Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in Translation?
Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in Translation?
2012-11-23 16:54:58
Hi all,
just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before or after Edward left London.
It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
(1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the original report):-
"All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king, but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart, that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th of the said month of June [sic].
The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of the rebels…"
(`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471… Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May) and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
(2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the spelling):-
"The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels], came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and all his host departed out of London towards his rebels…."
(`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green, Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
(3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
"…. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of London, took such great displeasure that he died.
On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various places….."
*This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley, the Constable of the Tower.
The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of punctuation in that period.
I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was interesting.
Marie
just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before or after Edward left London.
It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
(1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the original report):-
"All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king, but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart, that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th of the said month of June [sic].
The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of the rebels…"
(`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471… Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May) and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
(2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the spelling):-
"The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels], came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and all his host departed out of London towards his rebels…."
(`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green, Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
(3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
"…. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of London, took such great displeasure that he died.
On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various places….."
*This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley, the Constable of the Tower.
The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of punctuation in that period.
I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was interesting.
Marie
Re: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in Translation?
2012-11-23 17:54:27
Hi, Marie -
Sounds like a near thing, whatever the sequence actually was.
Now that you've done all this typing, I have no excuse for not doing the
Kendall notes that I intended to do 3 days ago! I may split them into two,
one set dealing with the death of Edward the Prince of Wales and the other
set dealing with Henry's death.
It would be nice if we had a neutral source for the information - because it
seems like all the sources had their own bias, one way or the other.
I can't for the life of me think why historians may feel that Mancini, for
instance, is an unbiased source, when Woodville henchmen were his
informants, for the most part, and he was working for the King of France,
surely no friend of the Yorkists.
But that's just my two farthings!
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 mariewalsh2003
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 12:55 PM
To:
Subject: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in
Translation?
Hi all,
just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before
or after Edward left London.
It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward
was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short
Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent
over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the
original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full
version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed
only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
(1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the
original report):-
"All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king,
but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart,
that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th
of the said month of June [sic].
The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of
the rebels."
(`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471.
Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas
Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a
transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was
the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May)
and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
(2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the
spelling):-
"The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels],
came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great
lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for
the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his
coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of
Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet
so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late
called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such
sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and
all his host departed out of London towards his rebels.."
(`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green,
Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
(3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
".. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May
greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of
three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen
Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's
tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her
an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was
content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she
might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place
the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her
at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of
London, took such great displeasure that he died.
On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great
army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various
places..."
*This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley,
the Constable of the Tower.
The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of
punctuation in that period.
I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was
interesting.
Marie
Sounds like a near thing, whatever the sequence actually was.
Now that you've done all this typing, I have no excuse for not doing the
Kendall notes that I intended to do 3 days ago! I may split them into two,
one set dealing with the death of Edward the Prince of Wales and the other
set dealing with Henry's death.
It would be nice if we had a neutral source for the information - because it
seems like all the sources had their own bias, one way or the other.
I can't for the life of me think why historians may feel that Mancini, for
instance, is an unbiased source, when Woodville henchmen were his
informants, for the most part, and he was working for the King of France,
surely no friend of the Yorkists.
But that's just my two farthings!
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 mariewalsh2003
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 12:55 PM
To:
Subject: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in
Translation?
Hi all,
just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before
or after Edward left London.
It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward
was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short
Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent
over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the
original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full
version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed
only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
(1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the
original report):-
"All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king,
but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart,
that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th
of the said month of June [sic].
The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of
the rebels."
(`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471.
Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas
Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a
transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was
the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May)
and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
(2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the
spelling):-
"The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels],
came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great
lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for
the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his
coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of
Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet
so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late
called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such
sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and
all his host departed out of London towards his rebels.."
(`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green,
Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
(3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
".. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May
greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of
three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen
Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's
tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her
an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was
content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she
might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place
the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her
at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of
London, took such great displeasure that he died.
On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great
army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various
places..."
*This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley,
the Constable of the Tower.
The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of
punctuation in that period.
I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was
interesting.
Marie
Re: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in Translation?
2012-11-23 19:34:53
The sequence of the words doesn't change, it's simply the nunances of punctuation and grammar. Personally I think we can assume that Jerningham's translation was correct (allowing for the error in the date in the copy he used), because it follows the sequence of events in the full version of the Arrivall, of which it seems to have been a precis. But I agree that it would not be enough to persuade anyone totally wedded to the idea that Henry died on the Tuesday.
Marie
--- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Marie -
>
> Sounds like a near thing, whatever the sequence actually was.
>
>
>
> Now that you've done all this typing, I have no excuse for not doing the
> Kendall notes that I intended to do 3 days ago! I may split them into two,
> one set dealing with the death of Edward the Prince of Wales and the other
> set dealing with Henry's death.
>
>
>
> It would be nice if we had a neutral source for the information - because it
> seems like all the sources had their own bias, one way or the other.
>
>
>
> I can't for the life of me think why historians may feel that Mancini, for
> instance, is an unbiased source, when Woodville henchmen were his
> informants, for the most part, and he was working for the King of France,
> surely no friend of the Yorkists.
>
>
>
> But that's just my two farthings!
>
>
>
> 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 mariewalsh2003
> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 12:55 PM
> To:
> Subject: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in
> Translation?
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before
> or after Edward left London.
>
> It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward
> was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short
> Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent
> over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the
> original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full
> version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed
> only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
>
> (1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the
> original report):-
> "All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king,
> but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart,
> that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th
> of the said month of June [sic].
> The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of
> the rebels."
> (`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471.
> Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas
> Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
> I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a
> transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was
> the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May)
> and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
>
> (2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the
> spelling):-
> "The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels],
> came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great
> lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for
> the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
> It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his
> coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of
> Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet
> so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late
> called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such
> sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and
> all his host departed out of London towards his rebels.."
> (`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green,
> Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
>
> (3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
> ".. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May
> greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of
> three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen
> Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's
> tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her
> an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was
> content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she
> might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place
> the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her
> at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
> Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of
> London, took such great displeasure that he died.
> On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great
> army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various
> places..."
> *This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley,
> the Constable of the Tower.
>
> The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of
> punctuation in that period.
>
> I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was
> interesting.
>
> Marie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Marie
--- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Marie -
>
> Sounds like a near thing, whatever the sequence actually was.
>
>
>
> Now that you've done all this typing, I have no excuse for not doing the
> Kendall notes that I intended to do 3 days ago! I may split them into two,
> one set dealing with the death of Edward the Prince of Wales and the other
> set dealing with Henry's death.
>
>
>
> It would be nice if we had a neutral source for the information - because it
> seems like all the sources had their own bias, one way or the other.
>
>
>
> I can't for the life of me think why historians may feel that Mancini, for
> instance, is an unbiased source, when Woodville henchmen were his
> informants, for the most part, and he was working for the King of France,
> surely no friend of the Yorkists.
>
>
>
> But that's just my two farthings!
>
>
>
> 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 mariewalsh2003
> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 12:55 PM
> To:
> Subject: Date of Henry VI's death - Lost in
> Translation?
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> just a curious little update on the question of whether Henry VI died before
> or after Edward left London.
>
> It's beginning to look to me as though the idea that he died while Edward
> was still in London may have arisen out of an ambiguity in the Short
> Arrivall - a potted French-language version of the Arrivall that Edward sent
> over to Burgundy on 29th May 1471. I haven't yet found a copy of the
> original French, but these are various translations (remember, the full
> version of the Arrivall says Edward arrived in London on the 21st and stayed
> only a day, and Henry VI died on the 23rd):-
>
> (1) Jerningham's translation of the Besancon MS (a transcript of the
> original report):-
> "All these events having come to the knowledge of Henry, lately called king,
> but then a prisoner in the Tower of London, he took them so much to heart,
> that through displeasure and melancholy, he departed this life on the 24th
> of the said month of June [sic].
> The king having quitted London, marched with all his forces in pursuit of
> the rebels."
> (`Account of King Edward the Fourth's Second Invasion of England in 1471.
> Communicated by Edward Jerningham, Esq., F. S. A. in a Letter to Nicholas
> Carlisle, Esq. F. R. S. Secretary', Archaeologia, vol XXI, 1826, p. 21).
> I don't know why it says 24th June, but it seems to have been a
> transcription error - the author clearly meant to say May because May was
> the "said month" (the previous date referred to having been the 21st May)
> and the report was sent out from England at the end of May!
>
> (2) A 15th-century translation back into English (I have updated the
> spelling):-
> "The King, keeping forth his journey towards them [Fauconberg's rebels],
> came to his city of London the xxjth day of May, accompanied with the great
> lords and in substance all the noble men of the land and other well able for
> the war, to the number of xxx thousand men, all on horseback.
> It is to remember that in this season from the field of Tewkesbury to his
> coming to London, Margaret, called queen, with many other captains of
> Edward's party aforesaid, were taken and brough to the King's hands (and yet
> so remain). The notice of all this came to the knowledge of Henry, late
> called king, that time being in the Tower of London, caused him to have such
> sorrow of displeasure and melancholy that he died. The 23 day the King and
> all his host departed out of London towards his rebels.."
> (`The Short Version of the Arrival of Edward IV', Richard Firth Green,
> Speculum, 56.2, 1961, p. 331)
>
> (3) Wavrin, who based his account largely on the Short Arrival:-
> ".. King Edward entered into his city of London on the twenty-first of May
> greatly accompanied with lords and gentlemen of his realm, to the number of
> three thousand horsemen; and straight afterwards there were brought Queen
> Margaret and many other captains of her party. The King, seeing this queen's
> tribulation, took pity on her, so that he he spared her life and offered her
> an honest estate in whatever place should please her, whereof she was
> content since she saw all her adherents dead; so she asked the King if she
> might keep her estate in the city of London during her life, at which place
> the King ordained for her fifteen noble persons, men and women, to serve her
> at the inn of the Baron dOndelai* where she made her abode.
> Hearing of all these things, King Henry, who was then in the Tower of
> London, took such great displeasure that he died.
> On the twenty-third of May following King Edward left London with a great
> army in order to pursue his enemies, who were scattered in various
> places..."
> *This should surely have been transcribed dOudelai - ie it is Lord Dudley,
> the Constable of the Tower.
>
> The confusion doubtless arose because of the almost total non-use of
> punctuation in that period.
>
> I'll be back with more on the dating later, but I thought this was
> interesting.
>
> Marie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.