Books

Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology of a Battle'?  I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded.  So, bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there, perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The Bosworth Campaign'?

Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram?  It came out very recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.

Cheers

Jonathan

I met with Mike Ingram a few weeks ago and he gave me a conducted tour of the new site. That was enlightening, but I was very disappointed in his book.
Jones at time bewilders me. He seems to really like Richard up to 1483, then turns against him. His scenario never felt right to me, unlike Peter Foss' one. I found him sitting outside Dadlington church back in 1483 offering a walk around his ideas of where the battle took place. Peter is a lovely guy and knows the area inside out. His scenario was very close to what has since been found in the way of artefacts, and put forward by the latest theorists.
Paul

On 1 Nov 2012, at 11:23, Jonathan Evans wrote:

> Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology of a Battle'? I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded. So, bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there, perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The Bosworth Campaign'?
>
> Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram? It came out very recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

The places where Peter Foss and Mike Jones suggested Richard were killed are equidistant from the real site, just in different directions. Mike Jones is also a lovely guy.
Marie



--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> I met with Mike Ingram a few weeks ago and he gave me a conducted tour of the new site. That was enlightening, but I was very disappointed in his book.
> Jones at time bewilders me. He seems to really like Richard up to 1483, then turns against him. His scenario never felt right to me, unlike Peter Foss' one. I found him sitting outside Dadlington church back in 1483 offering a walk around his ideas of where the battle took place. Peter is a lovely guy and knows the area inside out. His scenario was very close to what has since been found in the way of artefacts, and put forward by the latest theorists.
> Paul
>
> On 1 Nov 2012, at 11:23, Jonathan Evans wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology of a Battle'? I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded. So, bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there, perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The Bosworth Campaign'?
> >
> > Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram? It came out very recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

Thanks, Paul.

Really, really helpful.

Cheers

Jonathan



________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2012, 16:13
Subject: Re: Books


 
I met with Mike Ingram a few weeks ago and he gave me a conducted tour of the new site. That was enlightening, but I was very disappointed in his book.
Jones at time bewilders me. He seems to really like Richard up to 1483, then turns against him. His scenario never felt right to me, unlike Peter Foss' one. I found him sitting outside Dadlington church back in 1483 offering a walk around his ideas of where the battle took place. Peter is a lovely guy and knows the area inside out. His scenario was very close to what has since been found in the way of artefacts, and put forward by the latest theorists.
Paul

On 1 Nov 2012, at 11:23, Jonathan Evans wrote:

> Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology of a Battle'? I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded. So, bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there, perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The Bosworth Campaign'?
>
> Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram? It came out very recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Hi, Marie -

Do you mean the real site where Richard was killed, or the real site of the
battle?



And - are there maps somewhere online that depict the latest information?



Is it going to be possible to put a marker on the exact spot where Richard
died?



Johanne



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of mariewalsh2003
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:44 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Books





The places where Peter Foss and Mike Jones suggested Richard were killed are
equidistant from the real site, just in different directions. Mike Jones is
also a lovely guy.
Marie

--- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Paul Trevor Bale
<paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> I met with Mike Ingram a few weeks ago and he gave me a conducted tour of
the new site. That was enlightening, but I was very disappointed in his
book.
> Jones at time bewilders me. He seems to really like Richard up to 1483,
then turns against him. His scenario never felt right to me, unlike Peter
Foss' one. I found him sitting outside Dadlington church back in 1483
offering a walk around his ideas of where the battle took place. Peter is a
lovely guy and knows the area inside out. His scenario was very close to
what has since been found in the way of artefacts, and put forward by the
latest theorists.
> Paul
>
> On 1 Nov 2012, at 11:23, Jonathan Evans wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology
of a Battle'? I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of
course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded. So,
bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there,
perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The
Bosworth Campaign'?
> >
> > Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram? It came out very
recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

--- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Marie -
>
> Do you mean the real site where Richard was killed, or the real site of the
> battle?

The real site of the battle - at least the area where the majority of cannonshot was fond. There is a spot within this site that is tentatively suggested as the place where Richard was killed but we'll probably never know for sure.
Marie

>
>
>
> And - are there maps somewhere online that depict the latest information?

I'm finding it hard to locate a decent map online, but try this; you can always pick up the same image on google maps to get a better idea of location. Dadlington is to the east and Derby Spinney, where Mike Jones had Richard die, is by a little loop in the A444 just north of its junction with Fenn Lanes.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/19/bosworth_field/

Marie


>
>
> Is it going to be possible to put a marker on the exact spot where Richard
> died?
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of mariewalsh2003
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:44 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Books
>
>
>
>
>
> The places where Peter Foss and Mike Jones suggested Richard were killed are
> equidistant from the real site, just in different directions. Mike Jones is
> also a lovely guy.
> Marie
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > I met with Mike Ingram a few weeks ago and he gave me a conducted tour of
> the new site. That was enlightening, but I was very disappointed in his
> book.
> > Jones at time bewilders me. He seems to really like Richard up to 1483,
> then turns against him. His scenario never felt right to me, unlike Peter
> Foss' one. I found him sitting outside Dadlington church back in 1483
> offering a walk around his ideas of where the battle took place. Peter is a
> lovely guy and knows the area inside out. His scenario was very close to
> what has since been found in the way of artefacts, and put forward by the
> latest theorists.
> > Paul
> >
> > On 1 Nov 2012, at 11:23, Jonathan Evans wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology
> of a Battle'? I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of
> course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded. So,
> bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there,
> perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The
> Bosworth Campaign'?
> > >
> > > Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram? It came out very
> recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Michael's book is a good read and presents an alternative site for the Battle of Bosworth. My local branch had a visit led by Michael to Merevale Abbey and to his site of the battle. He brought forward quite a bit of evidence to support the fact that Mr Tudor stayed the night before the battle at Merevale Abbey. Michael also makes much of Richard's interest in chivalry.

Like you Jonathon I am not convinced that Edward was illegitimate and he also believes that Richard did murder the Princes, while I prefer to believe that there is no evidence and I don't know if the Princes even died at that time and if they did Richard was just one of several people who could have murdered them.

I have not read Peter Hammond's "The Bosworth Campaign" so I can't compare, however, that will be one for my book list if it is as good as his book on the Battle of Tewkesbury.

Michael's site of the Battle is not a million miles away from Peter Foss's site and where Glenn Foard found the cannon balls and the silver boar. I believe that Peter Foss told Glenn Foard where to dig. To be fair I think that Michael was one of the instigators of a dig originally. I am not entirely sure of that but when we said to him that it needed a dig to find the correct site he said that he was looking in to the possibility. As has been said in another post Michael is a lovely guy and a very interesting speaker.

Something else that is mentioned in the book and that Michael gave a lecture about at the Tewkesbury re-enactment in 2003, is that Richard made an endowment to Queens College Cambridge that honoured the memory and remembered by name all the relatively humble soldiers who had fought and died under his standard at Barnet and Tewkesbury. Apparently throughout medieval times Kings and great lords would remember the names of the nobility who fought for them but not the humble soldiers. Richard was unique in honouring these men. At the time I lived in Bewdley in Worcestershire and in 1472 Edward IV gave a charter to Bewdley because the Bewdley bowmen had fought for Richard at Tewkesbury. I always assumed that Edward had known about their part in the battle but obviously Richard had brought it to his attention. Michael's book is well worth a read.

Regards

Mary

--- In , Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any views on Michael Jones's 'Bosworth - the Psychology of a Battle'?  I'm not convinced by the Edward IV illegitimacy angle and, of course, his theory re the location of the battle has been superseded.  So, bearing all that in mind, is the book still worth getting or is there, perhaps, little in there that Peter Hammond doesn't cover better in 'The Bosworth Campaign'?
>
> Also, has anyone read 'Bosworth 1485' by Mike Ingram?  It came out very recently, yet I haven't seen any reviews anywhere.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>

Mary said
<
<Something else that is mentioned in the book and that Michael gave a lecture about at the Tewkesbury re-enactment in 2003, is that <Richard made an endowment to Queens College Cambridge that honoured the memory and remembered by name all the relatively humble <soldiers who had fought and died under his standard at Barnet and Tewkesbury. Apparently throughout medieval times Kings and great <lords would remember the names of the nobility who fought for them but not the humble soldiers. Richard was unique in honouring <these men. At the time I lived in Bewdley in Worcestershire and in 1472 Edward IV gave a charter to Bewdley because the Bewdley <bowmen had fought for Richard at Tewkesbury. I always assumed that Edward had known about their part in the battle but obviously <Richard had brought it to his attention
 
 
 
Well doesn't that tell us a lot about the kind of person Richard was?
 
Liz

Yes Liz that's what I thought. I think it is this sort of evidence that the traditionalists need to to consider before they make their opinions known. I wrote an article about it in The Dickon Independent, which is the magazine of the Worcestershire Branch of the Society.

--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> Mary said
> <
> <Something else that is mentioned in the book and that Michael gave a lecture about at the Tewkesbury re-enactment in 2003, is that <Richard made an endowment to Queens College Cambridge that honoured the memory and remembered by name all the relatively humble <soldiers who had fought and died under his standard at Barnet and Tewkesbury. Apparently throughout medieval times Kings and great <lords would remember the names of the nobility who fought for them but not the humble soldiers. Richard was unique in honouring <these men. At the time I lived in Bewdley in Worcestershire and in 1472 Edward IV gave a charter to Bewdley because the Bewdley <bowmen had fought for Richard at Tewkesbury. I always assumed that Edward had known about their part in the battle but obviously <Richard had brought it to his attention
>  
>  
>  
> Well doesn't that tell us a lot about the kind of person Richard was?
>  
> Liz
>
>
>

As I am starting to get back into reading about Richard, I find there are
many acts of generosity and humility and faith recorded about him.



I have read of many instances of his refusing grants/gifts of money, unlike
his predecessor and successor monarchs. For example, Louis XI offered
Edward and Richard sizable yearly pensions after the treaty of Picquigny.
Richard was very much opposed to the treaty, and he refused the pension.



When he was travelling, various worthies in the towns he visited offered
gifts. I guess it was customary for a town to offer gift of money to
visiting nobles. There are several instances of Richard refusing such gifts.



Also, Annette Carson mentions that Richard opposed benevolences. However,
like Edward and Henry VII, his treasury was chronically short of cash. So
Richard instituted a system of forced loans. OK, they were forced - but at
least Richard gave receipts with promises of repayment, the first time any
monarch had promised to repay his subjects. As Annette notes, because of
Richard's premature death we have no way of knowing if he would have repaid
or not, unfortunately, but at least he showed that he considered it an
obligation.



Our Richard was indeed Good King Richard!



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of liz williams
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 5:29 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Books





Mary said
<
<Something else that is mentioned in the book and that Michael gave a
lecture about at the Tewkesbury re-enactment in 2003, is that <Richard made
an endowment to Queens College Cambridge that honoured the memory and
remembered by name all the relatively humble <soldiers who had fought and
died under his standard at Barnet and Tewkesbury. Apparently throughout
medieval times Kings and great <lords would remember the names of the
nobility who fought for them but not the humble soldiers. Richard was unique
in honouring <these men. At the time I lived in Bewdley in Worcestershire
and in 1472 Edward IV gave a charter to Bewdley because the Bewdley <bowmen
had fought for Richard at Tewkesbury. I always assumed that Edward had known
about their part in the battle but obviously <Richard had brought it to his
attention



Well doesn't that tell us a lot about the kind of person Richard was?

Liz

<snip> I just wanted to say, I am still reading, and ordering books, avidly.
All of your suggestions have been most helpful, and I do feel that I am
starting to understand many of the issues and points of contention surrounding
Richard III.



I have a long way to go before I reach the level of erudition on the subject to
be found here, though..<snip >



Same here. I've always been a staunch Ricardian, but my main interest has
always been in the 14th century, so I'm learning a lot of new and interesting
stuff too, and, like Jan, am reading anything i can lay my hands on!



Thank you all!



Sharon

My speciality was / is the Industrial Revolution so most of this is new to me, and utterly fascinating. I'll just keep reading.......
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: 43118@... <43118@...>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Books
Sent: Wed, Oct 2, 2013 12:45:33 PM

 

<snip> I just wanted to say, I am still reading, and ordering books, avidly.
All of your suggestions have been most helpful, and I do feel that I am
starting to understand many of the issues and points of contention surrounding
Richard III.

I have a long way to go before I reach the level of erudition on the subject to
be found here, though..<snip >

Same here. I've always been a staunch Ricardian, but my main interest has
always been in the 14th century, so I'm learning a lot of new and interesting
stuff too, and, like Jan, am reading anything i can lay my hands on!

Thank you all!

Sharon

Could I hear what people think about Matthew Lewis' biography of Richard, of his father the Duke Of York, Of his book on the fate of the sons of Edward IV, and his WOTR book.
Before I spend any more money I'd like to know if there's anything different about them worth the investment.
Thank you in advance.
Paul


Envoyé de mon iPad

I have all three and they are different, building on Kendall and his successors to express facts and probabilities as they are now.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Paul Trevor Bale bale.paul-trevor@... []
Sent: 12 December 2018 10:30
To:
Subject: Books

 

Could I hear what people think about Matthew Lewis' biography of Richard, of his father the Duke Of York, Of his book on the fate of the sons of Edward IV, and his WOTR book.
Before I spend any more money I'd like to know if there's anything different about them worth the investment.
Thank you in advance.
Paul

Envoyé de mon iPad

Paul - just found this.
I have the latest biography and whilst I can't say I've read it cover to cover it is very readable and very reasonable. I would say for an 'entrant' interested in Richard it's good. Personally I can spot the Carson, the JAH, even the Hancock in it. I went straight to the summer of 1483, as that's what we've been talking about it. It agrees with a lot we've said but nothing is really examined in detail. Both Buckingham and Hastings are glossed over because, like us, he doesn't know the answer. Interestingly he puts the case that Richard and Rivers got on because they were alike - that is because they liked books and fighting. But Rivers never fought except once, just played at tournaments which would have grieved me had I been Richard! And he suggests Croyland 1486 was probably written by a group of old frightened bishops who wanted the truth to be known. Not sure about that given the relationship with the Abbey and MB and Bucks.
Trouble with any biography with a subject as controversial as Richard it would have to be very, very long and not a page turner. JAH had the right idea by tackling it in bits. So to answer your question, I don't think you'd learn a lot from it but other potential converts might.
Happy Christmans or Joyeux Noel! H


On Wednesday, 12 December 2018, 10:56:01 GMT, Stephen stephenmlark@... [] <> wrote:

I have all three and they are different, building on Kendall and his successors to express facts and probabilities as they are now.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Paul Trevor Bale bale.paul-trevor@... []
Sent: 12 December 2018 10:30
To:
Subject: Books



Could I hear what people think about Matthew Lewis' biography of Richard, of his father the Duke Of York, Of his book on the fate of the sons of Edward IV, and his WOTR book.
Before I spend any more money I'd like to know if there's anything different about them worth the investment.
Thank you in advance.
Paul

Envoyé de mon iPad