57-66; Spanish original quoted by Gairdner 1898 p. 296 n.). - No. 99, 20 July 1495: "Neither the King of the Romans, nor his son the Archduke, will assist the person who calls himself Duke of York. Nevertheless, if the King of the Romans lend him assistance, then they promise to lend assistance to Henry against the so-called Duke of York." (**VERIFIED**.) - No. 128 (28 Mar 1496) and no. 130 (14 Apr 1496): §2 above. No. 136, Puebla 13 June 1496 (**VERIFIED**, pp99-107): "Implores them to get the person who calls himself the son of Edward into their power"; "They are very angry in England with the King of the Romans, for having sent the so-called son of Edward to England." No. 198 (June 1498): "the said Perkin fled a few days ago ... God be thanked! Perkin is already captured." Pp. 185–6 (Aug 1498): §4.1. - Verdict: (H/neutral) — Spain, allied to Henry but with its own information (Rui de Sousa), consistently treated the claim as imposture from 1495. **4.5 Sir William Stanley, 1495.** - Vergil, *Anglica Historia* XXVI §27 (1555 text, **VERIFIED**): "Orto enim sermone inter Gulielmum et Robertum de Petro, qui se falso Edouardo filium praedicabat, Gulielmus professus est se nunquam arma in eium iuvenem laturum si certum haberet Edouardi filium esse. Id arguit Gulielmum ira, ut sit, ad punctum temporis permotum alieno ab Henrico esse animo" (Hay/Sutton: "When William and Robert were having a conversation concerning this Peter who falsely claimed to be Edward's son, William announced he would never take up arms against the young man, if he knew for certain that he was indeed the son of Edward. This went to show that William was momentarily estranged from Henry out of anger"). Hall p. 471 (**VERIFIED**): "sir Willia[m] Stanley sayde and affirmed there, that he would neuer fight nor beare armure agaynst the young man, if he knew of a truthe that he was the indubitate sonne of kyng Edward the. iiij." Vitellius A XVI (Kingsford p. 203, **VERIFIED**): the King "cam to the Tower of london, where was attached sir William Stanley, called the kynges Chamberleyn. And the same season sir Robert Clyfford, wich beforetyme had fled the land and was in fflaunders w[ith] the kynges Enemyes, cam agayn and was taken to grace." - Verdict: (B) at most — a conditional ("if he knew for certain"), reported at second hand by Clifford, which is evidence of Stanley's disaffection, not of the claimant's identity; the contemporary chronicle records only the arrest. **4.6 Charles VIII of France.** - The claimant's own account (1493 letter): summoned "multis nauibus & comeatu", received "ut cognatum et beniuolum honorifice", then "minime auxilium pollicitum prestaret". Hall p. 462–3 (**VERIFIED**): Charles "sent for Perkyn into Irelande to the entent to sende hym agaynste the kynge of England, whiche was inuadyng Fraunce ... & had a garde to hym assigned, wherof was gouernour y[e] lord Cogreshal ... But after that a peace ... was appoynted and concluded betwixt him and the kynge of England, the sayde kynge Charles dismissed the younge man, and woulde no lenger kepe hym." Henry's instructions to Richmond herald (Madden App. III) show Charles feeding Henry intelligence on Maximilian's support; by April 1496 Charles's council was sending Henry the Portuguese declaration that York was "the son of a barber" and offering "to send over his father and mother" (CSP Spain i no. 130, **VERIFIED**). - Verdict: (B) then (H): Charles used the claimant while at war with Henry (1492), dropped him at Étaples, and by 1496 was actively documenting him as Werbecque. --- ## 5. Scholarly treatments and the 2023–2026 responses ### 5.1 The standard monographs (not accessed — **UNVERIFIED**, from general knowledge) - Ian Arthurson, *The Perkin Warbeck Conspiracy 1491–1499* (Stroud, 1994): treats the affair as a conspiracy of Yorkist exiles and foreign courts around an impostor; the fullest political study. - Ann Wroe, *Perkin: A Story of Deception* (2003; US title *The Perfect Prince*): deliberately agnostic on identity, but prints the Setúbal depositions (pp. 525–8 per Amin) and the Tournai material; treats the confession's family as real. - Matthew Lewis, *The Survival of the Princes in the Tower* (2017): argues the survival case; Lewis is Chair of the Richard III Society (**PARTISAN** in the sense of declared position). - Nathen Amin, *Henry VII and the Tudor Pretenders* (2020): Tudor-side narrative treating Simnel and Warbeck as impostors (**PARTISAN** in the same sense). None of these could be read (archive.org copies lending-only; Google Books/HathiTrust blocked). ### 5.2 Responses to Langley's Gelderland argument Sceptical / critical: - **D. Th. Enklaar (1951)** — the earliest reading, on the archive's own file: possibly "een propagandastuk ... door een valse Richard van York naar voren te schuiven" (§1.3, **VERIFIED** via Omroep Gelderland). - **Michael Hicks**, "Historic doubts about the survival of the Princes in the Tower after 1485", *Historical Research* 97/277 (2024), 437–442 (abstract **VERIFIED**): "This note assesses Philippa Langley's four proofs for the survival of the two Princes in the Tower after 1485. Neither the Lille document nor supporting evidences prove that Lambert Simnel was really Edward V rather than Edward, earl of Warwick. The Gelderland manifesto recounting the escape of Richard, duke of York and the pretender's pledge to Duke Albert of Saxony were propaganda as necessary for the imposter Perkin Warbeck as for the real prince. The blemishes of Warbeck's body cannot be shown to identify him as the younger prince. While useful additions to the continental plots against Henry VII, these new evidences do not prove that either prince lived beyond the reign of Richard III." Also Hicks, "More proof needed on Princes", *Ricardian Bulletin* June 2024, pp. 4–5: the documents "do add to knowledge of the Tudor impostors, but they fall short of proof that either Edward V or Richard Duke of York survived beyond their disappearance in the autumn of 1483" (**UNVERIFIED** — quoted from Wikipedia's citation; Bulletin not accessed). - **Zoë Maula, Jean Roefstra and William Wiss** (Dutch Research Group), "Dutch statement on The Missing Princes Project", *Ricardian Bulletin* June 2024, p. 4: the documents "are in our own opinion open to various interpretations and do not constitute irrefutable proof"; Dan Moorhouse (thewarsoftheroses.co.uk, 21 Jul 2024) quotes them as having "considered the making of a documentary and the publishing of a book on the subject premature and possibly counter-productive" (**UNVERIFIED** at first hand; Moorhouse's page was read). Langley's reply in the same issue: her conclusions rest on "the totality of evidence thus assembled and the outcomes of a modern police missing person investigation methodology ... (and not through a traditional historical research method)" (via Wikipedia, **UNVERIFIED**). This is the most damaging response because it comes from the people who found the documents. - **Tim Thornton**, *History* 109 (2024), n. 50 (**VERIFIED**): treats the Gelderland text as "the recently identified letter of Perkin Warbeck claiming to be Richard, duke of York, which describes Tyrell as one of his guardians or gaolers in the Tower" — i.e. uses it as evidence for Tyrell's association with the princes, not for survival. Thornton also fronted the Channel 5 programme (Dec 2024) with Tracy Borman arguing for More's account (**UNVERIFIED** details). - **Yvette Hoitink** (24 Nov 2023, **VERIFIED**): citation errors in Langley's Dutch references ("do not undermine the conclusions in the book. It does suggest that the references were not (all) verified before publication"); "Buckgegen"/"Buckgegem"; footnote 25 of ch. 15 attaches a 1495 Bergen op Zoom entry to a 1493 statement. - **Nathen Amin** (Substack, 2026, **VERIFIED**; podcasts 2025, **UNVERIFIED**): the Setúbal depositions and Tournai records corroborate the confession; the Gelderland text adds nothing to the 1493 Dendermonde letter. - **Hicks as quoted by Soberton** (Nov 2025, **VERIFIED**): the document "is the earliest record connecting Richard, duke of York, with Sir James Tyrell and Miles Forest" — a Thornton-style use. - Press: James Delingpole, *Spectator*, 22 Nov 2023, called the programme "a calculated insult to the viewer" (via Wikipedia, **UNVERIFIED**). Other bloggers read (Pilling at Aspects of History: the Gelderland document "really no more than a curiosity", the question being "why and by whom"; Moorhouse: the documents "prove nothing" without corroboration; Streeter, Royal History Geeks: "leaps of logic") — quotations as noted at the time; not re-read. Defences: - **Langley and Nijman-Bliekendaal** (2023; 2025 edn; project website, **VERIFIED** for the website): witness statement, semi-legal, first person; authenticated as to materials/hand by Gelders Archief staff and Andrew Dunning; transcription checked by Bart Lambert; correlations with Howard's accounts (11 Aug 1483 clothing for "humble children of the stables"), Lisbon plague, Argentine's report; Maximilian's 1493 letter on body marks; Dresden pledge and Nuremberg charters as further "proofs of life". - **Richard III Society** press release, 16 Nov 2023 (**VERIFIED**, PDF): "suddenly we have new evidence to support our Society's challenge to tradition ... From now on, history must take account of this new breakthrough evidence. No longer can anyone confidently claim the princes were killed by Richard III." (Matt Lewis, Chair.) **PARTISAN** by constitution. - **The Times**, 23 May 2025, review by Jack Blackburn with a leader page ("Princes Mystery Finally Laid to Rest") — as reported on Langley's site (**UNVERIFIED**). - Nieuwsuur (NOS), 29 Jan 2024, sign-off "And that's how you solve a 500 year-old mystery" — as reported on Langley's site. - Popular Ricardian blogs (sparkypus, 6 Mar 2024; **VERIFIED**): "These correlations cannot all be purely coincidental and lead to the conclusion that the document is the real deal." Not found (searched, no text located): reviews by Sean Cunningham, A. J. Pollard, David Horspool or Tracy Borman of Langley 2023/2025; *History Today*, *TLS*, *Literary Review*, BBC *History Extra*, *The Conversation* pieces on the Gelderland manuscript; any Dutch academic (university) response after Enklaar 1951; any palaeographical or codicological report on the manuscript. ### 5.3 Strongest objection and strongest defence Strongest published objection (Hicks 2024; Enklaar 1951; and the Dutch Research Group's own caveat): the document is a manifesto — "propaganda as necessary for the imposter Perkin Warbeck as for the real prince" — so its existence and even its authenticity as a c. 1500 Dutch document are neutral between the two hypotheses; it is corroborated only by the claimant's own letters, and the parts that can be checked against independent evidence (the Low Countries–Portugal itinerary) match the Tournai boy's biography. Strongest published defence (Langley/Nijman 2023–5): it is a detailed first-person account with specific, checkable names in the Tower of 1483 (Brackenbury, Tyrell, Buckingham, Forest, Mauleverer, Howard, Norris, Tyrwhitt) that fit the known household of that summer, plus incidental correlations (Howard's accounts; Lisbon plague), and it coheres with a chain of other continental records (Dresden 1493, Nuremberg 1494–6, Bergen op Zoom 1495) in which the claimant is treated as Richard of York without qualification. The weakness of the defence is that every one of those records is either the claimant's own or issued by his backers, and the Tower names were public knowledge in Yorkist exile circles by 1492. --- ## 6. Developments 2024–2026 - **Nuremberg (2024)**: Nijman-Bliekendaal found "three authentic charters and four original letters, written respectively by Richard of England, King James IV of Scotland and Henry VII" — Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Historic Archive, Wolkenstein-Rodenegg family archive; Staatsarchiv Nürnberg, Geheimes Archiv des Fürstentums Ansbach (Ausländische Urkunden), documents 248–51 and 257: charters to Veit von Wolkenstein (4 Apr 1494) and Michael von Wolkenstein (5 Apr 1494); letter (15 Nov 1496) and charter (20 Nov 1496) to Ludwig Wolfgang Tetzel; James IV to Tetzel 31 Jul and 20 Oct 1496; Henry VII to Tetzel; "Richard of England's royal seal with Ostrich Feathers of the Prince of Wales, 15 November 1496" (Ansbach doc. 250). **VERIFIED** as claims on Langley's site; documents not seen. These are the claimant's own acts and letters and prove his diplomatic activity, not his identity. - **Dresden pledge, 4 Oct 1493** (found Feb 2019): receipt/pledge by "Richard of England" to Duke Albert of Saxony for 30,000 florins, with monogram and seal, co-signed by Sir Robert Clifford and William Barley (Langley site, **VERIFIED** as claim; NOS mentions "30.000 florijnen"). Hicks 2024 treats it, with the Gelderland text, as propaganda necessary to either hypothesis. - **Low Countries accounts** (Hoitink, **VERIFIED** citations): Bergen op Zoom stewards' accounts 1494/5, fol. 189v (West-Brabants Archief, box 0005, call no. 765): expenses for the Duke of Saxony and the Duke of York on 6 January 1495; Holland domain accounts 1495 (Nationaal Archief 3.01.27.02 inv. 191, fols 102r, 104v, 105r; NOS: the fleet "werd verzameld in Zeeland, maar vertrok uit Texel"). These show the claimant styled and entertained as Duke of York in 1495 — (B). - **Dendermonde / Mechelen**: "Dendermonde" is the place of issue of the 25 Aug 1493 letter ("Ex opido Andermunda"), where Margaret had a residence; I found no separate Dendermonde financial record about "the Duke of York" cited in the sources I could read. Mechelen city accounts 1487 (wine for "the son of Clarence") concern the 1487 claimant (see note 00), not Warbeck. **UNVERIFIED** whether Langley 2025 adds Mechelen entries for 1492–5. - **2025 edition**: *The Princes in the Tower: How History's Greatest Cold Case Was Solved* (History Press, 29 May 2025): chapters 18–19 updated, new ch. 21, Lambert's corrections to the Gelderland transcription/translation, images (Langley site, **VERIFIED** as description). No critical edition of the Dutch text has been published by anyone; the archive's scans are online (news item). - **Other**: AIB Award, Best Historical Documentary, 22 Nov 2024; National Geographic History cover July/Aug 2024; New York Times front page 28 Apr 2024; Denise Testa's research report on Irish lords at Windsor, May 1479 (10 Aug 2025) — all Langley site, none bearing on the Gelderland text. - **Academic**: Hicks 2024 (above); Thornton 2024 (*History*) and Thornton's *Historical Research* piece on Tyrell's "confession" of 1502 (title verified) — the counter-current arguing More's account has a credible source chain; no academic edition or study of the Gelderland manuscript as a manuscript has appeared to my knowledge as of Sept 2026. --- ## (a) Summary — what the Gelderland manuscript can and cannot bear 1. It is real: Gelders Archief 0510 inv. 1549, four pages in (Middle) Dutch, first person, with a third-person heading in the same hand, plus a sixteenth-century transcript; the archive dates it "circa 1500", author unidentified, provenance unknown ("diverse aanwinsten"). 2. It was known in 1951 (Van Schilfgaarde, Meij, Enklaar) and read then as probably "een propagandastuk" for "een valse Richard van York"; it was re-found online in 2020 by a lawyer with no archival training, working for a project with a declared conclusion. 3. Its narrative skeleton (escape from the Tower, oath of silence for "certain years", two keepers, one dead and one sent away, Portugal, Ireland, France, Burgundy) is the claimant's own story as issued from Dendermonde on 25 Aug 1493 — it is that story, not an independent witness to it. 4. Its checkable itinerary (Antwerp, Bergen op Zoom, Middelburg, Portugal with Edward Brampton's wife, Lisbon, Ireland) is the itinerary of Piers Werbecque of Tournai as given by Brampton and Rui de Sousa at Setúbal in April 1496 and in the 1497 confession — the strongest indication that the text absorbed the real boy's biography. 5. Its only novel content — the names of gaolers and rescuers in the Tower in 1483 — is unverifiable and consists of people whose 1483 roles were known in exile circles; academic readers (Thornton, Hicks) use it only as the earliest text linking Tyrell and Forest to the princes. 6. The age it implies ("almost nine" in 1483, c. 14 in Lisbon) fits a boy born 1474 (Warbeck was "23" in 1497) rather than Richard of York (born Aug 1473). 7. Every supporting continental record (Dresden 1493, Nuremberg 1494–6, Bergen op Zoom 1495, Maximilian's letters) is the claimant's own act or a backer's, and the backers' private despatches show them keeping both outcomes open ("ad libitum suum"; "should the Duke be worsted, the present King will be accepted"). 8. The neutral parties with independent knowledge — Ferdinand and Isabella (Rui de Sousa), the Portuguese herald, Charles VIII's council by 1496, the Italian envoys — all treated the claim as imposture before the confession existed. 9. The Tournai family in the confession is independently attested in municipal registers of 1460–76; the confession itself and the 1498 statement about Margaret were made under Henry's control and carry that discount. 10. Therefore the manuscript can bear: that at Margaret's court c. 1492–3 a detailed first-person legend of Richard of York's escape was composed and copied, and that this legend reached Guelders. It cannot bear: that Richard of York left the Tower alive in 1483, or that the claimant was he — those are the propositions the text asserts, and the text is the assertion. ## (b) What I could not find - The catalogue record text of 0510-1549 as displayed by the archive (JavaScript-only page; permalink returned 503) — relied on Hoitink's citation and the news item; the physical description (support, dimensions, watermark, hand) has not been published anywhere I could reach. - Any published transcription or edition of the Dutch text (only Langley's English translation, quoted at second hand) — so the Dutch wording above is limited to Meij's 1951 phrases and Hoitink's "Buckgegem". - The 1951 Meij–Enklaar letters themselves (only as quoted by Omroep Gelderland). - The Setúbal depositions in the original (Wroe pp. 525–8 inaccessible; archival reference unknown). - The Great Chronicle of London (1938) text — page numbers unverified. - Margaret of York's 1493 letters to Isabella and to the Pope; Maximilian's Nov–Dec 1493 letter on the "three marks" (only Langley's summary). - Langley 2023/2025 itself (no access): exact wording of the translation, appendix 5, and any Dendermonde/Mechelen entries. - Ricardian Bulletin June 2024 (Hicks; Dutch Research Group statement; Langley's reply) — quoted via Wikipedia only. - Hicks 2024 full text (abstract only); any reviews by Cunningham, Pollard, Horspool, Borman; History Today, TLS, Literary Review, History Extra, The Conversation coverage; any Dutch academic response after 1951; any independent palaeographic report. - Arthurson 1994, Wroe 2003, Amin 2020, Lewis 2017 (lending-only). - Gairdner L&P ii preface p. li (Simancas note about Charles VIII offering to send the parents) — not relocated in the OCR; the equivalent fact is in CSP Spain i no. 130.