Richard's grief

There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.

One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.

Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.

Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.

Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.

The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.

But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
Paul





Richard Liveth Yet!

I agree Paul, he would not have considered losing an option, but think it may have been his state of mind that made him a little rash in the final charge.  He was also probably wanting to finish the battle off, and get on with the job of ruling.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing.





________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
Sent: Wednesday, 23 January 2013, 12:12
Subject: Richard's grief


 
There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.

One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.

Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.

Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.

Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.

The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.

But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
Paul

Richard Liveth Yet!

I agree with both of you. I think you have to get into the fifteenth century mindset (as much as one can) where this life was a transient passage to the next.  Richard would have believed he was a king chosen by God for the  task. This would have no doubt been endorsed by his redoubtable mother 'Queen by Right'. These other things would have been trials God put in his way.  I think he would have approached Bosworth believing that God was on his side - Michael Jones says this in his excellent book. Richard's reward would have been in the next life. If he acted 'properly' he could not fail.   (But as M Jones also says, his father's 'rash charge' also cost his life, and that is where the folly lay, if there was folly).  Hilary



________________________________
From: marion cheatham <marioncheatham2003@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Wednesday, 23 January 2013, 13:14
Subject: Re: Richard's grief

 

I agree Paul, he would not have considered losing an option, but think it may have been his state of mind that made him a little rash in the final charge.  He was also probably wanting to finish the battle off, and get on with the job of ruling.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum >
Sent: Wednesday, 23 January 2013, 12:12
Subject: Richard's grief


 
There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.

One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.

Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.

Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.

Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.

The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.

But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
Paul

Richard Liveth Yet!

Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
[snip]
> The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
>
> But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.

Carol responds:

While I think that your first paragraph is a bit strong (I'm quite sure that no one who has made this suggestion intends to discredit Richard), I agree with the rest of this post. The Croyland Chronicler says that he was *glad* to hear that Tudor had landed. Evidently, he was tired of waiting and wanted to solve the problem once and for all. I agree that he expected to win even knowing that he could not trust the Stanleys.

Another thing, too. Richard as a medieval Catholic would have viewed both suicide and despair as mortal sins. And as pious as we know that he was, I'm quite sure that he would not have committed either sin.

(Those stories of his refusal to hear Mass before the battle are just part of the smear campaign. I agree with John Ashdown-Hill that there's not a grain of truth in them.

Carol

Hi, Paul,

I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.

Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.

Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.

Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.

There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.

Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.

Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.

Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.

We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.

This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.

Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.

I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.

In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.

~Weds



--- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
>
> One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
>
> Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
>
> Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
>
> Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
>
> The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
>
> But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> Paul

Beautifully written, Weds!
As Wednesday so eloquently points out grief and depression( not that Richard was conscious of it himself) cannot be discounted. I don't think it discredits him in any way. Rather it adds to his humanity. King he was and a stoic one. But he was a man too. You cannot get up next day after your wife of 12 years die and feel nothing.......... Just my humble opinion.
IB

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>

I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:

> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Paul,
> >
> > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> >
> > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> >
> > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> >
> > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> >
> > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> >
> > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> >
> > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> >
> > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> >
> > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> >
> > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> >
> > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> >
> > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> >
> > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > >
> > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > >
> > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > >
> > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > >
> > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > >
> > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > >
> > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > >
> > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Wed:

Surly R3 had scribes to do most of his writing, apart from signatures and very little can be gained from that. My signature has been referred to as a demented spider ( hopefully this does not prove that I have Arachnophobia !!)

Skeptically

George

From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:37 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief





I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield gbutterf1@... <mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com> > wrote:

> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@... <mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> > Hi, Paul,
> >
> > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> >
> > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> >
> > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> >
> > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> >
> > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> >
> > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> >
> > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> >
> > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> >
> > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> >
> > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> >
> > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> >
> > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> >
> > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> > --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > >
> > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > >
> > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > >
> > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > >
> > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > >
> > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > >
> > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > >
> > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

I meant the signatures. Sorry.
Here is the article I was referring to:
http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/inkandpaper.html
IB

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 9:30 PM, "George Butterfield" <gbutterf1@...> wrote:

> Wed:
>
> Surly R3 had scribes to do most of his writing, apart from signatures and very little can be gained from that. My signature has been referred to as a demented spider ( hopefully this does not prove that I have Arachnophobia !!)
>
> Skeptically
>
> George
>
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:37 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
> I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield gbutterf1@... > wrote:
>
> > Hi Wed
> > Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> > My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> > What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> > R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> > Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
> >
> > George
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@... > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Paul,
> > >
> > > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> > >
> > > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> > >
> > > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> > >
> > > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> > >
> > > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> > >
> > > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> > >
> > > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> > >
> > > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> > >
> > > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> > >
> > > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> > >
> > > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> > >
> > > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> > >
> > > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > > >
> > > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > > >
> > > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > > >
> > > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > > >
> > > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > > >
> > > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > > >
> > > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary



________________________________
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 2:43
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 

I meant the signatures. Sorry.
Here is the article I was referring to:
http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/inkandpaper.html
IB

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 9:30 PM, "George Butterfield" mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com> wrote:

> Wed:
>
> Surly R3 had scribes to do most of his writing, apart from signatures and very little can be gained from that. My signature has been referred to as a demented spider ( hopefully this does not prove that I have Arachnophobia !!)
>
> Skeptically
>
> George
>
> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:37 PM
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
> I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> > Hi Wed
> > Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> > My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> > What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> > R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> > Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
> >
> > George
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Paul,
> > >
> > > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> > >
> > > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> > >
> > > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> > >
> > > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> > >
> > > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> > >
> > > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> > >
> > > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> > >
> > > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> > >
> > > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> > >
> > > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> > >
> > > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> > >
> > > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> > >
> > > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > > >
> > > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > > >
> > > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > > >
> > > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > > >
> > > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > > >
> > > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > > >
> > > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi , I think this is a good article, very well thought out.
Christine


________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 0:55
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 

Hi, Paul,

I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.

Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.

Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.

Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.

There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.

Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.

Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.

Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.

We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.

This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.

Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.

I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.

In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.

~Weds

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
>
> One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
>
> Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
>
> Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
>
> Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
>
> The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
>
> But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> Paul

Thanks George. Depression is anger turned in on oneself. His activities up to and including Bosworth show no depression or anger except for those breaking the peace of his kingdom, a desire to get on with business, and then relief when he hears of Tudor's invasion.
I'd like to know who told you Richard was furious and impatient, and refused to listen to council on the field as our knowledge of the day is scanty at best. All this is the play based on Holinshed and Hall, not fact.
Richard rode to Tudor [we are now not even certain it was down a hill - the new topography suggests otherwise] as a desire to strike a decisive blow and save lives by ending the fighting. He was right in this, as the fighting stopped with his death, as did the killing, rout by Tudor and Stanleys, if there was one, apart.
Paul


On 24 Jan 2013, at 01:21, George Butterfield wrote:

> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Paul,
>>
>> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>>
>> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>>
>> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>>
>> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>>
>> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>>
>> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>>
>> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>>
>> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>>
>> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>>
>> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>>
>> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>>
>> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>>
>> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>>
>> ~Weds
>>
>> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>>>
>>> There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
>>>
>>> One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
>>>
>>> Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
>>>
>>> Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
>>>
>>> Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
>>>
>>> The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
>>>
>>> But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
>>> At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
>>> Paul
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Hilary ,Paul and George ,

You guys have a point. Specially about being a man of his time. He was probably not in tune with his " feelings" as we like to say:) But, I still think his sleeplessness(if that is true), losing weight and his gaunt appearance( from the portrait) does indicate( to me) he was not at his best mental frame.......
We will never know.
These people should have kept detailed journals!!
Ooh, what about the hand writing analyses? Is the graphologist projecting what we know( or think know) into his findings?

Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

On Jan 24, 2013, at 4:57 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do. R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected. Good debate though! Hilary
>
> ________________________________
> From: Ishita Bandyo bandyoi@...>
> To: "" >
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 2:43
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
>
> I meant the signatures. Sorry.
> Here is the article I was referring to:
> http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/inkandpaper.html
> IB
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 9:30 PM, "George Butterfield" mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Wed:
> >
> > Surly R3 had scribes to do most of his writing, apart from signatures and very little can be gained from that. My signature has been referred to as a demented spider ( hopefully this does not prove that I have Arachnophobia !!)
> >
> > Skeptically
> >
> > George
> >
> > From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:37 PM
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
> >
> > I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Wed
> > > Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> > > My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> > > What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> > > R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> > > Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi, Paul,
> > > >
> > > > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> > > >
> > > > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> > > >
> > > > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> > > >
> > > > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> > > >
> > > > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> > > >
> > > > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> > > >
> > > > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> > > >
> > > > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> > > >
> > > > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> > > >
> > > > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> > > >
> > > > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > > > >
> > > > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > > > >
> > > > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > > > >
> > > > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > > > >
> > > > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (11)
> RECENT ACTIVITY:

Hi Ishita,
 
Don't know about graphology at all. AND, really don't dismiss illness either - that's a different thing. I've often wondered why, if historians think Anne had TB, they never wonder if he could have contracted it also. It's a highly infectious and 'silent' disease in some stages (I know, I had it and didn't know till years later). I think there is something in the thirst, sleeplessness, otherwise why were they mentioned long before Shakespeare?  Illness could have been responsible for the error of judgment in the charge; ie the wish to get it over with fast. That's probably where the blokes disagree with me!   Hilary
 

________________________________
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:15
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 

Hilary ,Paul and George ,

You guys have a point. Specially about being a man of his time. He was probably not in tune with his " feelings" as we like to say:) But, I still think his sleeplessness(if that is true), losing weight and his gaunt appearance( from the portrait) does indicate( to me) he was not at his best mental frame.......
We will never know.
These people should have kept detailed journals!!
Ooh, what about the hand writing analyses? Is the graphologist projecting what we know( or think know) into his findings?

Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

On Jan 24, 2013, at 4:57 AM, Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do. R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected. Good debate though! Hilary
>
> ________________________________
> From: Ishita Bandyo mailto:bandyoi%40yahoo.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.commailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 2:43
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
>
> I meant the signatures. Sorry.
> Here is the article I was referring to:
> http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/inkandpaper.html
> IB
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 9:30 PM, "George Butterfield" mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Wed:
> >
> > Surly R3 had scribes to do most of his writing, apart from signatures and very little can be gained from that. My signature has been referred to as a demented spider ( hopefully this does not prove that I have Arachnophobia !!)
> >
> > Skeptically
> >
> > George
> >
> > From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:37 PM
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
> >
> > I just read the article on Richard's handwriting. Specially his signatures. The graphologist claims that Richard had a naturally depressive personality. Couldn't it have been exaggerated by recent traumas? I just want to be clear that I don't think he was sitting in a dark room listening to Carpenters and crying bucket. But depressed in a way that leads to error in judgement. His last charge was beyond courageous. We love him more for it. But his early death could have been avoided if he took a less detached view of the situation........
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:21 PM, George Butterfield mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Wed
> > > Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> > > My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> > > What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> > > R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> > > Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi, Paul,
> > > >
> > > > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> > > >
> > > > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> > > >
> > > > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> > > >
> > > > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> > > >
> > > > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> > > >
> > > > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> > > >
> > > > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> > > >
> > > > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> > > >
> > > > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> > > >
> > > > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> > > >
> > > > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > > > >
> > > > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > > > >
> > > > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > > > >
> > > > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > > > >
> > > > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (11)
> RECENT ACTIVITY:

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" <gbutterf1@...<mailto:gbutterf1@...>> wrote:



Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com>> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>

Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   


________________________________
From: Pamela Bain <pbain@...>
To: "<>" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" <gbutterf1@...<mailto:gbutterf1@...>> wrote:



Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com>> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>











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

Yahoo! Groups Links

wednesday_mc wrote:

//snip//
"This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join
Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does
mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his
anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to
fight another day.
Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced
by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his
being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to
have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of
the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was
Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive
himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal
losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years
prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving
process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was
suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.?"

Just wanted to say that, while I don't agree with your conclusions, I do
think you have presented an excellent summary (the parts I included) of a
POSSIBLE explanation of why Richard decided to personally enter the fighting
at Bosworth. The major problem is, of course, trying to decipher the
feelings and thoughts of someone from a distance of 500+ years and what
effect, if any, those feelings and thoughts MAY have had on that person's
actions.
Doug

George Butterfield wrote:
//snip//
"R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter
was given nor expected the stakes were just too high."
//snip//

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I understood that, at least until Stanley
interfered, Richard WAS winning. Yes, it was hard fighting, but the Tudor
forces were giving way and Richard had nearly reached Tudor and THEN
Stanley's forces hit the Yorkist line from the flank.
Or have I gotten something wrong again?
Doug

Doug
You are quite correct, however my comments refer to the closing parts of the battle where things were desperate and perhaps a "forlone hope"
George
" Apart from that Mrs Lincoln how was the play?"
On Jan 23, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Douglas Eugene Stamate <destama@...> wrote:

>
> Doug

There are two theories about the charge.  One that, as George says, it may have been a "forlorn hope".  The other, that it was precipitate - literally a spur of the moment action - in frustrated response to setback that was damaging but by no means fatal.  We don't even have a reliable chronology of the battle - some historians argue not only that it was short but that Richard died within the first half hour - so all we can do is guess.

Jonathan




________________________________
From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 15:36
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 
Doug
You are quite correct, however my comments refer to the closing parts of the battle where things were desperate and perhaps a "forlone hope"
George
" Apart from that Mrs Lincoln how was the play?"
On Jan 23, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Douglas Eugene Stamate destama@...> wrote:

>
> Doug

It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary

And can you imagine how chaotic those battles must have been.......men, horses, lances, swords, blood and other things........

On Jan 24, 2013, at 9:57 AM, "Jonathan Evans" <jmcevans98@...<mailto:jmcevans98@...>> wrote:



There are two theories about the charge. One that, as George says, it may have been a "forlorn hope". The other, that it was precipitate - literally a spur of the moment action - in frustrated response to setback that was damaging but by no means fatal. We don't even have a reliable chronology of the battle - some historians argue not only that it was short but that Richard died within the first half hour - so all we can do is guess.

Jonathan

________________________________
From: George Butterfield gbutterf1@...<mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 15:36
Subject: Re: Richard's grief



Doug
You are quite correct, however my comments refer to the closing parts of the battle where things were desperate and perhaps a "forlone hope"
George
" Apart from that Mrs Lincoln how was the play?"
On Jan 23, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Douglas Eugene Stamate destama@...<mailto:destama%40kconline.com>> wrote:

>
> Doug

I don't know about the specific analysis of Richard's handwriting, but graphology is used in forensic investigations, so it's not quite akin to reading tea leaves, palmistry, and phrenology.

~Weds

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> Hilary ,Paul and George ,
.
.
.
> Ooh, what about the hand writing analyses? Is the graphologist projecting what we know( or think know) into his findings?
>
> Ishita Bandyo

In re: this discussion, I'm reminded of two poems by American E.A. Robinson. "Richard Cory" and "Reuben Bright." They both attest to the 19th C. version of "getting on with it," but neither man gets far.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 
It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan




________________________________
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   


________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair.  So we half agree.
It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know.  Cheers Hilary 


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: "" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to roll them back.
This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe even some of Northumberland's men].
The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and, I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it, maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else deciding to do nothing.
As an addendum his father's death is often quoted as being similar, but the Duke of York when he rode out of Sandal castle to rescue his men did not know that a platoon of Queen Margaret's army was hidden out of sight ready to engage if needed.
Paul
New research has discovered a slightly raised piece of land on the road the battle was fought across, known for some time in the Middle Ages as Ambien. Not a hill, but high enough to give the king a view of the action.

On 23 Jan 2013, at 16:29, Douglas Eugene Stamate wrote:

>
> George Butterfield wrote:
> //snip//
> "R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter
> was given nor expected the stakes were just too high."
> //snip//
>
> Maybe I'm mistaken, but I understood that, at least until Stanley
> interfered, Richard WAS winning. Yes, it was hard fighting, but the Tudor
> forces were giving way and Richard had nearly reached Tudor and THEN
> Stanley's forces hit the Yorkist line from the flank.
> Or have I gotten something wrong again?
> Doug
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Sorry - or are you saying that subconcious depression could have impaired his judgement - I could buy that!  Hilary



________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: "" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Yep - it's the 'pull yourself together' bit now associated with 'robust Anglicanism'. You don't hear it much nowadays.   Sent many a soldier over Vimy ridge, rightly or wrongly.  Cheers  Hilary



________________________________
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:25
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

In re: this discussion, I'm reminded of two poems by American E.A. Robinson. "Richard Cory" and "Reuben Bright." They both attest to the 19th C. version of "getting on with it," but neither man gets far.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie

________________________________
From: wednesday_mc wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 
It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary

The medieval mindset is far removed from today,though I have no belief that Richard would have a death wish at Bosworth, I do believe that as a medieval knight he would have had a far greater call to duty and God than would be expected by today's standards.
These were men governed by a life of formal discipline trained at an early age to fight and in Richards case Anointed by God.
Suicide has always been a deadly sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church so it is highly unlikely that a man with his credentials would knowingly kill himself
On the matter of Nelson he was advised both prior to and during Trafalgar not to wear his formal dress coat however he had a prior history of what nowadays would seem rash behavior he also had discussed his death with Capt. Hardy prior to the battle (though much loved by his men Lady Hamilton did little to win him points with the establishment)
George (RN retired)









Sent from my iPad

On Jan 24, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair. So we half agree.
> It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know. Cheers Hilary
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
> To: "" >
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
> I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject. Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche. Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one. You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries. You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it. And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
> say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events. To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:
>
> "... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born... And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."
>
> Jonathan
>
> ________________________________
> From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
> Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
>
> I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course H7!! But Richard, as an idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that). That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
> purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation. As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is really only my view. Hilary
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
> Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:
>
> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Paul,
> >
> > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> >
> > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> >
> > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> >
> > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> >
> > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> >
> > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> >
> > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> >
> > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> >
> > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> >
> > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> >
> > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> >
> > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> >
> > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > >
> > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > >
> > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > >
> > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > >
> > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > >
> > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > >
> > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > >
> > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That's what I have been trying to say too! Jonathon just said it better:)





________________________________
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Sorry - or are you saying that subconcious depression could have impaired his judgement - I could buy that!  Hilary

________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
To: "" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Oh, totally agree that Richard hoped and expected to win right up until the end.  I certainly don't buy the "charge as death wish" theory.  But I do think it may have been the result of thinking that was clouded by other factors.  These might have been emotional or a result of illness.  As you say, we'll never know, but that's why I didn't want to rule out depression - or frustration - or anger - or, quite simply, to quote 'Night of the Iguana', a man "at the end of his rope".

Re Nelson, he wore "undress" uniform at Trafalgar, but this was
nevertheless embroidered with silver stars to represent his
decorations.  I was referring more to the fact that he had moods
that could take him to some quite dark, fatalistic places at times.  And
maybe Richard's charge was fatalistic in the sense that he'd bravely borne everything else thrown at him, so God *would* prove him right.  Might explain why he disregarded the threat of Stanley on his flank.  Interesting to conjecture, anyway.

Cheers

Jonathan






________________________________
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:58
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair.  So we half agree.
It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know.  Cheers Hilary 


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
To: "" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

George, you misunderstand me. I do not think he was trying to commit suicide. Just saying that his judgement could have been clouded by what he has been going through. Consiously he was probably being the warrior but human feelings have not changed over the years......Since he was an able general, he should have taken Stanleys' treacherous nature into account. Since they had made no move to support him, he should have taken in to account that they "could" be hostile to him. To charge right past them with that damnable crown on his head, seems foolhardy to me. His death could have been avoided. And that's what makes me doubt his judgement.
BTW, did he fight any pitched battle other than in Barnet and Teweskesbury? It might be that he was used to follow Ed's strategies and not making his own. Richard was a valiant

soldier but it might be that he was not a good strategist?




________________________________
From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
The medieval mindset is far removed from today,though I have no belief that Richard would have a death wish at Bosworth, I do believe that as a medieval knight he would have had a far greater call to duty and God than would be expected by today's standards.
These were men governed by a life of formal discipline trained at an early age to fight and in Richards case Anointed by God.
Suicide has always been a deadly sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church so it is highly unlikely that a man with his credentials would knowingly kill himself
On the matter of Nelson he was advised both prior to and during Trafalgar not to wear his formal dress coat however he had a prior history of what nowadays would seem rash behavior he also had discussed his death with Capt. Hardy prior to the battle (though much loved by his men Lady Hamilton did little to win him points with the establishment)
George (RN retired)

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 24, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair. So we half agree.
> It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know. Cheers Hilary
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
> I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject. Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche. Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one. You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries. You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it. And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
> say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events. To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:
>
> "... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born... And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."
>
> Jonathan
>
> ________________________________
> From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
> Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
>
> I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course H7!! But Richard, as an idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that). That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
> purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation. As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is really only my view. Hilary
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
> Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:
>
> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Paul,
> >
> > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> >
> > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> >
> > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> >
> > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> >
> > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> >
> > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> >
> > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> >
> > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> >
> > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> >
> > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> >
> > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> >
> > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> >
> > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > >
> > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > >
> > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > >
> > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > >
> > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > >
> > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > >
> > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > >
> > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hurray - we got therein the end!!! 


________________________________
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 17:39
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 

That's what I have been trying to say too! Jonathon just said it better:)

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Sorry - or are you saying that subconcious depression could have impaired his judgement - I could buy that!  Hilary

________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans mailto:jmcevans98%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.commailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain mailto:pbain%40bmbi.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.comgbutterf1@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: Richard's grief
Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:57 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Hilary Jones" hjnatdat
Hi Weds and Ishita,
Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this.
Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts.
My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known
what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That
was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even
closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the
15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have
believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal
life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they
all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would
have expected.   Good debate though! 
Hilary

Hi Hillary...and everybody else,

The labels of depression, etc., may be all late 20th century concepts, but the feelings themselves are inherent in man.  You can even see these demonstrated in other species such as chimpanzees as documented by researchers.  Your parents remained dignified and 'got on with it,' yes, but you saw what they presented to the world and wanted others to see.  It is very difficult to know with any accuracy what someone is feeling if they choose to hide it, especially from themselves. Having a programmed path to tell you how you are supposed to behave after a loss is comforting to some degree because it guides you in how to try to ignore or refuse to acknowledge the feelings, but it does not change the feelings of loss.  It only changes the outward behavior you can control.  But those emotions lingering deep inside our psyche can pounce in the middle of the night, or while listening to the radio, or on a battlefield, etc., without warning or our even
necessarily recognizing their source.  They can have their effect on us through rage or insomnia or other weirdly unconnected ways that those surrounding Richard (and Richard himself) probably would not have connected to the loss of his son and wife.  But still, might not the impact of the losses, such as rage that could have fueled the charge down the hill or perhaps feelings of resignation over circumstances while signing documents and making his signature a bit wonky, have happened?

~Penny
 

Live simply.  Love generously.  Care deeply.  Speak kindly.
        And never regret anything that made you smile.

Hi Penny, (and all)
 
I think where we've got to is an agreement over possible sub-conscious depression (ie not a suicidal charge and a wish to die). It just proves how difficult it is to communicate via email - it would probably have been thrashed out in five minutes face to face. 
Overnight I've been thinking that the real character for analysis is George, who I just can't fit into the medieaval mindset -at all,  indeed his behaviour after the death of Isabel suggests a complete mental breakdown and a will to self-destruct. In my acknowledgely scrambled mindset I have him knowing of the sbubcontract through either Stillington or Warwick (whose wife was E Butler's aunt) from about 1469, being abandoned by Warwick (through instability?) in 1470 and totally going to pieces when Isabel dies. But people also saw him as charming, handsome, witty and (yes) just.  And yes, I do have a soft spot for George, as I think Richard probably did.
Any views on this anyone?    Hilary   


________________________________
From: The Pennywhistle <thepennywhistle@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 22:58
Subject: Re: Richard's grief

 



Re: Richard's grief
Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:57 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Hilary Jones" hjnatdat
Hi Weds and Ishita,
Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this.
Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts.
My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known
what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That
was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even
closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the
15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have
believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal
life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they
all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would
have expected.   Good debate though! 
Hilary

Hi Hillary...and everybody else,

The labels of depression, etc., may be all late 20th century concepts, but the feelings themselves are inherent in man.  You can even see these demonstrated in other species such as chimpanzees as documented by researchers.  Your parents remained dignified and 'got on with it,' yes, but you saw what they presented to the world and wanted others to see.  It is very difficult to know with any accuracy what someone is feeling if they choose to hide it, especially from themselves. Having a programmed path to tell you how you are supposed to behave after a loss is comforting to some degree because it guides you in how to try to ignore or refuse to acknowledge the feelings, but it does not change the feelings of loss.  It only changes the outward behavior you can control.  But those emotions lingering deep inside our psyche can pounce in the middle of the night, or while listening to the radio, or on a battlefield, etc., without warning or our even
necessarily recognizing their source.  They can have their effect on us through rage or insomnia or other weirdly unconnected ways that those surrounding Richard (and Richard himself) probably would not have connected to the loss of his son and wife.  But still, might not the impact of the losses, such as rage that could have fueled the charge down the hill or perhaps feelings of resignation over circumstances while signing documents and making his signature a bit wonky, have happened?

~Penny
 

Live simply.  Love generously.  Care deeply.  Speak kindly.
        And never regret anything that made you smile.

Hi,
 
I think we've agreed to agree - I was only teasing about Nelson (another 'flawed' hero)!   Cheers Hilary


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 17:42
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

Oh, totally agree that Richard hoped and expected to win right up until the end.  I certainly don't buy the "charge as death wish" theory.  But I do think it may have been the result of thinking that was clouded by other factors.  These might have been emotional or a result of illness.  As you say, we'll never know, but that's why I didn't want to rule out depression - or frustration - or anger - or, quite simply, to quote 'Night of the Iguana', a man "at the end of his rope".

Re Nelson, he wore "undress" uniform at Trafalgar, but this was
nevertheless embroidered with silver stars to represent his
decorations.  I was referring more to the fact that he had moods
that could take him to some quite dark, fatalistic places at times.  And
maybe Richard's charge was fatalistic in the sense that he'd bravely borne everything else thrown at him, so God *would* prove him right.  Might explain why he disregarded the threat of Stanley on his flank.  Interesting to conjecture, anyway.

Cheers

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: "" >
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:58
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair.  So we half agree.
It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know.  Cheers Hilary 

________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
To: ">
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi Weds,
 
An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat?  Cheers Hilary


________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:16
Subject: Re: Richard's grief

 

It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary

George,
 
Off topic, but my great x 3 granddad was a marine on Theseus during the Napoleonic Wars - he joined just after the great man took the bullet. Every time I watch 'Master and Commander' I think of him.
Unforunately, he didn't die a hero  like Nelson - but a bigamist!   Hilary


________________________________
From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 17:36
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

 

The medieval mindset is far removed from today,though I have no belief that Richard would have a death wish at Bosworth, I do believe that as a medieval knight he would have had a far greater call to duty and God than would be expected by today's standards.
These were men governed by a life of formal discipline trained at an early age to fight and in Richards case Anointed by God.
Suicide has always been a deadly sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church so it is highly unlikely that a man with his credentials would knowingly kill himself
On the matter of Nelson he was advised both prior to and during Trafalgar not to wear his formal dress coat however he had a prior history of what nowadays would seem rash behavior he also had discussed his death with Capt. Hardy prior to the battle (though much loved by his men Lady Hamilton did little to win him points with the establishment)
George (RN retired)

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 24, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair. So we half agree.
> It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know. Cheers Hilary
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
> I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject. Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche. Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one. You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries. You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it. And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
> say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events. To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:
>
> "... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born... And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."
>
> Jonathan
>
> ________________________________
> From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
> Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
>
> I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course H7!! But Richard, as an idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that). That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
> purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation. As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is really only my view. Hilary
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
> To: ">
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
> Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:
>
> Hi Wed
> Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
>
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Paul,
> >
> > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> >
> > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> >
> > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> >
> > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> >
> > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> >
> > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> >
> > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> >
> > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> >
> > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> >
> > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> >
> > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> >
> > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> >
> > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > >
> > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > >
> > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > >
> > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > >
> > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > >
> > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > >
> > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > >
> > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi,
 They may be 20thC concepts but people had the same brain as we have, they may still be affected but some do get on with it, I have had mental health problems and have had to get on with it, I expect  Richard possibly felt the same way, It was his duty for the kingdom and his house and family.
Loyaulte me Lie
God Bless Richard and Family
Christine


________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:16
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 

It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.   Good debate though!  Hilary

Hi Jonathan, Totally agree with you on this one.
Christine


________________________________
From: Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 

I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject.  Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche.  Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one.  You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries.  You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it.  And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events.  To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:

"... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born...  And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."

Jonathan

________________________________
From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief


 
Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
 
 I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course  H7!!  But Richard, as an  idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that).  That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation.   As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is  really only my view.   Hilary   

________________________________
From: Pamela Bain mailto:pbain%40bmbi.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.commailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief

Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" mailto:gbutterf1%40yahoo.comgbutterf1@...>> wrote:

Hi Wed
Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.

George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Paul,
>
> I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
>
> Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
>
> Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
>
> Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
>
> There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
>
> Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
>
> Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
>
> Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
>
> We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
>
> This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
>
> Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
>
> I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
>
> In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >
> > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> >
> > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> >
> > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> >
> > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> >
> > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> >
> > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> >
> > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > Paul
>
>





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi Penny, you make a very good point and I agree with you.
Christine


________________________________
From: The Pennywhistle <thepennywhistle@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 22:58
Subject: Re: Richard's grief


 



Re: Richard's grief
Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:57 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Hilary Jones" hjnatdat
Hi Weds and Ishita,
Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this.
Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts.
My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known
what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That
was what the church and your upbringing told you to do.  R was even
closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the
15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have
believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal
life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they
all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would
have expected.   Good debate though! 
Hilary

Hi Hillary...and everybody else,

The labels of depression, etc., may be all late 20th century concepts, but the feelings themselves are inherent in man.  You can even see these demonstrated in other species such as chimpanzees as documented by researchers.  Your parents remained dignified and 'got on with it,' yes, but you saw what they presented to the world and wanted others to see.  It is very difficult to know with any accuracy what someone is feeling if they choose to hide it, especially from themselves. Having a programmed path to tell you how you are supposed to behave after a loss is comforting to some degree because it guides you in how to try to ignore or refuse to acknowledge the feelings, but it does not change the feelings of loss.  It only changes the outward behavior you can control.  But those emotions lingering deep inside our psyche can pounce in the middle of the night, or while listening to the radio, or on a battlefield, etc., without warning or our even
necessarily recognizing their source.  They can have their effect on us through rage or insomnia or other weirdly unconnected ways that those surrounding Richard (and Richard himself) probably would not have connected to the loss of his son and wife.  But still, might not the impact of the losses, such as rage that could have fueled the charge down the hill or perhaps feelings of resignation over circumstances while signing documents and making his signature a bit wonky, have happened?

~Penny
 

Live simply.  Love generously.  Care deeply.  Speak kindly.
        And never regret anything that made you smile.

Hilary
Thanks for the aside! My family bible has a page missing and was reputed to be the record of a past member of the family who was hung for piracy!
George

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 25, 2013, at 5:37 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> George,
>
> Off topic, but my great x 3 granddad was a marine on Theseus during the Napoleonic Wars - he joined just after the great man took the bullet. Every time I watch 'Master and Commander' I think of him.
> Unforunately, he didn't die a hero like Nelson - but a bigamist! Hilary
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: George Butterfield gbutterf1@...>
> To: "" >
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 17:36
> Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
> The medieval mindset is far removed from today,though I have no belief that Richard would have a death wish at Bosworth, I do believe that as a medieval knight he would have had a far greater call to duty and God than would be expected by today's standards.
> These were men governed by a life of formal discipline trained at an early age to fight and in Richards case Anointed by God.
> Suicide has always been a deadly sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church so it is highly unlikely that a man with his credentials would knowingly kill himself
> On the matter of Nelson he was advised both prior to and during Trafalgar not to wear his formal dress coat however he had a prior history of what nowadays would seem rash behavior he also had discussed his death with Capt. Hardy prior to the battle (though much loved by his men Lady Hamilton did little to win him points with the establishment)
> George (RN retired)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 24, 2013, at 11:58 AM, Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> > I don't dispute that he could have thought that God 'had a downer on him' and sent him some 'misadventures' as challenges - could have been a trigger for the fatal charge! As someone else said on here though, there is a contradiction between devout catholicism and suicide. Your Philip hopes to die, he doesn't actively seek death. Are you saying that Nelson purposely wore his medals at Trafalgar in order to get shot? Truly Jonathan, I'm no psychiatrist and there are a good few novels that have Richard welcoming death at Bosworth, consciously or sub-consciously. I'm still with Ashdown-Hill and Jones and think he thought until the very last that God would make him the victor. And I think you're saying that a bit too when you say you don't think he succumbed to despair. So we half agree.
> > It is, though, one of the best debates we've had for a while and we'll really never know. Cheers Hilary
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@...>
> > To: ">
> > Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:28
> > Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't entirely agree with this, or your earlier post on the subject. Because "depression" is a relatively modern concept, it doesn't mean that the symptoms themselves are a product of the modern psyche. Yes, Richard would certainly have viewed life as a succession of trials to be undergone to fulfil God's will, but that doesn't mean that his sub-conscious mind (to use another anachronistic term) would greet each one with the same equanimity as his conscious one. You can pin a diagnosis of depression on individuals, such as Hadrian and Nelson, separated by centuries. You can't do this with Richard because we haven't the same degree of evidence in terms of personal correspondence etc, but you equally can't say that, as a late medieval man, he would have been immune to it. And while I don't believe that Richard ever succumbed to despair - we know that he went on a hunting holiday prior to Bosworth and welcomed Tudor's landfall - it's untrue to
> > say that it would be impossible for a man of deep piety to react in that way to a succession of adverse events. To take the example of the unquestionably devout Philip II:
> >
> > "... very soon we shall find ourselves in such a state that we shall wish we had never been born... And if God does not send us a miracle (which is what I hope from Him), I hope to die and go to Him before all this happens."
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@...>
> > To: ">
> > Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 14:05
> > Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
> >
> >
> > Hello Pamela and a belated very warm welcome!
> >
> > I do understand where you're coming from - I came from there for a long, long time. A 'usurper', even one endorsed by Parliament, can expect betrayal, jealousy and scheming - think of Henry IV, who spent nearly his whole reign looking over his shoulder, falling out with his eldest son, having a horrible skin disease (a divine curse?) and of course H7!! But Richard, as an idealistic, religious man, would have believed his reward was in the next life; that he was put here and ordained as King for a purpose. His losses would have been God's 'tests', just like the mythical King Arthur's trials still made him a hero - and of course King Arthur loses his wife and dies in the final battle (ironic that). That doesn't mean it wasn't hard - but the reward was in the next life. I think it's really hard for most of us to get our heads round that - I find it hard too, but then I didn't grow up in a world where you had to ensure your passage through
> > purgatory by paying thithes and having masses said for your soul or you were facing eternal damnation. As I said before, a good debate, though and we shall never know the real answer and this is really only my view. Hilary
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Pamela Bain pbain@...>
> > To: ">
> > Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 13:41
> > Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief
> >
> > Just my two cents worth....yes, the times were brutal and violent, and yes, the man was a king. But, can you imagine dealing with loss on top of loss, betrayal, jealousy and all the scheming. Surely, even then people experienced "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder".
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:21 PM, "George Butterfield" [email protected]@...>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Wed
> > Sorry Paul has my vote, R3 was a trained warrior living in an age when death was very real and close in all households rich or poor.
> > My belief is that R3 was placed in a position during the battle that needed a show of overwhelming bravery/ gallantry/bravado call it what you will. Through time it has been shown that one single gallant act can change the course of a battle and a war.
> > What would have happened if the few WW2 fighter pilots had not stopped the Luftwaffe or ?..
> > R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter was given nor expected the stakes were just too high
> > Was he suffering from depression, I do not think so but blind rage at his traitorous allies and the inevitable defeat.
> >
> > George
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:55 PM, "wednesday_mc" wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Paul,
> > >
> > > I don't normally disagree with you, but I do in this instance.
> > >
> > > Everything you've outlined doesn't argue against Richard's possibly being depressed on the eve of Bosworth: it argues for it. Especially the most recent losses of his wife and son, and Richard's continued stresses and responsibilities as King not giving him the chance to grieve his losses. That Anne was ill for so long before dying also presents the possibility for further emotional vulnerability in the King and, yes, his being depressed if they were close and he had to watch her die over a period of months and being helpless to stop her suffering.
> > >
> > > Be it a medieval king or child, a 21st-century adult or child, or anyone else coping with loss and grief, whatever someone buries emotionally, they bury alive. The strong emotions associated with being depressed will not stay buried. Despite the conscious wishes of the person that their feelings just dissolve and go away, the emotions will resurface and sideswipe someone when they least expect it, and in ways that they often have no control over. That Richard lived in a violent age where death struck often does not mean he wasn't vulnerable to the same grief when death came to claim the people he loved and left him behind.
> > >
> > > Neither children nor adults ever "get used" to their loved ones dying. We -- and Richard -- may learn to live around the pain, but that is a process that does not happen in only a few months. "Get over it," is not a command the psyche or the heart obeys just because something external demands that it do so.
> > >
> > > There are definite, proven stages to grieving and healing from any major loss. The journey is never a steadily rising recovery from the depths of sorry back to "normal" functioning in X number of days or months or necessarily even years. It's an ongoing, turbulent zigzag of emotion -- some days are better than others, some are worse than others -- and everyone passes through the stages of grief at different speeds. Some people get stuck at certain stages and need help to heal - help that was not available to anyone, much less to Richard, in 1485.
> > >
> > > Additionally, just when someone thinks they are "over it," something can trigger a memory or emotion related to the loss, and the feeling of grief will then be just as raw as it was the day it happened.
> > >
> > > Incidentally, anger is a very strong stage of the mourning/grieving process; it is often also a strong symptom of depression. The current target of the anger is often not the true reason for the anger, though the target can trigger or add to the anger.
> > >
> > > Richard's reported fury and impatience, his refusal to listen to counsel on the field, and his determination to confront Tudor and fight until he or the pretender was dead might be interpreted as evidence of anger connected with depression.
> > >
> > > We can never know whether he was depressed before Bosworth. If someone had asked him, he likely wouldn't have known himself. But given the evidence of his actions, I think an argument can be made that he was depressed, and that depression did effect the decisions he made during the battle.
> > >
> > > This does not mean he had a conscious death-wish, that he wanted to join Anne and Edward in death, or that he intended to lose against Tudor. It does mean he may not have been able to set aside his emotions -- including his anger -- and weigh all the options rationally -- including retreating to fight another day.
> > >
> > > Whether his anger was centered only in Tudor, or if it was also influenced by his mourning Anne and his son (and if that mourning contributed to his being depressed) is something we can't know. Anger, however, does seem to have played a part in his deciding to ride down that hill.
> > >
> > > I am deeply sorry that Richard may never have learned the first lesson of the warrior: do not fight in anger. Given that one of his mentors was Warwick, and Warwick had a reputation for being hot-headed and impulsive himself, perhaps the lesson was never made available to Richard.
> > >
> > > In any case, my personal opinion -- given the chronology of the personal losses Richard suffered in the last year of his life (never mind the years prior), and human nature being what it is when it comes to the grieving process and depression, I can't rule out the possibility that Richard was suffering from depression on the eve of Bosworth.
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There have been a number of posts of late suggesting that Richard was suffering from depression at the time of Bosworth, which I must say, I think does him no credit at all.
> > > >
> > > > One has to remember that he had become used to dealing with grief from a young age, and seen how his mother and siblings dealt with it, a lesson he would have had to take to heart in order to function.
> > > >
> > > > Firstly he lost his beloved father, and his brother Edmund, as well as his uncle Richard. His mother dealt with this by organising their safe journey into exile in Burgundy, while herself remaining in London. Later he had to deal with losing close friends and associates, like the squires of the body killed by his side at Barnet, and possibly others killed at Tewkesbury.
> > > >
> > > > Later he had to weather the Clarence crisis and the execution of a brother he clearly loved, in spite of George's many weaknesses.
> > > >
> > > > Then his brother Edward died young, even though he was no longer the adored icon of Richard's youth, the king had been a major part of both Richard's public and private lives. That loss must have caused considerable pain, especially when you take into account, as Richard did, the implications of what that meant to Richard and his family.
> > > >
> > > > The storms of the 1483 crisis will have left their mark, and the deaths of, first his son and heir, and then his wife, will have been traumatic blows to the man.
> > > >
> > > > But Richard was the King, and after a few days of grieving, he will have buried the man inside the king, and come out fighting, as he did, for the other great love of his life, England.
> > > > At Bosworth he was fighting for a future with that love, and only winning, I firmly believe, would have entered his mind.
> > > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

I think that no person who goes through a war can return without memories, haunting flashbacks and perhaps even some sort of mental breakdown. I also agree that in this day and age we label every sort of mental and emotional problem as a malady and/or disease. Even my generation of warriors who went through Viet Nam pretty much "got on with it" or have floated through life never quite moored - my own brother included. The world has always been a dangerous place, and people lived through horrible, terrible, depressing things, and kept on "keeping on". I wonder what will happen to the youth of today who are treated for everything, coddled (for the most point, at least in USA) and not allowed to, or made to grow up.

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of C HOLMES
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 5:01 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Richard's grief



Hi,
They may be 20thC concepts but people had the same brain as we have, they may still be affected but some do get on with it, I have had mental health problems and have had to get on with it, I expect Richard possibly felt the same way, It was his duty for the kingdom and his house and family.
Loyaulte me Lie
God Bless Richard and Family
Christine


________________________________
From: wednesday_mc wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 16:16
Subject: Re: Richard's grief




It was called acedia and melacholia in the Middle Ages.

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds and Ishita, Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this. Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts. My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That was what the church and your upbringing told you to do. R was even closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would have expected.  Good debate though! Hilary

Someone else will have to analyze George. All I can see is the spoiled, jealous brother of a rich king. Perhaps George's motto should have been, "More. Again. Now."

~Weds

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds,
>  
> An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat?  Cheers Hilary

Penny, I agree with you too.
Hilary, George's case might be the same. He was erratic to start with but Isabel's death sent him over the edge.
Richard , on the other hand was composed and not wallowing in self pity but I am sure his was " subconsciously depressed". And that did distort his judgement..... IMHO

Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

On Jan 25, 2013, at 6:13 AM, C HOLMES <christineholmes651@...> wrote:

> Hi Penny, you make a very good point and I agree with you.
> Christine
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: The Pennywhistle thepennywhistle@...>
> To: "" >
> Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2013, 22:58
> Subject: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
>
>
> Re: Richard's grief
> Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:57 am (PST) . Posted by:
> "Hilary Jones" hjnatdat
> Hi Weds and Ishita,
> Sorry but I'm with the blokes on this.
> Depression, anxiety inner grief etc are all late 20th century concepts.
> My parents who lived through the Coventry blitz would have not known
> what you meant - they just remained dignified and 'got on with it'. That
> was what the church and your upbringing told you to do. R was even
> closer to the Church - he was by all accounts a pious man, even for the
> 15th century. From the minute the Crown was on his head he would have
> believed he was ordained by God to do a job, and nothing in his personal
> life would have got in the way. Yes, he would have grieved when they
> all died - but he would have 'got on with it', which is what God would
> have expected.  Good debate though!Â
> Hilary
>
> Hi Hillary...and everybody else,
>
> The labels of depression, etc., may be all late 20th century concepts, but the feelings themselves are inherent in man. You can even see these demonstrated in other species such as chimpanzees as documented by researchers. Your parents remained dignified and 'got on with it,' yes, but you saw what they presented to the world and wanted others to see. It is very difficult to know with any accuracy what someone is feeling if they choose to hide it, especially from themselves. Having a programmed path to tell you how you are supposed to behave after a loss is comforting to some degree because it guides you in how to try to ignore or refuse to acknowledge the feelings, but it does not change the feelings of loss. It only changes the outward behavior you can control. But those emotions lingering deep inside our psyche can pounce in the middle of the night, or while listening to the radio, or on a battlefield, etc., without warning or our even
> necessarily recognizing their source. They can have their effect on us through rage or insomnia or other weirdly unconnected ways that those surrounding Richard (and Richard himself) probably would not have connected to the loss of his son and wife. But still, might not the impact of the losses, such as rage that could have fueled the charge down the hill or perhaps feelings of resignation over circumstances while signing documents and making his signature a bit wonky, have happened?
>
> ~Penny
>
>
> Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly.
> And never regret anything that made you smile.
>
>
>
>
>
>

quicquid nimium est


Sent from my iPad

On Jan 25, 2013, at 11:01 AM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

> Someone else will have to analyze George. All I can see is the spoiled, jealous brother of a rich king. Perhaps George's motto should have been, "More. Again. Now."
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > Hi Weds,
> >
> > An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat? Cheers Hilary
>
>

Nah, I like George. He looked after our R in Utrectht and they thought a lot of him in my neck of the woods. Flawed, yes .......but so was Eddie 



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 25 January 2013, 16:01
Subject: Re: Richard's grief

 

Someone else will have to analyze George. All I can see is the spoiled, jealous brother of a rich king. Perhaps George's motto should have been, "More. Again. Now."

~Weds

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Weds,
>  
> An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat?  Cheers Hilary

Alexander, duke of Albany, has been called the "Scots Clarence."

Louis XI's younger brother, Charles, conspired against him throughout their adulthood.

Both of them were Clarence's contemporaries.

It looks to me as if Clarence was acting out one of several roles available to a 15th c. younger son. It seems likely there were "Irish, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Italian Clarences" in those medieval royal families as well.

It would make an interesting book, if anyone has the resources to research and write it.

Marion D.


--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Nah, I like George. He looked after our R in Utrectht and they thought a lot of him in my neck of the woods. Flawed, yes .......but so was Eddie 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 25 January 2013, 16:01
> Subject: Re: Richard's grief
>
>  
>
> Someone else will have to analyze George. All I can see is the spoiled, jealous brother of a rich king. Perhaps George's motto should have been, "More. Again. Now."
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > Hi Weds,
> >  
> > An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat?  Cheers Hilary
>
>
>
>
>
>

I still remember Kendall's evaluation - it was hard to be the brother of a king, so close and yet so far, and one named as next in line after the deaths of Henry VI and Edward of Lancaster. And were they both now dead? He goes on to say how George seems to have dreamed of crowns and coronets, which kind of says it all for me.
Paul



On 25 Jan 2013, at 16:10, Hilary Jones wrote:

> Nah, I like George. He looked after our R in Utrectht and they thought a lot of him in my neck of the woods. Flawed, yes .......but so was Eddie
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 25 January 2013, 16:01
> Subject: Re: Richard's grief
>
>
>
> Someone else will have to analyze George. All I can see is the spoiled, jealous brother of a rich king. Perhaps George's motto should have been, "More. Again. Now."
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>>
>> Hi Weds,
>> Â
>> An excess of bile? You may be interested in my question about George. I think he's a real candidate for analysis, seriously. Perhaps there's some 'wire in the blood' which went all the way through to Henry the Fat? Cheers Hilary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Paul Trevor Bale wrote:

"I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
roll them back.
This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
even some of Northumberland's men].
The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
deciding to do nothing."
//snip//

Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
(or tyres).
Doug

Paul
The information that you posted about the latest thoughts on Bosworth, did this refer to the suggested "new" site of the field of battle or the current historical site.
Apart from a few brief mentions I have managed to find out very little on the proposed new battlefield other than the discovery of period cannonball's and arrowheads etc.
Do you know what the current thoughts on this proposed new site is?
George




Sent from my iPad

On Jan 25, 2013, at 10:41 AM, "Douglas Eugene Stamate" <destama@...> wrote:

>
> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
> roll them back.
> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
> even some of Northumberland's men].
> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
> deciding to do nothing."
> //snip//
>
> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
> (or tyres).
> Doug
>
>

Sorry Doug, got all this from the people involved in the investigations at Bosworth who took me on tour round the whole 'new' site, explaining in detail what they have found and where, and what those finds indicate. The other Ambien was a revelation, and it was interesting standing on the rise and seeing what Richard would have been able to see. A lot of imagination is needed in some parts as there were nothing like the same number of trees then as today.
Paul



On 25 Jan 2013, at 15:41, Douglas Eugene Stamate wrote:

>
> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
> roll them back.
> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
> even some of Northumberland's men].
> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
> deciding to do nothing."
> //snip//
>
> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
> (or tyres).
> Doug
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

So fantastic you got a tour of the site.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:26 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...<mailto:paul.bale@...>> wrote:



Sorry Doug, got all this from the people involved in the investigations at Bosworth who took me on tour round the whole 'new' site, explaining in detail what they have found and where, and what those finds indicate. The other Ambien was a revelation, and it was interesting standing on the rise and seeing what Richard would have been able to see. A lot of imagination is needed in some parts as there were nothing like the same number of trees then as today.
Paul

On 25 Jan 2013, at 15:41, Douglas Eugene Stamate wrote:

>
> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
> roll them back.
> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
> even some of Northumberland's men].
> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
> deciding to do nothing."
> //snip//
>
> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
> (or tyres).
> Doug
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

This is the news on the proper site which is about a mile and a half west of the Battlefield centre on Ambien Hill. Michael Jones had his battle far too far west, and Peter Foss' in the correct general direction but not quite there.
My post details much of what has so far been released. They have even located the site where they believe Richard's last stand was. Fits in with all they have found about the marsh, and the silver boar, so valuable it would only have been worn by one of Richard's closest friends and household.
It's on private land, as is much of the new site, and the farmers clearly don't want tourists stamping all over their fields.
We also don't know what the farmers have found over the years and kept for themselves.
They may eventually be talked into declaring their private hoards as long as anonymity is guaranteed. These may reveal a much clearer picture of what happened.
There are a number of ideas about the time of day the fighting took place being discussed, but the line and position of the battle is pretty clear, with the cannon balls giving the archeological experts very clear ideas as to where Richard's artillery was, so of course where he was watching from. A number of marshes were discovered before they finally found the one that was in the right position, and more importantly was of the right period. They found one area that had been marshy in the Stone Age, another from the seventeenth century, then one that was certainly a marsh in August 1485.
All very exciting.
Paul


On 26 Jan 2013, at 15:49, George Butterfield wrote:

> Paul
> The information that you posted about the latest thoughts on Bosworth, did this refer to the suggested "new" site of the field of battle or the current historical site.
> Apart from a few brief mentions I have managed to find out very little on the proposed new battlefield other than the discovery of period cannonball's and arrowheads etc.
> Do you know what the current thoughts on this proposed new site is?
> George
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 25, 2013, at 10:41 AM, "Douglas Eugene Stamate" <destama@...> wrote:
>
>>
>> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>>
>> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
>> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
>> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
>> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
>> roll them back.
>> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
>> even some of Northumberland's men].
>> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
>> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
>> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
>> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
>> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
>> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
>> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
>> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
>> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
>> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
>> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
>> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
>> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
>> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
>> deciding to do nothing."
>> //snip//
>>
>> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
>> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
>> (or tyres).
>> Doug
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

So the story about Richard's horse being bogged down is true?

Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:

> This is the news on the proper site which is about a mile and a half west of the Battlefield centre on Ambien Hill. Michael Jones had his battle far too far west, and Peter Foss' in the correct general direction but not quite there.
> My post details much of what has so far been released. They have even located the site where they believe Richard's last stand was. Fits in with all they have found about the marsh, and the silver boar, so valuable it would only have been worn by one of Richard's closest friends and household.
> It's on private land, as is much of the new site, and the farmers clearly don't want tourists stamping all over their fields.
> We also don't know what the farmers have found over the years and kept for themselves.
> They may eventually be talked into declaring their private hoards as long as anonymity is guaranteed. These may reveal a much clearer picture of what happened.
> There are a number of ideas about the time of day the fighting took place being discussed, but the line and position of the battle is pretty clear, with the cannon balls giving the archeological experts very clear ideas as to where Richard's artillery was, so of course where he was watching from. A number of marshes were discovered before they finally found the one that was in the right position, and more importantly was of the right period. They found one area that had been marshy in the Stone Age, another from the seventeenth century, then one that was certainly a marsh in August 1485.
> All very exciting.
> Paul
>
> On 26 Jan 2013, at 15:49, George Butterfield wrote:
>
> > Paul
> > The information that you posted about the latest thoughts on Bosworth, did this refer to the suggested "new" site of the field of battle or the current historical site.
> > Apart from a few brief mentions I have managed to find out very little on the proposed new battlefield other than the discovery of period cannonball's and arrowheads etc.
> > Do you know what the current thoughts on this proposed new site is?
> > George
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jan 25, 2013, at 10:41 AM, "Douglas Eugene Stamate" destama@...> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
> >>
> >> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
> >> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
> >> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> >> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
> >> roll them back.
> >> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
> >> even some of Northumberland's men].
> >> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> >> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
> >> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
> >> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> >> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
> >> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
> >> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
> >> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
> >> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
> >> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
> >> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
> >> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
> >> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
> >> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
> >> deciding to do nothing."
> >> //snip//
> >>
> >> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
> >> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
> >> (or tyres).
> >> Doug
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>

Well let's just say that the few accounts of the battle mention it, and we now have located a marsh on the edge of the site of the fighting, so it is possible. I won't go any more positive than that. It is "possible".
Paul

On 26 Jan 2013, at 20:34, Ishita Bandyo wrote:

> So the story about Richard's horse being bogged down is true?
>
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
> On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
>> This is the news on the proper site which is about a mile and a half west of the Battlefield centre on Ambien Hill. Michael Jones had his battle far too far west, and Peter Foss' in the correct general direction but not quite there.
>> My post details much of what has so far been released. They have even located the site where they believe Richard's last stand was. Fits in with all they have found about the marsh, and the silver boar, so valuable it would only have been worn by one of Richard's closest friends and household.
>> It's on private land, as is much of the new site, and the farmers clearly don't want tourists stamping all over their fields.
>> We also don't know what the farmers have found over the years and kept for themselves.
>> They may eventually be talked into declaring their private hoards as long as anonymity is guaranteed. These may reveal a much clearer picture of what happened.
>> There are a number of ideas about the time of day the fighting took place being discussed, but the line and position of the battle is pretty clear, with the cannon balls giving the archeological experts very clear ideas as to where Richard's artillery was, so of course where he was watching from. A number of marshes were discovered before they finally found the one that was in the right position, and more importantly was of the right period. They found one area that had been marshy in the Stone Age, another from the seventeenth century, then one that was certainly a marsh in August 1485.
>> All very exciting.
>> Paul
>>
>> On 26 Jan 2013, at 15:49, George Butterfield wrote:
>>
>>> Paul
>>> The information that you posted about the latest thoughts on Bosworth, did this refer to the suggested "new" site of the field of battle or the current historical site.
>>> Apart from a few brief mentions I have managed to find out very little on the proposed new battlefield other than the discovery of period cannonball's and arrowheads etc.
>>> Do you know what the current thoughts on this proposed new site is?
>>> George
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 10:41 AM, "Douglas Eugene Stamate" destama@...> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is
>>>> along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with
>>>> Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
>>>> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to
>>>> roll them back.
>>>> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe
>>>> even some of Northumberland's men].
>>>> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
>>>> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and,
>>>> I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very
>>>> experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
>>>> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have
>>>> decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing
>>>> nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw
>>>> this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it,
>>>> maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air
>>>> would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and
>>>> knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of
>>>> our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up
>>>> to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at
>>>> Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else
>>>> deciding to do nothing."
>>>> //snip//
>>>>
>>>> Has this been written up in some book? Jones' "Bosworth", perhaps? It's next
>>>> on my list (with Kendall) and had to be delayed as the car needed new tires
>>>> (or tyres).
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Richard Liveth Yet!
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Very interested to hear about the raised piece of land known as Ambien. Went on a visit to the area some years ago, our branch and Michael Jones, we drove quite a long way from Merevale, which we also visited, onto the Fenn Lanes and ended up in a layby facing on to a large expanse of flat open land where Michael thought the battle might have taken place. To be fair he was not adament that it had taken place there. However, behind us was a piece of raised land which Michael thought could have been some sort of a burial mound. This is my memory of that day, which was many years ago and I may be wrong about the burial mound bit, but could this be the same piece of raised land?

I can't find my copy of Michael's book because I have just moved and things are packed away, but I remember the Rd to London featured in his plan of the Battle. Northumberland was situated on the road to London in his version and that has always made me wonder if that is why he didn't come to Richard's aid because he was told to guard the road to London at all costs. With regard to the site at the Battlefield Centre, it has always seemed odd to me, that if Tudor was at Atherstone or Merevale or both, he would travel all that way to Ambion Hill/ Sutton Cheney when he could have just nipped down the road to London.

Not sure about the finding of the silver boar pinpointing the place where Richard died as whoever lost it could have lost it at any point in the battle. I think Glenn Foard has been a bit previous by claiming this. I have spoken to someone from the main Society who says that more research needs to be done before it can categorically be claimed as the place where Richard died. Hopefully the finding of the Greyfriars warrior will spur them on to investigate more. Only a week to go!!

Regards

Mary

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to roll them back.
> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe even some of Northumberland's men].
> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and, I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it, maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else deciding to do nothing.
> As an addendum his father's death is often quoted as being similar, but the Duke of York when he rode out of Sandal castle to rescue his men did not know that a platoon of Queen Margaret's army was hidden out of sight ready to engage if needed.
> Paul
> New research has discovered a slightly raised piece of land on the road the battle was fought across, known for some time in the Middle Ages as Ambien. Not a hill, but high enough to give the king a view of the action.
>
> On 23 Jan 2013, at 16:29, Douglas Eugene Stamate wrote:
>
> >
> > George Butterfield wrote:
> > //snip//
> > "R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter
> > was given nor expected the stakes were just too high."
> > //snip//
> >
> > Maybe I'm mistaken, but I understood that, at least until Stanley
> > interfered, Richard WAS winning. Yes, it was hard fighting, but the Tudor
> > forces were giving way and Richard had nearly reached Tudor and THEN
> > Stanley's forces hit the Yorkist line from the flank.
> > Or have I gotten something wrong again?
> > Doug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 27 January 2013, 16:18
Subject: Re: Richard's grief/Bosworth now

"Not sure about the finding of the silver boar pinpointing the place
where Richard died as whoever lost it could have lost it at any point in the battle. I think Glenn Foard has been a bit previous by claiming
this."

Well, yes and no.  It's a high status badge, so most likely would have been worn by someone who only entered the fray alongside Richard.  This puts its loss towards the latter end of the action and is re-inforced by the fact that it was found where the marsh used to be.  Of course, one variable is the extent of the marsh.  People could have been forced into it and then randomly picked off across quite a wide area.  So, yes, I'm sure there's a lot more to be discovered.

Jonathan


________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 27 January 2013, 16:18
Subject: Re: Richard's grief/Bosworth now


 

Very interested to hear about the raised piece of land known as Ambien. Went on a visit to the area some years ago, our branch and Michael Jones, we drove quite a long way from Merevale, which we also visited, onto the Fenn Lanes and ended up in a layby facing on to a large expanse of flat open land where Michael thought the battle might have taken place. To be fair he was not adament that it had taken place there. However, behind us was a piece of raised land which Michael thought could have been some sort of a burial mound. This is my memory of that day, which was many years ago and I may be wrong about the burial mound bit, but could this be the same piece of raised land?

I can't find my copy of Michael's book because I have just moved and things are packed away, but I remember the Rd to London featured in his plan of the Battle. Northumberland was situated on the road to London in his version and that has always made me wonder if that is why he didn't come to Richard's aid because he was told to guard the road to London at all costs. With regard to the site at the Battlefield Centre, it has always seemed odd to me, that if Tudor was at Atherstone or Merevale or both, he would travel all that way to Ambion Hill/ Sutton Cheney when he could have just nipped down the road to London.

Not sure about the finding of the silver boar pinpointing the place where Richard died as whoever lost it could have lost it at any point in the battle. I think Glenn Foard has been a bit previous by claiming this. I have spoken to someone from the main Society who says that more research needs to be done before it can categorically be claimed as the place where Richard died. Hopefully the finding of the Greyfriars warrior will spur them on to investigate more. Only a week to go!!

Regards

Mary

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> I wish it were true that Richard was winning, but the latest thinking is along the lines that the main battle being across the road to London with Richard lined up on one side, and Oxford on the other, facing each other.
> At some stage the French pikemen attacked Richard's flank and started to roll them back.
> This may well have caused faint hearts in the rear to turn and run [maybe even some of Northumberland's men].
> The tide had turned, and then Norfolk was killed.
> With his general dead I would surmise the king saw this as a bad sign, and, I know he was fighting on the wrong side[!] but Oxford was a very experienced soldier and will have pushed the advantage.
> At this point Tudor, possibly not able to see what was happening, may have decided he was fed up watching his step father and step uncle sitting doing nothing and rode towards them to try to get them involved. When Richard saw this, Tudor separating himself from the main battle, he decided to risk it, maybe hoping that the dust the fighting threw up into the hot summer air would cover his move from the Stanleys long enough for him to succeed and knock Tudor out for good. That he failed is one of the great tragedies of our history, and like many a close call could have gone either way right up to the end. Another close run thing as Wellington said of his victory at Waterloo. He gambled on the Stanleys not reacting fast enough, or else deciding to do nothing.
> As an addendum his father's death is often quoted as being similar, but the Duke of York when he rode out of Sandal castle to rescue his men did not know that a platoon of Queen Margaret's army was hidden out of sight ready to engage if needed.
> Paul
> New research has discovered a slightly raised piece of land on the road the battle was fought across, known for some time in the Middle Ages as Ambien. Not a hill, but high enough to give the king a view of the action.
>
> On 23 Jan 2013, at 16:29, Douglas Eugene Stamate wrote:
>
> >
> > George Butterfield wrote:
> > //snip//
> > "R3 failed to rally his army in one last desperate attempt to win no quarter
> > was given nor expected the stakes were just too high."
> > //snip//
> >
> > Maybe I'm mistaken, but I understood that, at least until Stanley
> > interfered, Richard WAS winning. Yes, it was hard fighting, but the Tudor
> > forces were giving way and Richard had nearly reached Tudor and THEN
> > Stanley's forces hit the Yorkist line from the flank.
> > Or have I gotten something wrong again?
> > Doug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>