A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli

Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll

In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
 
(1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 

Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 

Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired

A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."

(2) In His Own Words

"...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."

Regards,
Judy

 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________

Hi,

I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.

P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?

Marion
--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>
> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>  
> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 
>
> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 
>
> Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>
> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>
> (2) In His Own Words
>
> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>
> Regards,
> Judy
>
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>

Many thanks, Marion and welcome to this Forum. 

I wrote in something of a rush of emotion, without editing, etc. Afterwards, I thought: Gulp! 

I have been trying to gather some semblance of Richard's library in recent months. We are strangely fortunate in that he usually wrote his name in his books; this was not common practice at that time. It's unfortunate, however, so few of Caxton's books were printed during his reign, and only one dedicated to the king: Ramon Lull's book of Chivalry.

Richard is generally held to have been "conventionally pious," yet it's interesting to know he owned the Vulgate Bible. And his Book of Hours contains a very personal prayer, albeit written in Latin. This prayer specifically cites examples of calumny and false accusation and asks for protection from those who perpetrate such things.

More often than not, we are what we read. No single book reveals the whole, but taken together, a pattern emerges. And to truly understand someone, it is useful to know what things he holds most precious. When I meet a person at home, I check out book shelves, music, and artwork. Don't think I'm alone in this habit.


Ah, if only we knew which songs Richard favoured ; )

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: marionziemke <marionziemke@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli


 

Hi,

I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.

P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?

Marion
--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>
> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>  
> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 
>
> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 
>
> Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>
> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>
> (2) In His Own Words
>
> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>
> Regards,
> Judy
>
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>

Thank you for that post which I found very interesting and gave me a great insight into what you people are doing at the moment.
That´s also my opinion. I think the belongings which one has gathered, especially the cultural belongings can be taken as a mirror of ones personality. At least it gives a good glimpse.

Well, if you were checking my bookshelf you had a lot to look at. ;-)

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Many thanks, Marion and welcome to this Forum. 
>
> I wrote in something of a rush of emotion, without editing, etc. Afterwards, I thought: Gulp! 
>
> I have been trying to gather some semblance of Richard's library in recent months. We are strangely fortunate in that he usually wrote his name in his books; this was not common practice at that time. It's unfortunate, however, so few of Caxton's books were printed during his reign, and only one dedicated to the king: Ramon Lull's book of Chivalry.
>
> Richard is generally held to have been "conventionally pious," yet it's interesting to know he owned the Vulgate Bible. And his Book of Hours contains a very personal prayer, albeit written in Latin. This prayer specifically cites examples of calumny and false accusation and asks for protection from those who perpetrate such things.
>
> More often than not, we are what we read. No single book reveals the whole, but taken together, a pattern emerges. And to truly understand someone, it is useful to know what things he holds most precious. When I meet a person at home, I check out book shelves, music, and artwork. Don't think I'm alone in this habit.
>
>
> Ah, if only we knew which songs Richard favoured ; )
>
> Judy
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: marionziemke <marionziemke@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli
>
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>
> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?
>
> Marion
> --- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
> >
> > In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> >  
> > (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 
> >
> > Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 
> >
> > Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
> >
> > A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
> >
> > (2) In His Own Words
> >
> > "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> > Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> >
> > Regards,
> > Judy
> >
> >  
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Welcome Marion, from another Marion.  I have been a member of this group for some considerable time, and throughly enjoy it.  Hope you have as much fun as I have.

Marion C



________________________________
From: marionziemke <marionziemke@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2012, 13:11
Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli


 

Hi,

I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.

P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?

Marion
--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>
> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>  
> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 
>
> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 
>
> Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>
> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>
> (2) In His Own Words
>
> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>
> Regards,
> Judy
>
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>

Hi Marion - Welcome from me, and it's great to add you to our list of forum members, which seems to be steadily growing. It's ages since I joined, but I don't remember any formal mechanism for introducing oneself. Some new members let us know their interests and suggest topics for discussion, but I suspect most just lurk until they get the flavour of the correspondence, then join in when a topic interests them.

For my part, there are so many ways to interpret Machiavelli, and his Italianate thinking is so far removed from what I see as conventional Wars-of-the-Roses-era English thinking, that I just don't find "The Prince" particularly relevant to a discussion of Richard III, except in the context of Shakespeare's play of course. The Richard of real history seems to me to have reflected the priorities of his father. The Duke of York's all-consuming obsession with what he perceived as (dis)honour and (in)justice must have permeated his entire family and household, and he is known for desiring to be recognised, justified and legitimated - he was perpetually setting out chapter and verse to explain his actions and objectives, and when it came to his claim to the throne, he actually asked Parliament to adjudicate on it.

As friends on this forum already know, I don't believe in trying to psychoanalyse the 15th-century mind, but one can see pointers to a ruling code concerned with ideas of legality and rectitude, as exemplified in the "Mirror" tradition which continued at least into the 16th century. A shining example is seen in the writings Sir John Fortescue who was influential in the education of the Lancastrian Prince of Wales. Most modern writing on Henry Tudor (David Grummitt et al) point to the 'new' politics introduced under his regime, in which the 'old' values were abandoned, which gives us a clue to what those abandoned values were.

Since English-speakers tend to be mainly familiar with English documents, it would be great to know what virtues Maximilian's "Prinzenspiegel" is concerned with. Would that be in the 1490s?
Regards, Annette

----- Original Message -----
From: marionziemke
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli




Hi,

I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.

P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?

Marion
--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>
> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>
> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear]
>
> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
>
> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>
> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>
> (2) In His Own Words
>
> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>
> Regards,
> Judy
>
>
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>

I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on it.

I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.

I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was private
and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it is
usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.

Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?

Best wishes
Christine

On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>
> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?
>
> Marion
> --- In , Judy Thomson<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>>
>> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>>
>> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear]
>>
>> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
>>
>> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>>
>> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>>
>> (2) In His Own Words
>>
>> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
>> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>>
>> Regards,
>> Judy
>>
>>

Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am part of the "thread"). 

Judy

Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Christine Headley <christinelheadley@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
Subject: List privacy?


 

I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on it.

I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.

I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was private
and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it is
usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.

Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?

Best wishes
Christine

On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>
> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?
>
> Marion
> --- In , Judy Thomson<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
>>
>> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>>
>> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear]
>>
>> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
>>
>> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
>>
>> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
>>
>> (2) In His Own Words
>>
>> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
>> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>>
>> Regards,
>> Judy
>>
>>

I've always thought of this Yahoo discussion group as semi-private since
there is no restriction on anyone joining the group and having access to
the discussions other than approval of the moderator.

Joan
---
This Time--General Fiction Finalist of 2010 Next Generation Indie Book
Awards
Loyalty Binds Me--recommended by Midwest Book reviews
website <http://www.joanszechtman.com/> -- blog
<http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/> --trailer <http://youtu.be/O49HPSN08NI>
ebooks at Smashwords
<http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/JoanSzechtman>


--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am
part of the "thread").Â
>
> Judy
>
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Christine Headley christinelheadley@...
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
> Subject: List privacy?
>
>
> Â
>
> I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
> interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on
it.
>
> I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.
>
> I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was
private
> and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it
is
> usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.
>
> Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?
>
> Best wishes
> Christine
>
> On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just joined this group and found the first message I read already
very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good
deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read
about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den
Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives
reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable
attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> > I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of
Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier
form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
> >
> > P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere
an place to introduce one self?
> >
> > Marion
> > --- In , Judy
Thomsonjudygerard.thomson@ wrote:
> >> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the
struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee,
but 61 years takes its toll
> >>
> >> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched
for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> >>
> >> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a
book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and
especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic,
just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be
humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how
to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct
conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright?
unclear]
> >>
> >> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was
unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or
feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the
means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was
changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's
biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that
waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
> >>
> >> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old
Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C.
version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian."
Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense
at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire"
becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony,
especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading
Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli
watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of
the man he'd actually admired
> >>
> >> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work:
"People take my words way too seriously...."
> >>
> >> (2) In His Own Words
> >>
> >> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor,
(dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor
as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> >> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such
words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and
later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's
certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Judy
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I thought it was a membership benefit of the Richard III Society, open
to members worldwide - complementing [richard 3], which I am also on.
That is to say, I thought the moderator only approved members.

But, having gone into the Yahoo website, I see that I am wrong! [Richard
3] is members only, private archive, this one is public. (I was also
horrified to see him mentioned in the spiel for a list for those with
club feet.)

So, anyone labouring under the same misapprehension as I was is warned!

Best wishes
Christine

On 21/05/2012 03:57, joanszechtman wrote:
> I've always thought of this Yahoo discussion group as semi-private since
> there is no restriction on anyone joining the group and having access to
> the discussions other than approval of the moderator.
>
> Joan
> ---
> This Time--General Fiction Finalist of 2010 Next Generation Indie Book
> Awards
> Loyalty Binds Me--recommended by Midwest Book reviews
> website<http://www.joanszechtman.com/> -- blog
> <http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/> --trailer<http://youtu.be/O49HPSN08NI>
> ebooks at Smashwords
> <http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/JoanSzechtman>
>
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>> Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am
> part of the "thread").Â
>> Judy
>>
>> Loyaulte me lie
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Christine Headley christinelheadley@...
>> To:
>> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
>> Subject: List privacy?
>>
>>
>> Â
>>
>> I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
>> interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on
> it.
>> I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.
>>
>> I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was
> private
>> and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it
> is
>> usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.
>>
>> Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?
>>
>> Best wishes
>> Christine
>>
>> On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already
> very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good
> deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read
> about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den
> Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives
> reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable
> attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
>>> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of
> Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier
> form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>>> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere
> an place to introduce one self?
>>> Marion
>>> --- In , Judy
> Thomsonjudygerard.thomson@ wrote:
>>>> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the
> struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee,
> but 61 years takes its toll
>>>> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched
> for days, to find these passages, to wit;
>>>> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a
> book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and
> especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic,
> just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be
> humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how
> to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct
> conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright?
> unclear]
>>>> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was
> unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or
> feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the
> means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was
> changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's
> biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that
> waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
>>>> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old
> Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C.
> version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian."
> Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense
> at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire"
> becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony,
> especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading
> Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli
> watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of
> the man he'd actually admired
>>>> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work:
> "People take my words way too seriously...."
>>>> (2) In His Own Words
>>>>
>>>> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor,
> (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor
> as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
>>>> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such
> words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and
> later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's
> certainly nicer than he used to be...."
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Judy
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Best wishes
Christine

Christine Headley
Butterrow, Stroud, Glos

Makes sense, then. Never gave it much thought before.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: joanszechtman <u2nohoo@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: List privacy?


 
I've always thought of this Yahoo discussion group as semi-private since
there is no restriction on anyone joining the group and having access to
the discussions other than approval of the moderator.

Joan
---
This Time--General Fiction Finalist of 2010 Next Generation Indie Book
Awards
Loyalty Binds Me--recommended by Midwest Book reviews
website <http://www.joanszechtman.com/> -- blog
<http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/> --trailer <http://youtu.be/O49HPSN08NI>
ebooks at Smashwords
<http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/JoanSzechtman>

--- In , Judy Thomson
<judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am
part of the "thread").Â
>
> Judy
>
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Christine Headley christinelheadley@...
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
> Subject: List privacy?
>
>
> Â
>
> I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
> interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on
it.
>
> I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.
>
> I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was
private
> and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it
is
> usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.
>
> Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?
>
> Best wishes
> Christine
>
> On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just joined this group and found the first message I read already
very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good
deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read
about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den
Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives
reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable
attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> > I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of
Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier
form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
> >
> > P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere
an place to introduce one self?
> >
> > Marion
> > --- In , Judy
Thomsonjudygerard.thomson@ wrote:
> >> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the
struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee,
but 61 years takes its toll
> >>
> >> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched
for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> >>
> >> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a
book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and
especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic,
just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be
humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how
to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct
conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright?
unclear]
> >>
> >> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was
unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or
feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the
means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was
changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's
biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that
waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
> >>
> >> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old
Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C.
version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian."
Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense
at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire"
becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony,
especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading
Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli
watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of
the man he'd actually admired
> >>
> >> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work:
"People take my words way too seriously...."
> >>
> >> (2) In His Own Words
> >>
> >> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor,
(dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor
as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> >> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such
words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and
later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's
certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Judy
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Forum groups are private in the sense that you must be a member of the group to post and to reply to posts. Some forums (like the Jussi Bjorling forum which I moderate) require approval to join the group and a second approval to become an unmoderated member. The reason for that is we were getting spammed by what were essentially porn offers. Once a new member has shown that they are legitimate, I stop moderating their posts.

A good rule of thumb for the internet is that nothing is private (excepting of course encrypted transactions). Frankly I'm appalled by some of the posts I see on FB which reveal far too much very private information. Nothing is private on FB as they collect information and sell it to marketers and others to increase revenues.

Interestingly I had a woman call me yesterday to see if I would be able to help her to remove a very distant connection with her through another website. Apparently she had posted something several years ago that was now a problem in a lawsuit. I have no idea why she thought I might be able to assist her. I wasn't.

Flo


On May 21, 2012, at 12:53 PM, Judy Thomson wrote:

> Makes sense, then. Never gave it much thought before.
>
> Judy
>
> Loyaulte me lie
>
> ________________________________
> From: joanszechtman <u2nohoo@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 9:57 PM
> Subject: Re: List privacy?
>
>
>
> I've always thought of this Yahoo discussion group as semi-private since
> there is no restriction on anyone joining the group and having access to
> the discussions other than approval of the moderator.
>
> Joan
> ---
> This Time--General Fiction Finalist of 2010 Next Generation Indie Book
> Awards
> Loyalty Binds Me--recommended by Midwest Book reviews
> website <http://www.joanszechtman.com/> -- blog
> <http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/> --trailer <http://youtu.be/O49HPSN08NI>
> ebooks at Smashwords
> <http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/JoanSzechtman>
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am
> part of the "thread").ý
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christine Headley christinelheadley@...
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
> > Subject: List privacy?
> >
> >
> > ý
> >
> > I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
> > interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on
> it.
> >
> > I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.
> >
> > I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was
> private
> > and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it
> is
> > usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.
> >
> > Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Christine
> >
> > On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I just joined this group and found the first message I read already
> very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good
> deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read
> about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den
> Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives
> reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable
> attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> > > I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of
> Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier
> form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
> > >
> > > P.s. Iýým happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere
> an place to introduce one self?
> > >
> > > Marion
> > > --- In , Judy
> Thomsonjudygerard.thomson@ wrote:
> > >> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the
> struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee,
> but 61 years takes its toll
> > >>
> > >> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched
> for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> > >>
> > >> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a
> book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and
> especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic,
> just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be
> humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how
> to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct
> conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright?
> unclear]
> > >>
> > >> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was
> unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or
> feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the
> means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was
> changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's
> biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that
> waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
> > >>
> > >> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old
> Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C.
> version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian."
> Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense
> at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire"
> becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony,
> especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading
> Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli
> watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of
> the man he'd actually admired
> > >>
> > >> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work:
> "People take my words way too seriously...."
> > >>
> > >> (2) In His Own Words
> > >>
> > >> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor,
> (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor
> as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> > >> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such
> words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and
> later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's
> certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Judy
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

And there's still some hope for Humankind in a world that hasn't forgotten Jussi!

(Once upon a time and in miniature, I costumed a Bjorling puppet for his big Swan Stop, Flo....)

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Florence Dove <mdove9@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: List privacy?

Forum groups are private in the sense that you must be a member of the group to post and to reply to posts. Some forums (like the Jussi Bjorling forum which I moderate) require approval to join the group and a second approval to become an unmoderated member. The reason for that is we were getting spammed by what were essentially porn offers. Once a new member has shown that they are legitimate, I stop moderating their posts.

A good rule of thumb for the internet is that nothing is private (excepting of course encrypted transactions). Frankly I'm appalled by some of the posts I see on FB which reveal far too much very private information. Nothing is private on FB as they collect information and sell it to marketers and others to increase revenues.

Interestingly I had a woman call me yesterday to see if I would be able to help her to remove a very distant connection with her through another website. Apparently she had posted something several years ago that was now a problem in a lawsuit. I have no idea why she thought I might be able to assist her. I wasn't.

Flo


On May 21, 2012, at 12:53 PM, Judy Thomson wrote:

> Makes sense, then. Never gave it much thought before.
>
> Judy
> 
> Loyaulte me lie
>
> ________________________________
> From: joanszechtman <u2nohoo@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 9:57 PM
> Subject: Re: List privacy?
>
>
> 
> I've always thought of this Yahoo discussion group as semi-private since
> there is no restriction on anyone joining the group and having access to
> the discussions other than approval of the moderator.
>
> Joan
> ---
> This Time--General Fiction Finalist of 2010 Next Generation Indie Book
> Awards
> Loyalty Binds Me--recommended by Midwest Book reviews
> website <http://www.joanszechtman.com/> -- blog
> <http://rtoaaa.blogspot.com/> --trailer <http://youtu.be/O49HPSN08NI>
> ebooks at Smashwords
> <http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/JoanSzechtman>
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson
> <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Christine. Yes, interesting question (especially since I was/am
> part of the "thread").Â
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christine Headley christinelheadley@...
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:09 PM
> > Subject: List privacy?
> >
> >
> > Â
> >
> > I studied C13 Mittelhochdeutsch many years ago and thought it would be
> > interesting to find out more about the Prinzenspiegel, so I googled on
> it.
> >
> > I was surprised to find Marion's message among the items found.
> >
> > I'm not personally bothered, but I did think that this list was
> private
> > and, while I have seen messages from private lists escape before, it
> is
> > usually some time after the e-mail was written, not within ten days.
> >
> > Or is the list's privacy only that only Society members can post?
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Christine
> >
> > On 12/05/2012 13:11, marionziemke wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I just joined this group and found the first message I read already
> very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good
> deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read
> about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den
> Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives
> reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable
> attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> > > I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of
> Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier
> form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
> > >
> > > P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere
> an place to introduce one self?
> > >
> > > Marion
> > > --- In , Judy
> Thomsonjudygerard.thomson@ wrote:
> > >> Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the
> struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee,
> but 61 years takes its toll
> > >>
> > >> In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched
> for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> > >>
> > >> (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a
> book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and
> especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic,
> just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be
> humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how
> to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct
> conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright?
> unclear]
> > >>
> > >> Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was
> unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or
> feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the
> means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was
> changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's
> biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that
> waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
> > >>
> > >> Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old
> Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C.
> version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian."
> Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense
> at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire"
> becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony,
> especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading
> Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli
> watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of
> the man he'd actually admired
> > >>
> > >> A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work:
> "People take my words way too seriously...."
> > >>
> > >> (2) In His Own Words
> > >>
> > >> "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor,
> (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor
> as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> > >> Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such
> words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and
> later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's
> certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Judy
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>







------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi Marion,

Thank you, maybe you can recommend me a few books for further reading. I had some basic knowledge of medival England through my researching of the Lifes of Joan of Kent and the Black Prince and also some insights into the 15th century (Ludovico Sforza Duke of Milan, emperor Maximilian I). Currently I´m reading Paul Murray Kendalls "Richard III".

Marion Z
--- In , marion cheatham <marioncheatham2003@...> wrote:
>
> Welcome Marion, from another Marion.  I have been a member of this group for some considerable time, and throughly enjoy it.  Hope you have as much fun as I have.
>
> Marion C
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: marionziemke <marionziemke@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2012, 13:11
> Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli
>
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>
> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?
>
> Marion
> --- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
> >
> > In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> >  
> > (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear] 
> >
> > Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like  "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying.  Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!) 
> >
> > Richard's princely  "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair,  was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
> >
> > A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
> >
> > (2) In His Own Words
> >
> > "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> > Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> >
> > Regards,
> > Judy
> >
> >  
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Annette,

Regarding the Prinzenspiegel of Maximilian I: Splendid. I´m currently collecting some material to complete the bits and pieces I had from my studium.

Marion



--- In , "Annette Carson" <email@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Marion - Welcome from me, and it's great to add you to our list of forum members, which seems to be steadily growing. It's ages since I joined, but I don't remember any formal mechanism for introducing oneself. Some new members let us know their interests and suggest topics for discussion, but I suspect most just lurk until they get the flavour of the correspondence, then join in when a topic interests them.
>
> For my part, there are so many ways to interpret Machiavelli, and his Italianate thinking is so far removed from what I see as conventional Wars-of-the-Roses-era English thinking, that I just don't find "The Prince" particularly relevant to a discussion of Richard III, except in the context of Shakespeare's play of course. The Richard of real history seems to me to have reflected the priorities of his father. The Duke of York's all-consuming obsession with what he perceived as (dis)honour and (in)justice must have permeated his entire family and household, and he is known for desiring to be recognised, justified and legitimated - he was perpetually setting out chapter and verse to explain his actions and objectives, and when it came to his claim to the throne, he actually asked Parliament to adjudicate on it.
>
> As friends on this forum already know, I don't believe in trying to psychoanalyse the 15th-century mind, but one can see pointers to a ruling code concerned with ideas of legality and rectitude, as exemplified in the "Mirror" tradition which continued at least into the 16th century. A shining example is seen in the writings Sir John Fortescue who was influential in the education of the Lancastrian Prince of Wales. Most modern writing on Henry Tudor (David Grummitt et al) point to the 'new' politics introduced under his regime, in which the 'old' values were abandoned, which gives us a clue to what those abandoned values were.
>
> Since English-speakers tend to be mainly familiar with English documents, it would be great to know what virtues Maximilian's "Prinzenspiegel" is concerned with. Would that be in the 1490s?
> Regards, Annette
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: marionziemke
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 1:11 PM
> Subject: Re: A Mirror of Princes and Machiavelli
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I just joined this group and found the first message I read already very absorbing. During my studies of the 15th century I learned a good deal about the up bringing of noble men and their studies. When I read about the "Mirror of the Princes" I had just to think of "den Prinzenspiegel" which was given to Maximilian I as a guideline. It gives reason to believe that during the 15th century certain honourable attributes, as gven by Judy were held high.
> I am going to look for any texts concerning the Prinzenspiegel of Maxmimilian I which are I think in mittelhochdeutsch (an old, earlier form of german) and see if I can make an translation of crucial parts.
>
> P.s. I´m happy to be now part of this group. Is there somewhere an place to introduce one self?
>
> Marion
> --- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Took me a few days to build some courage, but Richard is worth the struggle. As a kid, I studied history under a protege of Arnold Toynbee, but 61 years takes its toll
> >
> > In honour of Paul, Annette, William, Mr. Tripp et al, I searched for days, to find these passages, to wit;
> >
> > (1) "Among his [R's] books was a so-called 'Mirror of Princes', a book [one of many] of guidance on the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. A prince should be prudent, dignified, sympathetic, just, temperate, courageous, magnanimous. He should love, honour and be humble, and be on friendly terms with his subjects. He should learn how to rule himself, his household and his kingdom.This was the correct conduct of all men, and especially kings. [translation Copyright? unclear]
> >
> > Richard learned these things from early childhood. He was unschooled in those notions like "It's better to be be cruel [or feared] than kind [or to be loved], nor was "the end justifies the means" a common saying. Sure, there were exceptions; the world was changing. But Richard most certainly didn't encourage one of NM's biggies: the establishment of a State-controlled religion (an idea that waited over 40 years and the Tudors!)
> >
> > Richard's princely "guidebook" was a far far cry from poor Old Nick's, which, to be fair, was probably closer to a 15th-16th C. version of the Borowitz Report. Even Machiavelli wasn't "machiavellian." Perhaps La Mandragola was deemed funnier; no one seemed to take offense at that. But sometimes, when a writer rises up so angry, his "satire" becomes too pointed. As William said, Not everyone appreciates irony, especially when they search their own souls and know they're reading Truth about themselves. And there is Truth in Il Principe. Machiavelli watched his beloved Florentine Republic eaten alive by the grandsons of the man he'd actually admired
> >
> > A writer acquaintance agrees with me. He said of his own work: "People take my words way too seriously...."
> >
> > (2) In His Own Words
> >
> > "...justly and duly administer the laws without delay or favor, (dispensing justice) indifferently to every person, as well as to poor as to rich". - Richard III - Address at Westminster, 1483
> > Even on a good day, I can't imagine Cesare Borgia uttering such words. To paraphrase Machiavelli: Kill all your enemies on Day One, and later people will say of you, "Well, maybe he's not so bad. He's certainly nicer than he used to be...."
> >
> > Regards,
> > Judy
> >
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>