John Skelton
John Skelton
2011-04-04 16:17:44
Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
Carol, who has always been curious about this matter but has never seen it mentioned
Carol, who has always been curious about this matter but has never seen it mentioned
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-04 20:35:35
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Good question. The references I read say that nothing is known about the poet Skelton's birth and childhood and there seems to be little agreement about where he came from.
I had never heard of him, so I found researching him very interesting. He had connections (literary, not familial) to many of the big names of our favorite era.
Katy
>
> Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Good question. The references I read say that nothing is known about the poet Skelton's birth and childhood and there seems to be little agreement about where he came from.
I had never heard of him, so I found researching him very interesting. He had connections (literary, not familial) to many of the big names of our favorite era.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-04 20:44:57
Are either of these the John Skelton associated with Diss in Norfolk? Wikipedia thinks the younger was - he became the future Henry VIII's tutor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Skelton
----- Original Message -----
From: oregon_katy
To:
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Good question. The references I read say that nothing is known about the poet Skelton's birth and childhood and there seems to be little agreement about where he came from.
I had never heard of him, so I found researching him very interesting. He had connections (literary, not familial) to many of the big names of our favorite era.
Katy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Skelton
----- Original Message -----
From: oregon_katy
To:
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Good question. The references I read say that nothing is known about the poet Skelton's birth and childhood and there seems to be little agreement about where he came from.
I had never heard of him, so I found researching him very interesting. He had connections (literary, not familial) to many of the big names of our favorite era.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-05 16:12:59
Carol earlier:
> >
> > Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Stephen responded:
>
> Are either of these the John Skelton associated with Diss in Norfolk? Wikipedia thinks the younger was - he became the future Henry VIII's tutor:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Skelton
Carol again:
Yes, that's the younger John Skelton. He was famous for two things, the rough meter of his poems (called Skeltonics) and his open relationship with a handsome young woman (Wikipedia calls it a secret marriage), which was scandalous given that he was a clergyman (before it was legal for English priests to marry). During one of his sermons, after his congregation had complained that the kept a "fair wench" in the rectory, he supposedly held up his naked baby son for his congregation to see and said, "How say you, neighbors all? Is not this child as fair as the best of all yours? It hath nose, eyes, hands, and feet, as well as any of yours. It is not like a pig, nor a calf, nor like no foul nor no monstrous beast. If I had brought forth this child without arms or legs, or that it were deformed being a monstrous thing, I would never have blamed you to have complained to the Bishop of me, but to complain without a cause! I say as I said before, in my antetheme, *vos estis*, you be, and have been, and will and shall be knaves to complain of me without a cause reasonable" (Norton Anthology of English Literature).
He was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't have approved of his morals.
Carol
> >
> > Speaking of obscure historical figures, does anyone know whether the John Skelton rewarded by Edward IV in 1461 for service to his brothers (presumably escorting Richard and George to Burgundy) was the father of the poet John Skelton, born in 1460?
>
Stephen responded:
>
> Are either of these the John Skelton associated with Diss in Norfolk? Wikipedia thinks the younger was - he became the future Henry VIII's tutor:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Skelton
Carol again:
Yes, that's the younger John Skelton. He was famous for two things, the rough meter of his poems (called Skeltonics) and his open relationship with a handsome young woman (Wikipedia calls it a secret marriage), which was scandalous given that he was a clergyman (before it was legal for English priests to marry). During one of his sermons, after his congregation had complained that the kept a "fair wench" in the rectory, he supposedly held up his naked baby son for his congregation to see and said, "How say you, neighbors all? Is not this child as fair as the best of all yours? It hath nose, eyes, hands, and feet, as well as any of yours. It is not like a pig, nor a calf, nor like no foul nor no monstrous beast. If I had brought forth this child without arms or legs, or that it were deformed being a monstrous thing, I would never have blamed you to have complained to the Bishop of me, but to complain without a cause! I say as I said before, in my antetheme, *vos estis*, you be, and have been, and will and shall be knaves to complain of me without a cause reasonable" (Norton Anthology of English Literature).
He was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't have approved of his morals.
Carol
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-05 18:20:52
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>.
>
> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't have approved of his morals.
>
> Carol
>
Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Katy
>.
>
> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't have approved of his morals.
>
> Carol
>
Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-05 21:33:00
Katy, I believe we'd still be talking with English accents ; )
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
wrote:
>.
>
> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>have approved of his morals.
>
> Carol
>
Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Katy
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
wrote:
>.
>
> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>have approved of his morals.
>
> Carol
>
Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-05 22:44:09
And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
Paul
On 5 Apr 2011, at 21:32, Judy Thomson wrote:
> Katy, I believe we'd still be talking with English accents ; )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
>
>
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
> wrote:
>> .
>>
>> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>> become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>> have approved of his morals.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
> planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
> an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
> the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
> for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
> "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
> But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
> any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Paul
On 5 Apr 2011, at 21:32, Judy Thomson wrote:
> Katy, I believe we'd still be talking with English accents ; )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
>
>
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
> wrote:
>> .
>>
>> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>> become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>> have approved of his morals.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
> planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
> an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
> the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
> for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
> "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
> But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
> any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-05 22:47:30
OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
Judy
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
Paul
On 5 Apr 2011, at 21:32, Judy Thomson wrote:
> Katy, I believe we'd still be talking with English accents ; )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
>
>
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
> wrote:
>> .
>>
>> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>>
>> become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>>
>> have approved of his morals.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
> planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother
>had
>
> an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>
> the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
> for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
> "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
> But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
> any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Judy
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
Paul
On 5 Apr 2011, at 21:32, Judy Thomson wrote:
> Katy, I believe we'd still be talking with English accents ; )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 12:20:44 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
>
>
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
> wrote:
>> .
>>
>> He [John Skelton] was quite a character, and I like to think that he might have
>>
>> become Richard's court poet if Richard had lived. Then, again, Richard wouldn't
>>
>> have approved of his morals.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
> planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother
>had
>
> an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>
> the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
> for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
> "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
> But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
> any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 00:45:55
--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 01:10:42
Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 05:22:41
as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would prefer that absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec is still part of canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995. many canadians do not appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they would prefer that only english was spoken. btw. john cabot, an explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have conquest of the new world.
the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
--- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
To:
Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have conquest of the new world.
the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
--- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
To:
Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 05:36:52
My Scots ancestors arrived (or at least squabbled in court) in Tennessee, 1789,
so I guess we're late-comers, alas! ; )
________________________________
From: fayre rose <fayreroze@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 11:22:35 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would prefer that
absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec is still part of
canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995. many canadians do not
appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they would prefer that only english
was spoken. btw. john cabot, an explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have
conquest of the new world.
the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's
settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins
from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also
fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder
i'm often confused..:-))
--- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
To:
Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
so I guess we're late-comers, alas! ; )
________________________________
From: fayre rose <fayreroze@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 11:22:35 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would prefer that
absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec is still part of
canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995. many canadians do not
appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they would prefer that only english
was spoken. btw. john cabot, an explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have
conquest of the new world.
the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's
settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins
from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also
fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder
i'm often confused..:-))
--- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
To:
Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
interpretation.
Love,
Judy,
whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
"security risks."
Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
or Sally.
This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>
> Judy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>
>
> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> Paul
I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
Katy
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 11:17:12
Agree with fayre rose re: Canada's linguistic proclivities
On 06/04/2011 12:22 AM, fayre rose wrote:
>
> as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would
> prefer that absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec
> is still part of canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995.
> many canadians do not appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they
> would prefer that only english was spoken. btw. john cabot, an
> explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
>
> the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could
> have conquest of the new world.
>
> the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with
> it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the
> elizabethan era.
>
> roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible
> cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my
> ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the
> war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
>
> --- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>>
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>>
> Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
>
>
>
> Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the
> context (i..e.,
> they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people
> who, unlike
> previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens,
> and like
> Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms
> that could
> ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
> monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn
> resulted
> from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
> interpretation.
>
> Love,
> Judy,
>
> whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@...
> <mailto:ricardianfunds%40yahoo.co.uk> was refused by PayPal due to
> "security risks."
>
> Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank
> account
> for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
> payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque
> purchase in
> Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue
> and David
> or Sally.
>
> This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
> convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday
> afternoon. JGT
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@... <mailto:oregon_katy%40yahoo.com>>
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
> >
> > OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what
> iffing" !)
> >
> > Judy
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> > To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> >
> >
> > And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> > Paul
>
> I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3553 - Release Date: 04/05/11
>
On 06/04/2011 12:22 AM, fayre rose wrote:
>
> as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would
> prefer that absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec
> is still part of canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995.
> many canadians do not appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they
> would prefer that only english was spoken. btw. john cabot, an
> explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
>
> the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could
> have conquest of the new world.
>
> the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with
> it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the
> elizabethan era.
>
> roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible
> cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my
> ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the
> war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
>
> --- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>>
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...
> <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com>>
> Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
>
>
>
> Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the
> context (i..e.,
> they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people
> who, unlike
> previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens,
> and like
> Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms
> that could
> ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
> monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn
> resulted
> from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
> interpretation.
>
> Love,
> Judy,
>
> whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@...
> <mailto:ricardianfunds%40yahoo.co.uk> was refused by PayPal due to
> "security risks."
>
> Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank
> account
> for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
> payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque
> purchase in
> Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue
> and David
> or Sally.
>
> This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
> convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday
> afternoon. JGT
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@... <mailto:oregon_katy%40yahoo.com>>
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
> >
> > OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what
> iffing" !)
> >
> > Judy
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> > To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> >
> >
> > And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
> > Paul
>
> I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3553 - Release Date: 04/05/11
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-06 11:19:51
I had no intention of stirring up a hornets nest, only making the point that had Richard financed Columbus the entire American continents, south, and central would be speaking English rather than Spanish, Brazil apart of course, as would Cuba and the other Spanish speaking Caribbean islands.
Of course England just later went on to steal a large part of the world outside the Americas from their rightful owners, and England is still suffering from the fall out of such an Empire, unlike Spain who did not tie it's former dependants to the homeland once they had gained their independence.
Paul
On 6 Apr 2011, at 05:22, fayre rose wrote:
> as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would prefer that absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec is still part of canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995. many canadians do not appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they would prefer that only english was spoken. btw. john cabot, an explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
>
> the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have conquest of the new world.
>
> the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
>
> roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
>
> --- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> To:
> Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
> Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
> they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
> previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
> Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
> ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
> monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
> from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
> interpretation.
>
> Love,
> Judy,
>
> whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
> "security risks."
>
> Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
> for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
> payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
> Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
> or Sally.
>
> This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
> convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>>
>> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>>
>> Judy
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
>> To:
>> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>>
>>
>> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
>> Paul
>
> I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Of course England just later went on to steal a large part of the world outside the Americas from their rightful owners, and England is still suffering from the fall out of such an Empire, unlike Spain who did not tie it's former dependants to the homeland once they had gained their independence.
Paul
On 6 Apr 2011, at 05:22, fayre rose wrote:
> as a canadian, let me reassure you that the quebec separtists would prefer that absolutely no english was spoken in that province. quebec is still part of canada with a squeaker of a referendum vote in 1995. many canadians do not appreciate that we are a bilingual country. they would prefer that only english was spoken. btw. john cabot, an explorer of h7's was in canada circa 1497.
>
> the pope of the era also passed a bull saying only the spanish could have conquest of the new world.
>
> the area now known as the usa was basically a johnny come lately with it's settlement and exploration beginning in what is called the elizabethan era.
>
> roslyn with ancestors from the jamestown settlement, and with possible cousins from the missing roanoake settlement. i am a DAR and a UEL. my ancestors also fought on both sides of the american civil war and the war of 1812...no wonder i'm often confused..:-))
>
> --- On Tue, 4/5/11, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
> To:
> Cc: "Judy Thomson" <judygerard.thomson@...>
> Received: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 8:10 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Of course, Katy, but what if someone out there misinterprets the context (i.e.,
> they feel we're disparaging those particular Spanish-speaking people who, unlike
> previous generations, don't want to be English-speaking U.S. citizens, and like
> Quebec, would prefer a dual-language country). This is a can o'worms that could
> ignite unintentional Star Wars. Trust me; I've known of other excellently
> monitored/managed sites where the verbal equivalent of Pistols at Dawn resulted
> from nothing. Certainly, from even less than this vaguely possible
> interpretation.
>
> Love,
> Judy,
>
> whose PayPal payment to ricardianfunds@... was refused by PayPal due to
> "security risks."
>
> Ah, but PayPal was more than happy to suggest I link my personal bank account
> for withdrawing said funds. I called American Express, which was my
> payor-of-choice to PayPal, and they suggested a fee-free checque purchase in
> Euros, sent by Air Mail, and made out to The Society; receipt c/o Sue and David
> or Sally.
>
> This will probably be my course of action, as the AmX location is fairly
> convenient, and I'll be across the street from them on Friday afternoon. JGT
>
> ________________________________
> From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
> To:
> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 6:45:54 PM
> Subject: Re: John Skelton
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>>
>> OMG, you're right. (No offense meant to anyone...we're just "what iffing" !)
>>
>> Judy
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
>> To:
>> Sent: Tue, April 5, 2011 4:44:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
>>
>>
>> And the Mexican immigrants would speak English!
>> Paul
>
> I don't think it's offensive to observe that Mexicans speak Spanish.
>
> Katy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-07 18:23:12
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she* might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic, at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she* might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic, at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-07 18:33:26
But witch trials were a-comin' . Not too long after '85, The Malleus Malificarum
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-07 18:44:22
.......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy Thomson
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
But witch trials were a-comin' . Not too long after '85, The Malleus Malificarum
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy Thomson
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
But witch trials were a-comin' . Not too long after '85, The Malleus Malificarum
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-07 19:05:06
Oh, right! And Their Most Christian Majesties of Aragon and Castille expelled
everyone else they didn't approve...
Cheers!
Judy
________________________________
From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:44:01 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
.......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing
(twice) the heresy laws .........
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy Thomson
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
But witch trials were a-comin' . Not too long after '85, The Malleus Malificarum
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
everyone else they didn't approve...
Cheers!
Judy
________________________________
From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:44:01 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
.......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing
(twice) the heresy laws .........
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy Thomson
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: Re: John Skelton
But witch trials were a-comin' . Not too long after '85, The Malleus Malificarum
struck Europe....
Judy
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 12:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Katy wrote:
> Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
Carol responds:
I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-07 23:00:46
"Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
Carol responds:
But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
Carol
>
> .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
Carol responds:
But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
Carol
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-08 00:02:16
In his book "Good King Richard?" Jeremy Potter says that if Richard had survived Bosworth he "and his successors could have loosened the spiritual and temporal bonds of Rome,as earlier Plantagenets had done, without the senseless destruction precipitated by Henry V111's financial ineptitude,frantic urge for a male heir and unbridleable wilfulmess". He also says that Richard and Edward maintained close and good relations with the church but permitted little interference from Rome. Ofcourse we would still have the wonderful abbeys and churches that Henry V111 destroyed. He also says that "the English renaissance would have dawned at least as gloriously under Yorkist as under Tudor rule"
There are so many things that would have been different had Richard survived Bosworth no Stuart Kings and Queens, no divine right of Kings and therefore no Civil War, probably no problems with Ireland, no Hanovarian Kings, no Kaiser Wilhelm and therefore no WW1 and possibly no WW2.
Mary who thinks that the Tydders have got a lot to answer for.
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> >
> > .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
>
> Carol responds:
>
> But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
>
> Carol
>
There are so many things that would have been different had Richard survived Bosworth no Stuart Kings and Queens, no divine right of Kings and therefore no Civil War, probably no problems with Ireland, no Hanovarian Kings, no Kaiser Wilhelm and therefore no WW1 and possibly no WW2.
Mary who thinks that the Tydders have got a lot to answer for.
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> >
> > .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
>
> Carol responds:
>
> But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
>
> Carol
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-08 00:41:22
It's really impossible to predict, but I suspect that Richard wouldn't
have been eager to fund Columbus if his treasury was still depleted.
From what I read, one reason why Richard hurried to meet Tudor was
because he was running low on funds and couldn't afford to keep the
armies milling about for too much longer. Had he won at Redemore, his
obligations to the peer might have kept the treasury tight, and five
years from when the battle was fought to when Columbus was looking for
funds might not have been long enough for the treasury to be built up to
a point where an English King, any English King could support. Is it
possible that that is one reason why H7 sent Columbus packing?
Joan
---
author of This Time, a novel about Richard III in the 21st-century
2010 Next Generation Indie Book Awards General Fiction Finalist
website: http://www.joanszechtman.com/
blog: http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/
ebook: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/3935
--- In , "ricard1an"
<maryfriend@...> wrote:
>
> In his book "Good King Richard?" Jeremy Potter says that if Richard
had survived Bosworth he "and his successors could have loosened the
spiritual and temporal bonds of Rome,as earlier Plantagenets had done,
without the senseless destruction precipitated by Henry V111's financial
ineptitude,frantic urge for a male heir and unbridleable wilfulmess". He
also says that Richard and Edward maintained close and good relations
with the church but permitted little interference from Rome. Ofcourse we
would still have the wonderful abbeys and churches that Henry V111
destroyed. He also says that "the English renaissance would have dawned
at least as gloriously under Yorkist as under Tudor rule"
>
> There are so many things that would have been different had Richard
survived Bosworth no Stuart Kings and Queens, no divine right of Kings
and therefore no Civil War, probably no problems with Ireland, no
Hanovarian Kings, no Kaiser Wilhelm and therefore no WW1 and possibly no
WW2.
>
> Mary who thinks that the Tydders have got a lot to answer for.
>
> --- In , "justcarol67"
justcarol67@ wrote:
> >
> > "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> > >
> > > .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders
reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of
England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the
Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he
would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until
1518?
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
have been eager to fund Columbus if his treasury was still depleted.
From what I read, one reason why Richard hurried to meet Tudor was
because he was running low on funds and couldn't afford to keep the
armies milling about for too much longer. Had he won at Redemore, his
obligations to the peer might have kept the treasury tight, and five
years from when the battle was fought to when Columbus was looking for
funds might not have been long enough for the treasury to be built up to
a point where an English King, any English King could support. Is it
possible that that is one reason why H7 sent Columbus packing?
Joan
---
author of This Time, a novel about Richard III in the 21st-century
2010 Next Generation Indie Book Awards General Fiction Finalist
website: http://www.joanszechtman.com/
blog: http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/
ebook: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/3935
--- In , "ricard1an"
<maryfriend@...> wrote:
>
> In his book "Good King Richard?" Jeremy Potter says that if Richard
had survived Bosworth he "and his successors could have loosened the
spiritual and temporal bonds of Rome,as earlier Plantagenets had done,
without the senseless destruction precipitated by Henry V111's financial
ineptitude,frantic urge for a male heir and unbridleable wilfulmess". He
also says that Richard and Edward maintained close and good relations
with the church but permitted little interference from Rome. Ofcourse we
would still have the wonderful abbeys and churches that Henry V111
destroyed. He also says that "the English renaissance would have dawned
at least as gloriously under Yorkist as under Tudor rule"
>
> There are so many things that would have been different had Richard
survived Bosworth no Stuart Kings and Queens, no divine right of Kings
and therefore no Civil War, probably no problems with Ireland, no
Hanovarian Kings, no Kaiser Wilhelm and therefore no WW1 and possibly no
WW2.
>
> Mary who thinks that the Tydders have got a lot to answer for.
>
> --- In , "justcarol67"
justcarol67@ wrote:
> >
> > "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> > >
> > > .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders
reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of
England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the
Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he
would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until
1518?
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-08 10:14:01
Well before we get too excited we have to consider the fact that the anti Roman doctrines would still have spread from Europe. However the effect might have been far different under the House of York, and of course the monasteries would not have been looted and destroyed as they were by Fat Henry.
England's artistic inheritance would have stayed intact for a while, and we might even now still be able to visit the shrine of Thomas a Becket in Canterbury, which would be nice.
Paul
On 7 Apr 2011, at 23:00, justcarol67 wrote:
> "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>>
>> .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
>
> Carol responds:
>
> But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
England's artistic inheritance would have stayed intact for a while, and we might even now still be able to visit the shrine of Thomas a Becket in Canterbury, which would be nice.
Paul
On 7 Apr 2011, at 23:00, justcarol67 wrote:
> "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>>
>> .......... not to mention the first, second and fourth Tydders reintroducing (twice) the heresy laws .........
>
> Carol responds:
>
> But there wouldn't have been any Tydders--and probably no Church of England--in our scenario. :-} Possibly, too, the religious frenzy on the Continent wouldn't have spread to England under Richard. Wonder what he would have thought of Luther's 95 theses, assuming that he lived until 1518?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-08 21:43:43
Hi all,
Just found this article on Henry VII and the New World for free download quite by accident today:
http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0950-3471
Marie
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Katy wrote:
> > Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she* might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic, at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
>
> Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
>
Just found this article on Henry VII and the New World for free download quite by accident today:
http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0950-3471
Marie
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Katy wrote:
> > Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the "river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain. But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she* might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic, at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
>
> Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
>
Re: John Skelton
2011-04-09 01:31:31
Thank you, Marie, for sharing this. It's interesting.
Cheers, Dorothea
________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Sat, 9 April, 2011 6:43:40 AM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Hi all,
Just found this article on Henry VII and the New World for free download quite
by accident today:
http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0950-3471
Marie
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
wrote:
>
> Katy wrote:
> > Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
>put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
>discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
>of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
>might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
>particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
>that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
>for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
>exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
>say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
>Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
>wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
>at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
>
>
> Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
>heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
>
Cheers, Dorothea
________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Sat, 9 April, 2011 6:43:40 AM
Subject: Re: John Skelton
Hi all,
Just found this article on Henry VII and the New World for free download quite
by accident today:
http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0950-3471
Marie
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...>
wrote:
>
> Katy wrote:
> > Another what-if: When Christopher Columbus was seeking financing for his
>planned expedition to find a new trade route to China and India, his brother had
>an appointment with Henry VII to try get England's backing. Henry did not keep
>the appointment. Would Richard have done so? Would he have put up the money
>for the voyage, as Ferdinand and Isabella did when approached? If he had, the
>"river of gold" from the Americas may have flowed to England instead of Spain.
>But would the English have exploited the Americas the way the Spanish did? In
>any case, it could have changed history, and changed the world.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I'm almost certain that Richard, not being a skinflint like Henry, would have
>put up the money (and would have rewarded John Cabot somewhat more lavishly for
>discovering Greenland than Henry did). And, of course, if he had married Joana
>of Portugal, he might have had a hand in the Portuguese expeditions (or *she*
>might have). And I seriously doubt that the English in general and Richard in
>particular would have forced the conversion of the Native Americans in the way
>that the Spanish did. I don't think the English would have been quite so hungry
>for gold, either. Richard, I think, would mostly have been interested in
>exploration (and maybe a bit of glory for the House of York). It's impossible to
>say, of course, but the English of the next century seem to have come to the
>Americas primarily as settlers. And, of course, the issue of religious freedom
>wouldn't have arisen under Richard. The colonies would have been Roman Catholic,
>at least at the outset. No Salem witch trials, for one!
>
>
> Carol, who lives in the Southwestern U.S and would happily trade the Spanish
>heritage for an English one stemming from Richard's reign
>
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.