I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne



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

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

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To:
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment





Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

I still can't believe the unprofessionalism of it!!! What an ass!

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:

> In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To:
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>

You took the words right out of my mouth! Hes just stirring for trouble -
trying to get in the limelight - so ignore him if you can... I see there is
also a voting section on where to bury him... I'm with the beautiful
cathedral of Leicester - its central to other R3 sites.

There are other nicer comments on there to focus on... Looks like its going
to be a long drawn out 'fight'...

Lisa

On 7 February 2013 18:56, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> In Britain I think they would say, ýDonýt get your knickers in a twist,ý
> Ishita. I know itýs hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think
> heýs (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isnýt he
> the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*?
> ýWhat a maroon!ý to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: [mailto:
> ] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To:
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read
> Starkey's comment
>
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: ýI think there is a very good
> reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a
> disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of
> York.ýUnless Westminster Abbey opens a villainsý corner where we can put
> him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesnýt make the
> grade.ý
> Full link:
>
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



--
Lisa
The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329

www.Antiques-Boutique.com <http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.108554399176307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f>

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 


________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com

or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

Hi Ishita,
 
Ignore him - and Schama who sounds even worse. There are a lot of supporters out there, including another MP called Tristram Hunt who is believe it or not a historian, and quite a dishy one! This was bound to happen. They are out to revitalise their careers. We just have to swallow, smile and carry on. I've been looking at all the UK reports and it will be hard, but there is also an awful lot of support. And before this week how many had heard of our King?
So onwards and upwards - no-one likes Starkey. You could say he's doing us a favour.
I'm off to bed now.  Keep smiling!  H


________________________________
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:46
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

I say off with dude's head....

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 4:46 PM
To:
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment



Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: "I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York."Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade."
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones 



________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 

________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com

or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

He's a creep. I swear, he's jealous of the world's fascination with Richard. I mean, who is interested in his ferret-faced idol and his fat, disgusting son? If it wasn't for Elizabeth, the Tudors would would be nowhere! Maire.

--- In , Pamela Bain wrote:
>
> I say off with dude's head....
>
> ________________________________
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 4:46 PM
> To:
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: "I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York."Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade."
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi, Lisa!
Did you say that we can vote on "where to bury Starkey"?

I'm all for interring Richard in Leicester (as you say, it's beautiful
countryside). Or York - anywhere where Richard will be the focus of
attention. Anyplace but the Abbey!

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanne L. Tournier

Email - jltournier60@...
or jltournier@...

"With God, all things are possible."
- Jesus of Nazareth
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Lisa @ The
Antiques Boutique
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 7:00 PM
To:
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read
Starkey's comment

You took the words right out of my mouth! Hes just stirring for trouble -
trying to get in the limelight - so ignore him if you can... I see there is
also a voting section on where to bury him... I'm with the beautiful
cathedral of Leicester - its central to other R3 sites.

There are other nicer comments on there to focus on... Looks like its going
to be a long drawn out 'fight'...

Lisa

On 7 February 2013 18:56, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> In Britain I think they would say, "Don't get your knickers in a twist,"
> Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I
> think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from
> Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The
Trial of Richard III*?
> "What a maroon!" to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: [mailto:
> ] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To:
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read
> Starkey's comment
>
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: "I think there is a very good
> reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a
> disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of
> York."Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can
> put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't
> make the grade."
> Full link:
>
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-
> iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



--
Lisa
The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services Baddeck,
Nova Scotia.
Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329

www.Antiques-Boutique.com <http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.1085543991
76307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f>






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

Yahoo! Groups Links

To misquote Samuel Johnson: "It is advantageous to [Richard] that his [life and reputation] be attacked as well as praised. Fame is a shuttlecock. If it be struck at only one end of the room, it will soon fall to the ground. To keep it up, it must be struck at both ends."

So let Starkey rail. Because in his own way he's promoting Richard even as he's vilifying him. The irony is that the more he tries to push people away, the more they may get curious and begin digging more deeply for Richard.

Pamela Tudor-Craig may have said it best in the documentary: "It was of great importance to the Tudor dynasty that this man was a villain. It was essential. Otherwise, there was no reason for Henry to be on the throne."

That's still the case today for every Tudor scholar. Anger often covers fear, and I suspect that's the case regarding Starkey's venom. Deep down, I imagine he knows he's backing a bastard.

~Weds

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html

Well, one more time, a Texas saying, "screw them, and the horse they rode in one"! Leicester looks like a lovely town, and is on my list of places to see! We have been to England and love it, but have not visited the Midlands. I say next trip, we take the train North and find out what we have been missing!!!

On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:03 PM, "liz williams" <ferrymansdaughter@...<mailto:ferrymansdaughter@...>> wrote:



I read that on the train the other day. He is such an arse.

What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester. I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine. It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.



________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier jltournier60@...<mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


In Britain I think they would say, ýDonýt get your knickers in a twist,ý Ishita. I know itýs hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think heýs (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isnýt he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? ýWhat a maroon!ý to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com<http://40hotmail.com>

or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: ýI think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.ýUnless Westminster Abbey opens a villainsý corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesnýt make the grade.ý
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com<http://www.ishitabandyo.com>
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts<http://www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts>
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com<http://www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com>

Let's do some DNA testing on him......or maybe just a root canal, without numbing.

On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:48 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac@...>> wrote:



To misquote Samuel Johnson: "It is advantageous to [Richard] that his [life and reputation] be attacked as well as praised. Fame is a shuttlecock. If it be struck at only one end of the room, it will soon fall to the ground. To keep it up, it must be struck at both ends."

So let Starkey rail. Because in his own way he's promoting Richard even as he's vilifying him. The irony is that the more he tries to push people away, the more they may get curious and begin digging more deeply for Richard.

Pamela Tudor-Craig may have said it best in the documentary: "It was of great importance to the Tudor dynasty that this man was a villain. It was essential. Otherwise, there was no reason for Henry to be on the throne."

That's still the case today for every Tudor scholar. Anger often covers fear, and I suspect that's the case regarding Starkey's venom. Deep down, I imagine he knows he's backing a bastard.

~Weds

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: ýýýI think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.ýýýUnless Westminster Abbey opens a villainsýýý corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesnýýýt make the grade.ýýý
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html

Ah, another twerp heard from!

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>

Indeed. [Proffering bowl.] Popcorn, Lisa?

--- In , "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" wrote:
>
> You took the words right out of my mouth! Hes just stirring for trouble -
> trying to get in the limelight - so ignore him if you can... I see there is
> also a voting section on where to bury him... I'm with the beautiful
> cathedral of Leicester - its central to other R3 sites.
>
> There are other nicer comments on there to focus on... Looks like its going
> to be a long drawn out 'fight'...
>
> Lisa
>
> On 7 February 2013 18:56, Johanne Tournier wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > In Britain I think they would say, "Don't get your knickers in a twist,"
> > Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think
> > he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he
> > the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*?
> > "What a maroon!" to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@...
> >
> > or jltournier@...
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > From: [mailto:
> > ] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read
> > Starkey's comment
> >
> >
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: "I think there is a very good
> > reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a
> > disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of
> > York."Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put
> > him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the
> > grade."
> > Full link:
> >
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Lisa
> The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
> Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
> Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329
>
> www.Antiques-Boutique.com
> Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
> View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
>
>
>
>
>

I believe the dinosaur will only bellow louder the deeper he is stuck in the tar pit.

STARKEY: Hunchback!

LANGLEY: Skeleton.

STARKEY: Usurper!

LANGLEY: Titulus Regius.

STARKEY: Murderer!

LANGLEY: Rumor.

STARKEY: Goddammit, I am not giving up my TV gig!

LANGLEY: 'Bye.

--- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> To misquote Samuel Johnson: "It is advantageous to [Richard] that his [life and reputation] be attacked as well as praised. Fame is a shuttlecock. If it be struck at only one end of the room, it will soon fall to the ground. To keep it up, it must be struck at both ends."
>
> So let Starkey rail. Because in his own way he's promoting Richard even as he's vilifying him. The irony is that the more he tries to push people away, the more they may get curious and begin digging more deeply for Richard.
>
> Pamela Tudor-Craig may have said it best in the documentary: "It was of great importance to the Tudor dynasty that this man was a villain. It was essential. Otherwise, there was no reason for Henry to be on the throne."
>
> That's still the case today for every Tudor scholar. Anger often covers fear, and I suspect that's the case regarding Starkey's venom. Deep down, I imagine he knows he's backing a bastard.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
>

A new BBC comedy show in the offing????

On Feb 7, 2013, at 8:13 PM, "mcjohn_wt_net" <mcjohn@...<mailto:mcjohn@...>> wrote:



I believe the dinosaur will only bellow louder the deeper he is stuck in the tar pit.

STARKEY: Hunchback!

LANGLEY: Skeleton.

STARKEY: Usurper!

LANGLEY: Titulus Regius.

STARKEY: Murderer!

LANGLEY: Rumor.

STARKEY: Goddammit, I am not giving up my TV gig!

LANGLEY: 'Bye.

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> To misquote Samuel Johnson: "It is advantageous to [Richard] that his [life and reputation] be attacked as well as praised. Fame is a shuttlecock. If it be struck at only one end of the room, it will soon fall to the ground. To keep it up, it must be struck at both ends."
>
> So let Starkey rail. Because in his own way he's promoting Richard even as he's vilifying him. The irony is that the more he tries to push people away, the more they may get curious and begin digging more deeply for Richard.
>
> Pamela Tudor-Craig may have said it best in the documentary: "It was of great importance to the Tudor dynasty that this man was a villain. It was essential. Otherwise, there was no reason for Henry to be on the throne."
>
> That's still the case today for every Tudor scholar. Anger often covers fear, and I suspect that's the case regarding Starkey's venom. Deep down, I imagine he knows he's backing a bastard.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: ýýýI think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.ýýýUnless Westminster Abbey opens a villainsýýý corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesnýýýt make the grade.ýýý
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
>

Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'

However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..

So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  




________________________________
 Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...> wrote:

 
Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

If only he'd waited for reinforcements at Bosworth. Impetuous, all or nothing man. Do you think, if he'd still had an heir, he might have been more cautious?

--- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
>
> However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
>
> So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
>  
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that.  The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do?  I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue. 
 
The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
 
Liz
 

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones 

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 

________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com

or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
 
I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers  


________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that.  The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do?  I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue. 
 
The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
 
Liz
 

From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones 

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 

________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com

or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
Full link:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
Ishita Bandyo
www.ishitabandyo.com
www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com

Go in to a service, then when it begins nip to the left hand side of the
nave and you can get into see the tombs for free!
They'll throw you out if they catch you, but if you are British it is
your Abbey, so why should you pay such an outrageous price?
Paul

On 08/02/2013 10:56, Hilary Jones wrote:
> I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
>
> I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>
>
>
> Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that. The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do? I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue.
>
> The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
>
> Liz
>
>
> From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>
> It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones
>
> ________________________________
> From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>
>
> I read that on the train the other day. He is such an arse.
>
> What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester. I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine. It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
> Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>
> In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com
>
> or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

You know Paul my daughter wanted to do that - she's braver than me. And you're right, it is ours  



________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 11:33
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

Go in to a service, then when it begins nip to the left hand side of the
nave and you can get into see the tombs for free!
They'll throw you out if they catch you, but if you are British it is
your Abbey, so why should you pay such an outrageous price?
Paul

On 08/02/2013 10:56, Hilary Jones wrote:
> I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
> 
> I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers
> 
>
> ________________________________
>  From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>   
> 
>   
> 
> Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that.  The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do?  I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue.
> 
> The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
> 
> Liz
> 
>
> From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>   
> It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones
>
> ________________________________
> From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>   
>
> I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
> 
> What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
> 
> 
>
> ________________________________
> From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
> Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>   
> In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com
>
> or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>         
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!



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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Each?  I thought that was for two.  that's outrageous.  Mind you I've never paid since I used to get in for free.

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 10:56
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
 
I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers  


________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that.  The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do?  I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue. 
 
The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
 
Liz
 

From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones 

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 

________________________________
Recent Activity: * New Members 25
Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest " Unsubscribe " Terms of Use " Send us Feedback
.
EACh?

It was certainly in the high twenties each and that was two years' ago - think it increased after the Royal Wedding. Lucky you!  



________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 12:22
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

Each?  I thought that was for two.  that's outrageous.  Mind you I've never paid since I used to get in for free.

From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 10:56
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
 
I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers  

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 

Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that.  The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do?  I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue. 
 
The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
 
Liz
 

From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones 

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 

I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
 
What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
 
 

________________________________
Recent Activity: * New Members 25
Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest " Unsubscribe " Terms of Use " Send us Feedback
.
EACh?

Actually I used to go once a week, spent all day in the office and barely saw anything although I did once get a private look around the Shrine and a tour of the roof spaces which the public aren't allowed in.
 
So I suppose I should agree - lucky me1

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 12:39
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
It was certainly in the high twenties each and that was two years' ago - think it increased after the Royal Wedding. Lucky you!  

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 12:22
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment


 

Each?  I thought that was for two.  that's outrageous.  Mind you I've never paid since I used to get in for free.

From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 10:56
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
 
I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers  

________________________________

Paul
I thought that Westminster Abbey was a Royal Peculiar making it part of the direct ownership of HM and positions within the Abbey are grace and favors etc.
So assuming Westminster was your "private" chapel would you not charge admission. I think that the reason we have places of worship is to worship not go in to a service and sneak a look before being thrown out, somewhat defeats the object of religion.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 8, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:

> Go in to a service, then when it begins nip to the left hand side of the
> nave and you can get into see the tombs for free!
> They'll throw you out if they catch you, but if you are British it is
> your Abbey, so why should you pay such an outrageous price?
> Paul
>
> On 08/02/2013 10:56, Hilary Jones wrote:
>> I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
>>
>> I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
>> To: "" <>
>> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that. The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do? I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue.
>>
>> The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
>>
>> Liz
>>
>>
>> From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
>> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>> It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
>> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>>
>> I read that on the train the other day. He is such an arse.
>>
>> What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester. I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine. It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
>> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
>> Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>> In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>>
>> Loyaulte me lie,
>>
>> Johanne
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Johanne L. Tournier
>>
>> Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com
>>
>> or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv
>>
>> "With God, all things are possible."
>>
>> - Jesus of Nazareth
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
>> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
>> Full link:
>> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
>> Ishita Bandyo
>> www.ishitabandyo.com
>> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
>> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

George,
 
I'm supporting Paul on this. I would happily have paid a fiver but thirty quid is extortionate - I pay taxes to support HM and her family without grudge and I can go into a lot of beautiful churches and donate what I want.; the glorious Beauchamp chappel at Warwick or my own cathedral (2 of them) at Coventry for a start. Yes, it's a sneaky way to get a free 'peep' and it may defeat the object of religion, but who knows the sneakers might 'get hooked' and as was said in a play on telly the other night 'they could do with the custom'. Cheers H.


________________________________
From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 13:30
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 

Paul
I thought that Westminster Abbey was a Royal Peculiar making it part of the direct ownership of HM and positions within the Abbey are grace and favors etc.
So assuming Westminster was your "private" chapel would you not charge admission. I think that the reason we have places of worship is to worship not go in to a service and sneak a look before being thrown out, somewhat defeats the object of religion.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 8, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@...> wrote:

> Go in to a service, then when it begins nip to the left hand side of the
> nave and you can get into see the tombs for free!
> They'll throw you out if they catch you, but if you are British it is
> your Abbey, so why should you pay such an outrageous price?
> Paul
>
> On 08/02/2013 10:56, Hilary Jones wrote:
>> I think the Abbey's now about £30 - I went on a walking tour for £18 so we could get in cheaper and by the back door.
>>
>> I agree entirely with what you say about some of the posts in newspapers
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: liz williams ferrymansdaughter@...>
>> To: "" >
>> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 9:21
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Well I've seen comments on the Daily Mail site about "Leicester's full of immigrants" but wouldn't expect anything else from that. The other thing that gets me is people keep saying Leicester are only doing it to get money and yet it's not Leicester, is it, that charges £12 a pop or whatever the Abbey do? I understand why the Abbey have to charge but most people don't have a clue.
>>
>> The posts of course say a lot more about the people posting than they do about Leicester or Richard.
>>
>> Liz
>>
>>
>> From: Hilary Jones mailto:hjnatdat%40yahoo.com>
>> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:08
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>> It's known as racism Liz. But we do work in several churches in Leicester and it's nice. Might even get to do the cathedral - have done a lot of other Midland ones
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
>> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 23:02
>> Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>>
>> I read that on the train the other day. He is such an arse.
>>
>> What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester. I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine. It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Johanne Tournier mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
>> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
>> Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>>
>> In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>>
>> Loyaulte me lie,
>>
>> Johanne
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Johanne L. Tournier
>>
>> Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com
>>
>> or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv
>>
>> "With God, all things are possible."
>>
>> - Jesus of Nazareth
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
>> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>>
>> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
>> Full link:
>> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
>> Ishita Bandyo
>> www.ishitabandyo.com
>> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
>> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

I guess it's down to perception...two people might look at the very same situation and yet come up with two completely different perceptions of it...

My perception of it was that Richard was catapulted into a set of circumstances in which made it extremely hard going for him. Couple that with the cupidity of the nobles who surrounded him, who could change their colours at the mere drop of a hat, add to that perhaps Richard lacked the ruthlessness that perhaps you needed to survive in those days, throw in the inflammatory mix of two very devious schemers, MB and JM and the not insignificant fact that Richard had no heir....and Pow. Perhaps even with all this to contend with Richard could have come through and proved to later generations his great worth as a king if only he had survived the melee of the battle to get to Weasle and cave his head in. But there you go...Fate....I think we all know as adults that life is not fair...Eileen


--- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
>
> However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
>
> So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
>  
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:31
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

I guess it's down to perception...two people might look at the very same situation and yet come up with two completely different perceptions of it...

My perception of it was that Richard was catapulted into a set of circumstances in which made it extremely hard going for him. Couple that with the cupidity of the nobles who surrounded him, who could change their colours at the mere drop of a hat, add to that perhaps Richard lacked the ruthlessness that perhaps you needed to survive in those days, throw in the inflammatory mix of two very devious schemers, MB and JM and the not insignificant fact that Richard had no heir....and Pow. Perhaps even with all this to contend with Richard could have come through and proved to later generations his great worth as a king if only he had survived the melee of the battle to get to Weasle and cave his head in. But there you go...Fate....I think we all know as adults that life is not fair...Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
>
> However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
>
> So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
>  
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:31
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> I guess it's down to perception...two people might look at the very same situation and yet come up with two completely different perceptions of it...
>
> My perception of it was that Richard was catapulted into a set of circumstances in which made it extremely hard going for him. Couple that with the cupidity of the nobles who surrounded him, who could change their colours at the mere drop of a hat, add to that perhaps Richard lacked the ruthlessness that perhaps you needed to survive in those days, throw in the inflammatory mix of two very devious schemers, MB and JM and the not insignificant fact that Richard had no heir....and Pow. Perhaps even with all this to contend with Richard could have come through and proved to later generations his great worth as a king if only he had survived the melee of the battle to get to Weasle and cave his head in. But there you go...Fate....I think we all know as adults that life is not fair...Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Pamela Furmidge wrote:
> >
> > Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
> >
> > However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
> >
> > So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> >  
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:31
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> I guess it's down to perception...two people might look at the very same situation and yet come up with two completely different perceptions of it...
>
> My perception of it was that Richard was catapulted into a set of circumstances in which made it extremely hard going for him. Couple that with the cupidity of the nobles who surrounded him, who could change their colours at the mere drop of a hat, add to that perhaps Richard lacked the ruthlessness that perhaps you needed to survive in those days, throw in the inflammatory mix of two very devious schemers, MB and JM and the not insignificant fact that Richard had no heir....and Pow. Perhaps even with all this to contend with Richard could have come through and proved to later generations his great worth as a king if only he had survived the melee of the battle to get to Weasle and cave his head in. But there you go...Fate....I think we all know as adults that life is not fair...Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Pamela Furmidge wrote:
> >
> > Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
> >
> > However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
> >
> > So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> >  
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Shopping list! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! "I lost my torn half of an envelope! The world shall pay!"

--- In , "EileenB" wrote:
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen

Actually peoples...if you think about it...maybe it will go in Richard's favour if Dr Starkey is allowed to continue his rants over Richard...because this may lead some people to think...Oh for God sake...Will this man every shut up!?...and ask themselves why does he hate Richard so...Has he another agenda...? Because Im beginning to think some quite unpleasant stuff here and I may be barking up the wrong tree. Eileen

--- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
>
> Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Shopping list! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! "I lost my torn half of an envelope! The world shall pay!"
>
> --- In , "EileenB" wrote:
> >
> > Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>

My guess is it's all about his lost youth encapsulated in that dreadful performance during the 'Trial'. I'd love to know what you're thinking!



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:59
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

Actually peoples...if you think about it...maybe it will go in Richard's favour if Dr Starkey is allowed to continue his rants over Richard...because this may lead some people to think...Oh for God sake...Will this man every shut up!?...and ask themselves why does he hate Richard so...Has he another agenda...? Because Im beginning to think some quite unpleasant stuff here and I may be barking up the wrong tree. Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
>
> Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Shopping list! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! "I lost my torn half of an envelope! The world shall pay!"
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" wrote:
> >
> > Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>

Actually I could probably end up getting sued..hahahahahah Eileen

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
>. I'd love to know what you're thinking!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:59
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> Actually peoples...if you think about it...maybe it will go in Richard's favour if Dr Starkey is allowed to continue his rants over Richard...because this may lead some people to think...Oh for God sake...Will this man every shut up!?...and ask themselves why does he hate Richard so...Has he another agenda...? Because Im beginning to think some quite unpleasant stuff here and I may be barking up the wrong tree. Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
> >
> > Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Shopping list! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! "I lost my torn half of an envelope! The world shall pay!"
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" wrote:
> > >
> > > Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
>
> However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
>
> So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  

Carol responds:

Except for the villain part and his deserving burial in a parking lot. However, I think it was Edward IV who failed Richard and doomed his own line. The most obvious blunder is the marriage to Eleanor Butler failed by the notorious (and illegal) "marriage" to Elizabeth Woodville and her family of swarming insects. And then (assuming he wasn't poisoned), his failure to take care of his own health and consequently dying young. I forgot sending his elder son off to Ludlow to be raised by Woodvilles, a stranger to his uncle Richard. There are other things, many other things, but those are the most obvious and would in themselves have set up Richard for the terrible choice he faced--take the crown or become a Woodville victim. From there, he might have succeeded had Edward not alienated and killed off two men who might have been Richard's stalwart allies, the Neville brothers. And if he had executed the Earl of Oxford when he had both cause and opportunity, the Tydder would have had no general to fight his battle for him.

I am not saying that Richard did not make his share of mistakes, among them handing Morton into the custody of Buckingham, and no one could deny his incredibly bad luck in losing his only legitimate son and his wife so close together. But if he had won Bosworth, none of it would have mattered. He would be alive, he would be king, he would marry Joanna of Portugal for a genuine union of York and Lancaster, he would (God willing) have sons to maintain his dynasty, and he would write history.

In the end, it was a few treacherous nobles (maybe just one, William Stanley) who caused him to "fail" as king.

Carol

Oh...just imagine..if those two had survived...allied with Richard..they three would have been INVINCIBLE...and yes...I am shouting...Eileen

--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
>
>
>. From there, he might have succeeded had Edward not alienated and killed off two men who might have been Richard's stalwart allies, the Neville brothers.
> Carol
>

"favefauve@..." wrote:
>
> If only he'd waited for reinforcements at Bosworth. Impetuous, all or nothing man. Do you think, if he'd still had an heir, he might have been more cautious?

Carol responds:

Without question. He knew how easy it was to depose a child king, and he wouldn't have wanted that to happen to his own little Edward. And I suspect that the Tudor would have found it less easy to find followers if Richard had had a secure dynasty. A childless king is always at risk, as Richard II found to his detriment.

Carol

How long do you think Edward of Middleham would have survived after Bosworth? What would have become of Anne...Eileen
--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
>
> "favefauve@" wrote:
> >
> > If only he'd waited for reinforcements at Bosworth. Impetuous, all or nothing man. Do you think, if he'd still had an heir, he might have been more cautious?
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Without question. He knew how easy it was to depose a child king, and he wouldn't have wanted that to happen to his own little Edward. And I suspect that the Tudor would have found it less easy to find followers if Richard had had a secure dynasty. A childless king is always at risk, as Richard II found to his detriment.
>
> Carol
>

Great response Carol ! :)

I need to check who was what, but Penman in 'Sunne' portrays Edwards court as dissolute drunken carousing and Richard hating to visit there. He would not have done so often during those years, as Lord of the North, he would have had many duties and little time.
If we are right in our assessment of his character I think when he did go there he would have been dismayed at the court and the wreckage it was making of his beloved oldest brother, once so handsome and fit. If that caused his early death (liver failure maybe?) then I am thinking Richard would not have blamed Edward but those surrounding him (including Hastings), Richard may well have felt that if they had acted soberly and responsibly that maybe then Edward would also have done so.
Which in turn may be why some Yorkist nobles got sent away from court when Richard arrived in London as Lord-Protector, leading to that abortive rebellion that so angered Richard that Hastings, who he had kept, on bore the brunt of his anger. It may also explain why some Yorkist nobles went off and joined Henry in France.

I think one of the reasons I care about him is that, given all the adverse incidents all through his life, too many to enumerate here, he did not turn into a ruthless ruler, al la Bolingbroke or Henry Tudor himself. If he HAD been then quite possibly he would have reigned a long time...


________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 


--- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
>
> However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
>
> So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  

Carol responds:

Except for the villain part and his deserving burial in a parking lot. However, I think it was Edward IV who failed Richard and doomed his own line. The most obvious blunder is the marriage to Eleanor Butler failed by the notorious (and illegal) "marriage" to Elizabeth Woodville and her family of swarming insects. And then (assuming he wasn't poisoned), his failure to take care of his own health and consequently dying young. I forgot sending his elder son off to Ludlow to be raised by Woodvilles, a stranger to his uncle Richard. There are other things, many other things, but those are the most obvious and would in themselves have set up Richard for the terrible choice he faced--take the crown or become a Woodville victim. From there, he might have succeeded had Edward not alienated and killed off two men who might have been Richard's stalwart allies, the Neville brothers. And if he had executed the Earl of Oxford when he had both cause and opportunity,
the Tydder would have had no general to fight his battle for him.

I am not saying that Richard did not make his share of mistakes, among them handing Morton into the custody of Buckingham, and no one could deny his incredibly bad luck in losing his only legitimate son and his wife so close together. But if he had won Bosworth, none of it would have mattered. He would be alive, he would be king, he would marry Joanna of Portugal for a genuine union of York and Lancaster, he would (God willing) have sons to maintain his dynasty, and he would write history.

In the end, it was a few treacherous nobles (maybe just one, William Stanley) who caused him to "fail" as king.

Carol

Little Ed imprisoned and eventually killed. Anne relegated to convent or married to an Woodville/ Tudor supporter.




________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2013 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

How long do you think Edward of Middleham would have survived after Bosworth? What would have become of Anne...Eileen
--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
>
> "favefauve@" wrote:
> >
> > If only he'd waited for reinforcements at Bosworth. Impetuous, all or nothing man. Do you think, if he'd still had an heir, he might have been more cautious?
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Without question. He knew how easy it was to depose a child king, and he wouldn't have wanted that to happen to his own little Edward. And I suspect that the Tudor would have found it less easy to find followers if Richard had had a secure dynasty. A childless king is always at risk, as Richard II found to his detriment.
>
> Carol
>

On 08/02/2013 15:36, justcarol67 wrote:
> However, I think it was Edward IV who failed Richard and doomed his own line.
Absolutely Carol.
Paul


-- Richard Liveth Yet!

Hello all,

I don't post much, but I feel strongly about this. The Tudors and Shakespeare created a caracature of a loner who ruthlessly murdered anyone who blocked his way to the throne.

In fact, Richard III's accession to the throne was a group responsibility. Noblemen, clergy, and commoners supported Richard because they didn't want to relive the misgovernment of Henry VI's reign. Richard was the most qualified adult male to succede to a throne that was vacant because of Edward IV's bad decisions.

In fact, Henry Tudor has more in common with Shakespeare's caracature of the ruthless outsider than Richard ever did.

The day when facts replace Tudor and Shakesperean fictions can't come too soon for me.

Marion

--- In , "EileenB" wrote:
>
> I guess it's down to perception...two people might look at the very same situation and yet come up with two completely different perceptions of it...
>
> My perception of it was that Richard was catapulted into a set of circumstances in which made it extremely hard going for him. Couple that with the cupidity of the nobles who surrounded him, who could change their colours at the mere drop of a hat, add to that perhaps Richard lacked the ruthlessness that perhaps you needed to survive in those days, throw in the inflammatory mix of two very devious schemers, MB and JM and the not insignificant fact that Richard had no heir....and Pow. Perhaps even with all this to contend with Richard could have come through and proved to later generations his great worth as a king if only he had survived the melee of the battle to get to Weasle and cave his head in. But there you go...Fate....I think we all know as adults that life is not fair...Eileen
>
>
> --- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
> >
> > Before I start, let me assure you I am a firm Richardian and have been for very many years.  I think Richard was a most worthy Prince and, given time, would have been a good King.  From what we know of his character, he was honourable and just and '...a bonny lad....'
> >
> > However, we have to admit that Richard failed as king.  His reign was short, with only a single parliament.  He was defeated and killed in battle and thus effectively ended his own Royal House.  There may be many reasons as to why it happened, but we cannot pretend it didn't happen.  One of the prime duties of a king is to hang on to his crown, his country and perpetuate his royal line.  In that sense, H7 was a successful king if a rather unlikeable man..
> >
> > So, apart from the use of rather OTT language, Starkey is essentially correct.  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  Ishita Bandyo wrote:
> >
> >  
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.

~Weds


--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 

Love it. You may have hit on something there



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:30
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 

To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.

~Weds

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 

Wednesday, that is brilliant!  (Maybe he's not Margaret Beaufort reincarnated - my pet theory -  maybe he's Elizabeth of York, miffed because Richard told the world he had no intention of marrying HER?  :-)



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:30
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 
To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.

~Weds

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 

Richard drives people wild!!!

On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.

--- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 
>

That's it! You've ended the week on a great note.  Off to work tomorrow and back no doubt to hundreds of emails. He's certainly causing a bit of a stir - and I don't mean Starkey.



________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:55
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

Wednesday, that is brilliant!  (Maybe he's not Margaret Beaufort reincarnated - my pet theory -  maybe he's Elizabeth of York, miffed because Richard told the world he had no intention of marrying HER?  :-)

________________________________
From: wednesday_mc mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:30
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 
To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.

~Weds

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 

[Nodding sagely.] Internalized Ricophobia.

--- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the desired turned into the despised.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue. Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly when you get to Henry VIII and his victims.  H 
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!" Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III. He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father. Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see him for what he is - a man with strange values 
>

As someone whose resemblance to Elizabeth of York is something of a point of
pride, I take offense :p




________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: ""
<>
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 5:55:54 PM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard


Wednesday, that is brilliant! (Maybe he's not Margaret Beaufort reincarnated -
my pet theory - maybe he's Elizabeth of York, miffed because Richard told the
world he had no intention of marrying HER? :-)

________________________________
From: wednesday_mc wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:30
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the
desired turned into the despised.


~Weds

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks
>he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the
>Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue.
>Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly
>when you get to Henry VIII and his victims. HÂ
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>Richard
>
>
> Â
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of
>Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a
>complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the
>piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of
>the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For
>me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to
>me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!"
>Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III.
>He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with
>France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made
>of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father.
>Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see
>him for what he is - a man with strange valuesÂ

Well Megan, I don't think it was her looks Richard had the issue with, he just didn't want the mother in law from hell  ....



________________________________
From: Megan Lerseth <megan_phntmgrl@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 23:09
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 
As someone whose resemblance to Elizabeth of York is something of a point of
pride, I take offense :p

________________________________
From: liz williams mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com"
mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 5:55:54 PM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard

Wednesday, that is brilliant! (Maybe he's not Margaret Beaufort reincarnated -
my pet theory - maybe he's Elizabeth of York, miffed because Richard told the
world he had no intention of marrying HER? :-)

________________________________
From: wednesday_mc mailto:wednesday.mac%40gmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 22:30
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard

To me, Starkey behaves as if Richard somehow refused his advances, so the
desired turned into the despised.

~Weds

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> Couldn't agree more. He just doesn't know when to shut up. Perhaps he thinks
>he's a 'celebrity'. And as you say he actually denegrates scholarship of the
>Tudors, which is sad in its way because a more balanced view is long overdue.
>Some of the Tudor websites are, believe it or not, pro-Ricardian, particularly
>when you get to Henry VIII and his victims. HÂ
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013, 14:48
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>Richard
>
>
> Â
>
> Casting aside for one moment Dr Starkey's almost palpable hatred of
>Richard...how strange for a Historian?...he simply comes across to me as a
>complete Prima Donna...His new comments about Richard sound to me like the
>piqued response of a small but outraged toddler who has thrown its toys out of
>the pram. How Dr Starkey acts when he has lost his shopping list I know not. For
>me, even if I admired the Tudors, this gentleman would lack credibility to
>me..Im sorry...the more I hear of him the more I just think...'What a Plonker!"
>Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones wrote:
> >
> > And Starkey's measure of the perfect medieval king was, I recall, Edward III.
>He was lucky enough to live for a long time, wage a successful (?) war with
>France, father a load of kids , have a mistress etc etc. Little mention was made
>of the fact that Edward possibly condoned the horrible murder of his own father.
>Dr Starkey has strange values, but luckily, I think the great British public see
>him for what he is - a man with strange valuesÂ

Marion wrote:

> I don't post much, but I feel strongly about this. The Tudors and Shakespeare created a caracature of a loner who ruthlessly murdered anyone who blocked his way to the throne.
>
> In fact, Richard III's accession to the throne was a group responsibility. Noblemen, clergy, and commoners supported Richard because they didn't want to relive the misgovernment of Henry VI's reign. Richard was the most qualified adult male to succede to a throne that was vacant because of Edward IV's bad decisions.
>
> In fact, Henry Tudor has more in common with Shakespeare's caracature of the ruthless outsider than Richard ever did.
>
> The day when facts replace Tudor and Shakesperean fictions can't come too soon for me.


Carol responds:

Unusually for me, I don't have anything to add, but I was nodding my head as I read this post. Just wanted you to know that I agree with you, and I suspect that many other members of the forum do, too.

Carol

RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?

WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?

~Weds


--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Richard drives people wild!!!
>
> On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.

Would that he had lived in the time of the Internet. He'd probably have had a
bigger pack of besotted fangirls than Edward.




________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 7:25:44 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over
there?

WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
about your book collection?


~Weds

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Richard drives people wild!!!
>
> On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses
>were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on
>people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women
>(and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.

RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!

--- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
>
> WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> >
> > Richard drives people wild!!!
> >
> > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
>

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:

> Would that he had lived in the time of the Internet.

He does now.

> He'd probably have had a bigger pack of besotted fangirls than Edward.

Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::

~Weds

I've already seen it happening and I'm powerless to stop it. (I've also seen the
phrase "Looks like I have another hot misfit to crush on!" tagged #richard iii
#loki #sherlock #british babes.)

I shouldn't judge; I wrote self-insert Ricardian fanfiction when I was 16 or 17,
but that was years ago and is still embarrassing in retrospect. Seeing that kind
of thing blossoming all over the rest of the internet now is somewhere between
bittersweet and cringey.





________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 7:56:21 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:

> Would that he had lived in the time of the Internet.

He does now.

> He'd probably have had a bigger pack of besotted fangirls than Edward.

Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::

~Weds

[Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
> >
> > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > >
> > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> >
>

Hmmm...in a bad mood are we tonight?

--- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
>
> [Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...
>
> --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> > >
> > > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
> > >
> > > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > > >
> > > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> > >
> >
>

[Laughing.] I was thinking of an old Steve Martin joke.

"Well, I'll be hog-tied!" she said.

"You will?" he exclaimed.

And it was a wonderful Christmas after all.

(Completely indefensible. Yes. Awful, horrible joke. I still laugh at it 'cause I'm like that.)

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Hmmm...in a bad mood are we tonight?
>
> --- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
> >
> > [Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
> > >
> > > --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
> > > >
> > > > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Oh God, it's like the huge numbers of Les Misérables readers who didn't realize
"Patria" is Latin for "fatherland" and not an actual girl's name.



________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net <mcjohn@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 8:51:01 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


[Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not
make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just
>over there?
> >
> > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
>quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
>about your book collection?
>
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > >
> > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his
>mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he
>had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving
>women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> >
>

Wednesday wrote:

> Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
>
Carol responds:

Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first century." Helllp.

Carol

Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.





________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


Wednesday wrote:

> Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
>
Carol responds:

Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her
rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
century." Helllp.

Carol

Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...


________________________________
From: Megan Lerseth <megan_phntmgrl@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 
Oh God, it's like the huge numbers of Les Misérables readers who didn't realize
"Patria" is Latin for "fatherland" and not an actual girl's name.

________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net mcjohn@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 8:51:01 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard

[Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not
make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just
>over there?
> >
> > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
>quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
>about your book collection?
>
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > >
> > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his
>mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he
>had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving
>women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> >
>

Basically, Enjolras, the revolutionary leader, indicates "Patria" as the name of
his mistress.




________________________________
From: Aidan Donnelly <aidan.donnelly@...>
To: ""
<>
Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 12:00:50 AM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard




Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...

________________________________
From: Megan Lerseth megan_phntmgrl@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard



Oh God, it's like the huge numbers of Les Misérables readers who didn't realize
"Patria" is Latin for "fatherland" and not an actual girl's name.

________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net mcjohn@...>
To:
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 8:51:01 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard

[Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not
make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just
>over there?
> >
> > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
>
>quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
>about your book collection?
>
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > >
> > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his
>mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he

>had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving
>women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> >
>

What do we want?
Time Travel!!
When do we want it?
It's irrelevant !!

Sorry- couldn't resist  )



________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 
Wednesday wrote:

> Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
>
Carol responds:

Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first century." Helllp.

Carol

Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...

Carol responds:

Or so Richard may have thought. Unfortunately, his death didn't help his country!

Just out of curiosity, Aidan, are you British or American? I'm guessing American for some reason. (I'm from Arizona.)

Carol

I am umm 'complicated' lol

My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the same)
My Mother was born here in Perth, West Australia, her parents were from Sussex and her dad descended from a Norman (I dislike the Normans intensely which is a bit bothersome:)
My parents met and married while serving in the forces in WWII and all 5 of us kids were born in Liverpool.
So I am British by birth, Australian and Irish by descent

I may slip in an Americanism here and there, that's because I am married to a lovely lady from Des Moines, Iowa

The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by this starkly terrible poem from World War One:

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge. 

Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots(the sound made by artillery shells flying through the air)
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines (artillery shells) that dropped behind.

Gas!Gas! Quick, boys!  An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime. . .
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning. 

In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning. 

If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.

Wilfred Owen -  killed in action on 4 November 1918 - one week before the armistice

Sorry if that's a bit nasty, but so was that (and I suppose any) war



________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...

Carol responds:

Or so Richard may have thought. Unfortunately, his death didn't help his country!

Just out of curiosity, Aidan, are you British or American? I'm guessing American for some reason. (I'm from Arizona.)

Carol

Hello Aiden - I'm an ex-pat in Nova Scotia (last 4 years) but from The
Wirral - close to Liverpool - so I get your sense of humour! LOL
Still have a John Lennon accent?!
Lisa

On 9 February 2013 02:31, Aidan Donnelly <aidan.donnelly@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I am umm 'complicated' lol
>
> My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial
> High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the
> same)
> My Mother was born here in Perth, West Australia, her parents were from
> Sussex and her dad descended from a Norman (I dislike the Normans intensely
> which is a bit bothersome:)
> My parents met and married while serving in the forces in WWII and all 5
> of us kids were born in Liverpool.
> So I am British by birth, Australian and Irish by descent
>
> I may slip in an Americanism here and there, that's because I am married
> to a lovely lady from Des Moines, Iowa
>
> The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by
> this starkly terrible poem from World War One:
>
> Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
> Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
> Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
> And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
>
> Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
> But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
> Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots(the sound made by artillery
> shells flying through the air)
> Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines (artillery shells) that dropped behind.
>
> Gas!Gas! Quick, boys! ý An ecstasy of fumbling,
> Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
> But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
> And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime. . .
> Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
> As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
>
> In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
> He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
>
> If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
> Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
> And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
> His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
> If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
> Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
> Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
> Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
> My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
> To children ardent for some desperate glory,
> The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
> Pro patria mori.
>
> Wilfred Owen - killed in action on 4 November 1918 - one week before the
> armistice
>
> Sorry if that's a bit nasty, but so was that (and I suppose any) war
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 1:54 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
>
>
> Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> >
> > Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Or so Richard may have thought. Unfortunately, his death didn't help his
> country!
>
> Just out of curiosity, Aidan, are you British or American? I'm guessing
> American for some reason. (I'm from Arizona.)
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>



--
Lisa
The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329

www.Antiques-Boutique.com <http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.108554399176307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f>

I was born in Walton - a couple streets over from Paul McC's parents apparently (they were one year away from forming 'the quarrymen' then)

But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old and then to Bristol when I was eight
which is when I got myself stuck with a 'Bristle' accent which wont go away entirely - lol
But the humour was definately passed along (and Aussie humour is very similar)


Cold enough up there Lisa ? here it's 30c with the fan going, I would run the airco but we
pay 23c per kw/h now so sweating is cheaper



________________________________
From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

Hello Aiden - I'm an ex-pat in Nova Scotia (last 4 years) but from The
Wirral - close to Liverpool - so I get your sense of humour! LOL
Still have a John Lennon accent?!
Lisa

On 9 February 2013 02:31, Aidan Donnelly <aidan.donnelly@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I am umm 'complicated' lol
>
> My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial
> High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the
> same)
> My Mother was born here in Perth, West Australia, her parents were from
> Sussex and her dad descended from a Norman (I dislike the Normans intensely
> which is a bit bothersome:)
> My parents met and married while serving in the forces in WWII and all 5
> of us kids were born in Liverpool.
> So I am British by birth, Australian and Irish by descent
>
> I may slip in an Americanism here and there, that's because I am married
> to a lovely lady from Des Moines, Iowa
>
> The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by
> this starkly terrible poem from World War One:
>
> Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
> Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
> Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
> And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
>
> Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
> But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
> Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots(the sound made by artillery
> shells flying through the air)
> Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines (artillery shells) that dropped behind.
>
> Gas!Gas! Quick, boys!  An ecstasy of fumbling,
> Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
> But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
> And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime. . .
> Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
> As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
>
> In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
> He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
>
> If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
> Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
> And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
> His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
> If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
> Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
> Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
> Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
> My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
> To children ardent for some desperate glory,
> The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
> Pro patria mori.
>
> Wilfred Owen -  killed in action on 4 November 1918 - one week before the
> armistice
>
> Sorry if that's a bit nasty, but so was that (and I suppose any) war
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 1:54 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
>
>
> Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> >
> > Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Or so Richard may have thought. Unfortunately, his death didn't help his
> country!
>
> Just out of curiosity, Aidan, are you British or American? I'm guessing
> American for some reason. (I'm from Arizona.)
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> 
>



--
Lisa
The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329

www.Antiques-Boutique.com <http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.108554399176307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f>






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

Yahoo! Groups Links

"--- In , Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> I am umm 'complicated' lol
>
> My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the same)"

Snap - I obviously don't have the y chromosone to prove it, but my maternal grandmother was an O'Donnell.
Marie

Snap indeed. Though despite the similarity of the name (in English anyway) the O'Donnell's and the Donnelly's
are seperate, but closely related, septs of the O'Neill clan




________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 


"--- In , Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> I am umm 'complicated' lol
>
> My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the same)"

Snap - I obviously don't have the y chromosone to prove it, but my maternal grandmother was an O'Donnell.
Marie

[Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise never, ever, ever to do it again?

(Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67
> To:
> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
> her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her
> rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Snickering.] Those French people. Look how they spell "Patricia"!

[Ducks as expendable copies of Weir and Gregory fly through the air.]

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Basically, Enjolras, the revolutionary leader, indicates "Patria" as the name of
> his mistress.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Aidan Donnelly
> To: ""
>
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 12:00:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
>
>
> Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...
>
> ________________________________
> From: Megan Lerseth megan_phntmgrl@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 10:57 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
>
> Oh God, it's like the huge numbers of Les Misérables readers who didn't realize
> "Patria" is Latin for "fatherland" and not an actual girl's name.
>
> ________________________________
> From: mcjohn_wt_net mcjohn@...>
> To:
> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 8:51:01 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
> [Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not
> make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...
>
> --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> > >
> > > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just
> >over there?
> > >
> > > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
> >
> >quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
> >about your book collection?
> >
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > > >
> > > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his
> >mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he
>
> >had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving
> >women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Scribbling.] Oh, great! Another cheer for the Sartain Squadron! Now all we need is those sweater vests with the Gloucester boar and the wellies with the coat of arms and we'll be all set!

--- In , Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> What do we want?
> Time Travel!!
> When do we want it?
> It's irrelevant !!
>
> Sorry- couldn't resist  )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
>  
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

That was my first reaction when I read your post, not very professional remarks. As for a " villains corner " in Westminster Abbey it already has one it is known as the Henry VII Chapel. Unfortunately for Elizabeth of York she is buried there too.

Ishita, I would not worry too much David Starkey and Simon Schama have been feted by the BBC and I believe Channel 4 for years. They are probably terrified that their hold over the British people's perception of WOTR will be broken. That is why they are trying to get in first with their comments. As for Schama if I remember correctly, when he did a programme, I think it was called The History of Britain, he completely ignored the WOTR.

I don't pretend to know everything about Richard's reign but from the evidence that we do have I realised, when I read those comments in the Standard, that Starkey obviously has no knowledge at all, he has obviously listened to More, Vergil et al. It takes hard work to do what John Ashdown Hill has done and it has taken him years to research his findings. Starkey obviously favours making a quick buck by trotting out all the traditionalist nonsense.

--- In , Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> I still can't believe the unprofessionalism of it!!! What an ass!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Johanne Tournier wrote:
>
> > In Britain I think they would say, “Don’t get your knickers in a twist,” Ishita. I know it’s hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he’s (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn’t he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? “What a maroon!” to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@...
> >
> > or jltournier@...
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
> >
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Aidan Donnelly wrote:

> [snip]
> The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by this starkly terrible poem from World War One:

Carol responds:

Hi, Aidan. I'm familiar with the Wilfred Owen poem, but I was responding to the line quoted out of context and took it at face value. I wonder how Richard would have felt about it. He was an idealist who believed in chivalry, yet he knew all too well the horrors of war from a young age thanks to Margaret of Anjou.

You said that you're "a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial High
King of Ireland. My maternal grandmother was an O'Neill, so I like to think that her ancestry (and mine) also traces back to the Irish high kings. If so, we could be very distantly related! (OTOH, my confirmed ancestors are somewhat more notorious, including a Salem "witch" and her executioner husband.)

Carol

Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
Richard/Lovell.



________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net <mcjohn@...>
To:
Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


[Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
never, ever, ever to do it again?

(Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67
> To:
> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
>
> her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her

> rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

Lovell was gay?

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> Richard/Lovell.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mcjohn_wt_net
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
> never, ever, ever to do it again?
>
> (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
> she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67
> > To:
> > Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > Wednesday wrote:
> >
> > > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> > >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
> >
> > her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her
>
> > rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> > century." Helllp.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
Richard/Lovell.



________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net <mcjohn@...>
To:
Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


[Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
never, ever, ever to do it again?

(Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67
> To:
> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
>
> her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her

> rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

First rule of fanfiction: everyone is gay if it allows you to write the story.




________________________________
From: mairemulholland <mairemulholland@...>
To:
Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 10:10:40 AM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


Lovell was gay?

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> Richard/Lovell.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mcjohn_wt_net
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise

> never, ever, ever to do it again?
>
> (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
>
> she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67
> > To:
> > Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > Wednesday wrote:
> >
> > > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> > >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and
>uses
>
> >
> > her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry
>her
>
>
> > rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> > century." Helllp.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

If you are descended from an O'Neil then we are almost without doubt related, distant though it might be, such is the joy of clans and septs :)

Yes, I believe Richard was a chivalrous man and acted that way, and that would explain his leniency to Stanly, Margaret Beaufort and Jane Swynford too.

Which of course lead to his downfall in an age that had become markedly more ruthless


________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 
Aidan Donnelly wrote:

> [snip]
> The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by this starkly terrible poem from World War One:

Carol responds:

Hi, Aidan. I'm familiar with the Wilfred Owen poem, but I was responding to the line quoted out of context and took it at face value. I wonder how Richard would have felt about it. He was an idealist who believed in chivalry, yet he knew all too well the horrors of war from a young age thanks to Margaret of Anjou.

You said that you're "a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial High
King of Ireland. My maternal grandmother was an O'Neill, so I like to think that her ancestry (and mine) also traces back to the Irish high kings. If so, we could be very distantly related! (OTOH, my confirmed ancestors are somewhat more notorious, including a Salem "witch" and her executioner husband.)

Carol

Aidan Donnelly wrote:

[snip]
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]

Carol responds:

So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?

Carol

Oh, hey. My people!

As a lesbian writer of fanfic, perhaps I may interject here just for a second with a VASTLY oversimplified take on the matter. The modern division of the spectrum of human sexuality into "gay" and "straight" dates from the late 19th century, and seems to have been invented pretty much to slang advocates of women's suffrage as unnatural creatures who wanted to be men (really).

Fan fiction is a way of reclaiming the imagery of popular entertainment (and, we see now, history) to tell stories that have been left out of the discussion up until now. The Web is a terrific place for this reclamation, and various communities of interest have taken it up: Christians, African-Americans, the differently abled, LGBTs, goths, Native and aboriginal peoples, and on and on and on. Fiction is no longer something printed between the covers of a book, nor is it always about stereotypical men in love with stereotypical women of a light complexion and a healthy bank balance.

Naturally, there's some resentment of the playground being opened up to Those People (in line with the erroneous notion that for me to win, you have to lose), and part of it is the somewhat truthful, somewhat facetious comment that all fanfic is a hash of badly-written, improbable mashups between characters whose same-sex desires are explored in full. That fiction is now accessible to all means that the explosive volume of fiction you see on the Web won't be carefully edited by professionals; it's just going to look rough compared to what we're used to. Web-published fiction is barely a decade and a half old. Give it time and the true artists will emerge from the pack.

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> First rule of fanfiction: everyone is gay if it allows you to write the story.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mairemulholland
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 10:10:40 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Lovell was gay?
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> > him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> > Richard/Lovell.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: mcjohn_wt_net
> > To:
> > Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
>
> > never, ever, ever to do it again?
> >
> > (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
> >
> > she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
> >
> > --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> > >
> > > Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Wednesday wrote:
> > >
> > > > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> > > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and
> >uses
> >
> > >
> > > her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry
> >her
> >
> >
> > > rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> > > century." Helllp.
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour Lancaster and
York' telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).

yup know Walton. Sister went to school with Pauls step sister (thats my
slim claim to fame!)
We are on the tail end of the huge storm hitting NY so we have a mild minus
3 at lunchtime...! More to come later - what fun - at least I have the
forum & Internet to keep me going!!

TTFN

On 9 February 2013 03:03, Aidan Donnelly <aidan.donnelly@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I was born in Walton - a couple streets over from Paul McC's parents
> apparently (they were one year away from forming 'the quarrymen' then)
>
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old and then to
> Bristol when I was eight
> which is when I got myself stuck with a 'Bristle' accent which wont go
> away entirely - lol
> But the humour was definately passed along (and Aussie humour is very
> similar)
>
> Cold enough up there Lisa ? here it's 30c with the fan going, I would run
> the airco but we
> pay 23c per kw/h now so sweating is cheaper
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" lisa.holtjones@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 2:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his
> comments about Richard
>
> Hello Aiden - I'm an ex-pat in Nova Scotia (last 4 years) but from The
> Wirral - close to Liverpool - so I get your sense of humour! LOL
> Still have a John Lennon accent?!
> Lisa
>
> On 9 February 2013 02:31, Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I am umm 'complicated' lol
> >
> > My paternal ancestry is Irish (I am a hundredsumthing descendant of Nial
> > High King of Ireland (big whoop there are tens of thousands can say the
> > same)
> > My Mother was born here in Perth, West Australia, her parents were from
> > Sussex and her dad descended from a Norman (I dislike the Normans
> intensely
> > which is a bit bothersome:)
> > My parents met and married while serving in the forces in WWII and all 5
> > of us kids were born in Liverpool.
> > So I am British by birth, Australian and Irish by descent
> >
> > I may slip in an Americanism here and there, that's because I am married
> > to a lovely lady from Des Moines, Iowa
> >
> > The Dulce quote is actually from an ode by Horace but made more famous by
> > this starkly terrible poem from World War One:
> >
> > Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
> > Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
> > Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
> > And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
> >
> > Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
> > But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
> > Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots(the sound made by artillery
> > shells flying through the air)
> > Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines (artillery shells) that dropped behind.
> >
> > Gas!Gas! Quick, boys! ý An ecstasy of fumbling,
> > Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
> > But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
> > And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime. . .
> > Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
> > As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
> >
> > In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
> > He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
> >
> > If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
> > Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
> > And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
> > His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
> > If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
> > Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
> > Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
> > Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
> > My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
> > To children ardent for some desperate glory,
> > The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
> > Pro patria mori.
> >
> > Wilfred Owen - killed in action on 4 November 1918 - one week before the
> > armistice
> >
> > Sorry if that's a bit nasty, but so was that (and I suppose any) war
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@...>
> > To:
> > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 1:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > about Richard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > >
> > > Dulce et decorum est, pro Patria Mori...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > Or so Richard may have thought. Unfortunately, his death didn't help his
> > country!
> >
> > Just out of curiosity, Aidan, are you British or American? I'm guessing
> > American for some reason. (I'm from Arizona.)
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Lisa
> The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
> Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
> Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329
>
> www.Antiques-Boutique.com http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
> Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
> View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
>
> https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.108554399176307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>



--
Lisa
The Antiques Boutique & Ceramic Restoration/Conservation Services
Baddeck, Nova Scotia.
Tel: 902 295 9013 / 1329

www.Antiques-Boutique.com <http://www.antiques-boutique.com/>
Like us on *www.facebook.com/TheAntiquesBoutique*
View our Ceramic Restoration Photos
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398988066799604.100100.108554399176307&type=1&l=cd560aff9f>

You would have to pay ME (more than that too) to join it.   She's certainly happy to make a lot of money out of him isn't she?
 
On a separate note, why doesn't Michael Wood have his own travel company?  :-)


________________________________
From: Pamela Furmidge <pamela.furmidge@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 15:56
Subject: Oh Dear Lord........

 
Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour Lancaster and
York' telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).

[Poker-faced.] Got too tired of ladies of a certain age asking him to wear jeans on the cathedral tour.

--- In , liz williams wrote:
>
> You would have to pay ME (more than that too) to join it.   She's certainly happy to make a lot of money out of him isn't she?
>  
> On a separate note, why doesn't Michael Wood have his own travel company?  :-)
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Furmidge
> To: ""
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 15:56
> Subject: Oh Dear Lord........
>
>  
> Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour ‘Lancaster and
> York’ telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
> 16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I assume that 20min is spent on History the rest in tea rooms or book signing
G

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:20 AM, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:

> You would have to pay ME (more than that too) to join it. She's certainly happy to make a lot of money out of him isn't she?
>
> On a separate note, why doesn't Michael Wood have his own travel company? :-)
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Furmidge pamela.furmidge@...>
> To: "" >
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 15:56
> Subject: Oh Dear Lord........
>
>
> Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour Lancaster and
> York' telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
> 16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).
>
>
>
>
>
>

Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield, taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I believe ?


York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes over York's city gates

Edmund was only 17 I think



________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 
Aidan Donnelly wrote:

[snip]
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]

Carol responds:

So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?

Carol

Hi, All 

Someone a while ago asked for info on the Tour of Ricadian Britain which is being accompanied by Sharon Kay Penman. Here is the description on the website. Of course the tour has been fully booked since a few days after they first advertised it. We are supposed to get a briefing in person from Richard Buckley and Philippa Langley at Leicester and Phil Stone at the Tower. I hope somehow or other they might be able to shoehorn J A-H in as well.



http://www.academic-travel.com/region-country/europe/in-the-footsteps-of-king-richard-iii/



A tinyurl 



http://tinyurl.com/a6ejx2o



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne



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

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

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Pamela Furmidge
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 11:56 AM
To:
Subject: Oh Dear Lord........





Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour Lancaster and
York' telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).

Really, it is sad that so few are well educated. And, it doesn't necessarily mean at grand and posh schools. I was an English teacher at an inner city middle school with a lot of poverty and problems. But, by God, I had my kids read the classics, and/or read it to them. Those kids are now in their 50's and I keep in touch. Quite a few actually remember that. But in the thirty plus years since I taught, school standards in the US have become appalling. Grammar is simply not taught, and the classics, poof, gone..... even if they were Tudor propaganda, and Dickens' view of the French Revolution.

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Megan Lerseth
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 8:58 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard



Oh God, it's like the huge numbers of Les Misérables readers who didn't realize
"Patria" is Latin for "fatherland" and not an actual girl's name.

________________________________
From: mcjohn_wt_net mcjohn@...<mailto:mcjohn%40oplink.net>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 8:51:01 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard

[Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not
make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
>
> --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just
>over there?
> >
> > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your
>quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk
>about your book collection?
>
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > >
> > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his
>mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he
>had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving
>women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
> >
>

Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
countess of Salisbury.

Karen

From: Aidan Donnelly <aidan.donnelly@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
To: ""
<>
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard






Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
believe ?

York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
over York's city gates

Edmund was only 17 I think

________________________________
From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... <mailto:justcarol67%40yahoo.com> >
To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard



Aidan Donnelly wrote:

[snip]
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]

Carol responds:

So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?

Carol

Hi, Aidan 



Welcome to the Forum, btw.



You've got the basics correct as I remember them. Apparently the Duke of York (who was the chief peer of the realm at the time and of course had a better claim than the Lancastrians) had been named heir to Henry VI. That would have disinherited his son Edward of Lancaster, of course. Perhaps the Duke of York eventually felt that the Lancastrians were reneging on the promise. The Duke did some overt act like approaching the throne and putting his hand on it (it was unoccupied at the time) as if to claim it for his own. Sometime later he and Edmund, his second son, were at Sandal castle. Edward was off near the Welsh marches, I think. A foraging party went out from Sandal to do what foraging parties do, apparently, and was caught in an ambush by the Lancastrians. York, Rutland and about 500 supporters went out to save the foragers and most were slaughtered. Rutland was caught on the bridge, unarmed, and asked for quarter, and Clifford stabbed him to death. Yes, he was only 17, and Richard was only 7 or 8 at the time.



What bothers me is that historians like David Baldwin use this to justify alleged brutality on the part of Richard as an adult. However, the early years of Richard seem to have been rather idyllic. I believe his essential decency had been inculcated in him as a youngster and therefore, while the losses that he suffered would indeed have been shocks to his system, they didn't change the essential person that he was.



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne



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

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

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Aidan Donnelly
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:29 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard





Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield, taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I believe ?

York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes over York's city gates

Edmund was only 17 I think

________________________________
From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... <mailto:justcarol67%40yahoo.com> >
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard



Aidan Donnelly wrote:

[snip]
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]

Carol responds:

So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?

Carol

One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg

http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541

George



Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...> wrote:

> Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> countess of Salisbury.
>
> Karen
>
> From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...>
> Reply-To: >
> Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> To: ""
> >
> Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
> Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> believe ?
>
> York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> over York's city gates
>
> Edmund was only 17 I think
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... >
> To:
>
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
> Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
>
> Carol responds:
>
> So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

An alternate view of Wakefield has York betrayed in the field by Robert
Nevill, who arrived offering support then changed sides when the Lancastrian
army engaged. There's an article from an old Ricardian by (iirc) Dockray as
well as a rather good book by Helen Cox.

Karen

From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:50:12 -0400
To: <>
Subject: RE: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard






Hi, Aidan ­

Welcome to the Forum, btw.

You¹ve got the basics correct as I remember them. Apparently the Duke of
York (who was the chief peer of the realm at the time and of course had a
better claim than the Lancastrians) had been named heir to Henry VI. That
would have disinherited his ³son² Edward of Lancaster, of course. Perhaps
the Duke of York eventually felt that the Lancastrians were reneging on the
promise. The Duke did some overt act like approaching the throne and putting
his hand on it (it was unoccupied at the time) as if to claim it for his
own. Sometime later he and Edmund, his second son, were at Sandal castle.
Edward was off near the Welsh marches, I think. A foraging party went out
from Sandal to do what foraging parties do, apparently, and was caught in an
ambush by the Lancastrians. York, Rutland and about 500 supporters went out
to save the foragers and most were slaughtered. Rutland was caught on the
bridge, unarmed, and asked for quarter, and Clifford stabbed him to death.
Yes, he was only 17, and Richard was only 7 or 8 at the time.

What bothers me is that historians like David Baldwin use this to justify
alleged brutality on the part of Richard as an adult. However, the early
years of Richard seem to have been rather idyllic. I believe his essential
decency had been inculcated in him as a youngster and therefore, while the
losses that he suffered would indeed have been shocks to his system, they
didn¹t change the essential person that he was.

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - jltournier60@... <mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>

or jltournier@... <mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv>

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Aidan
Donnelly
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:29 PM
To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard

Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
believe ?

York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
over York's city gates

Edmund was only 17 I think

________________________________
From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... <mailto:justcarol67%40yahoo.com> >
To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard

Aidan Donnelly wrote:

[snip]
> But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]

Carol responds:

So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?

Carol

I shall do my best to find a source. I think, at my Sartain age, a longer knee length skirt would be for the best - for everyone!!! I am not tubby, but no two ways about it, I am pear shaped and things are rapidly settling!

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of mcjohn_wt_net
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 8:28 AM
To:
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard



[Scribbling.] Oh, great! Another cheer for the Sartain Squadron! Now all we need is those sweater vests with the Gloucester boar and the wellies with the coat of arms and we'll be all set!

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Aidan Donnelly wrote:
>
> What do we want?
> Time Travel!!
> When do we want it?
> It's irrelevant !!
>
> Sorry- couldn't resist )
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
>
> Â
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>

I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.

Angela

--- In , George Butterfield wrote:
>
> One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
>
> http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
>
> George
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
>
> > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > countess of Salisbury.
> >
> > Karen
> >
> > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...>
> > Reply-To: >
> > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > To: ""
> > >
> > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > about Richard
> >
> > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > believe ?
> >
> > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > over York's city gates
> >
> > Edmund was only 17 I think
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... >
> > To:
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > about Richard
> >
> >
> > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" <amertzanis@...> wrote:

> I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
>
> Angela
>
> --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> >
> > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> >
> > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> >
> > George
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> >
> > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > countess of Salisbury.
> > >
> > > Karen
> > >
> > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...>
> > > Reply-To: >
> > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > To: ""
> > > >
> > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > about Richard
> > >
> > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > believe ?
> > >
> > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > over York's city gates
> > >
> > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... >
> > > To:
> > >
> > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > about Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:37 PM, George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:

> I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
> My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" amertzanis@...> wrote:
>
> > I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
> >
> > Angela
> >
> > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> > >
> > > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> > >
> > > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > > countess of Salisbury.
> > > >
> > > > Karen
> > > >
> > > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...>
> > > > Reply-To: >
> > > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > > To: ""
> > > > >
> > > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > > believe ?
> > > >
> > > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > > over York's city gates
> > > >
> > > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... >
> > > > To:
> > > >
> > > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Carol responds:
> > > >
> > > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > > >
> > > > Carol
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

George
Was it living where you did that brought you to Richard? It was the case for me as I just wanted to find out more about the Battle of Wakefield. According to Philip Haigh's book, the Duke of York haunts the area. I have never seen or heard anything. Shame!

--- In , George Butterfield wrote:
>
> I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
> My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" wrote:
>
> > I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
> >
> > Angela
> >
> > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> > >
> > > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> > >
> > > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > > countess of Salisbury.
> > > >
> > > > Karen
> > > >
> > > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@>
> > > > Reply-To: >
> > > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > > To: ""
> > > > >
> > > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > > believe ?
> > > >
> > > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > > over York's city gates
> > > >
> > > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@ >
> > > > To:
> > > >
> > > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Carol responds:
> > > >
> > > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > > >
> > > > Carol
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

At about $4,000 a pop, I bet there will be more tours!

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Johanne Tournier
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 10:33 AM
To:
Subject: Now this is more like it! (was RE: Oh Dear Lord........)



Hi, All -

Someone a while ago asked for info on the Tour of Ricadian Britain which is being accompanied by Sharon Kay Penman. Here is the description on the website. Of course the tour has been fully booked since a few days after they first advertised it. We are supposed to get a briefing in person from Richard Buckley and Philippa Langley at Leicester and Phil Stone at the Tower. I hope somehow or other they might be able to shoehorn J A-H in as well.

http://www.academic-travel.com/region-country/europe/in-the-footsteps-of-king-richard-iii/

A tinyurl -

http://tinyurl.com/a6ejx2o

Loyaulte me lie,

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - jltournier60@...<mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>

or jltournier@...<mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv>

"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

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

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

From: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Pamela Furmidge
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 11:56 AM
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Oh Dear Lord........

Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour 'Lancaster and
York' telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).

No I think as a Yorkshireman you tend to be stubborn and my Dad had always told me never to believe everything about R3. It's a shame that he( my dad) is no longer with us as he would have enjoyed both this site and last week.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:43 PM, "angela" <amertzanis@...> wrote:

>
> George
> Was it living where you did that brought you to Richard? It was the case for me as I just wanted to find out more about the Battle of Wakefield. According to Philip Haigh's book, the Duke of York haunts the area. I have never seen or heard anything. Shame!
>
> --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> >
> > I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
> > My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
> > George
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
> > >
> > > Angela
> > >
> > > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > > >
> > > > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > > > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> > > >
> > > > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> > > >
> > > > George
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPad
> > > >
> > > > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > > > countess of Salisbury.
> > > > >
> > > > > Karen
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@>
> > > > > Reply-To: >
> > > > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > > > To: ""
> > > > > >
> > > > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > > about Richard
> > > > >
> > > > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > > > believe ?
> > > > >
> > > > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > > > over York's city gates
> > > > >
> > > > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@ >
> > > > > To:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > > about Richard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > Carol responds:
> > > > >
> > > > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > > > >
> > > > > Carol
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

AS if there isn't already enough rubbish out (yes Gregory and Weir I do mean you) just wait for a slew os dreadful film, tv series and books, many of which with Richard as the romantic lead (not that I have a problem with that bit as long as it's done properly)



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 0:56
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 
--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Megan Lerseth wrote:

> Would that he had lived in the time of the Internet.

He does now.

> He'd probably have had a bigger pack of besotted fangirls than Edward.

Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::

~Weds

RICHARD: What is your name, fair maiden?

WANNA-BE LOVER: Constancy.

Is that better?


--- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
>
> [Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...
>
> --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> >
> > RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> > >
> > > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
> > >
> > > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > > >
> > > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.

Hi, Pamela -



Finances are pretty tight now, but I am going to do whatever I can, if I
have to sell my silverware, LOL! Ms. Penman is supposed to read excerpts
from the book at various places along the tour. For example, we will spend 3
nights in York, tour the City including the city walls and the Mickelgate
Bar where the heads were displayed, travel to Middleham, and Ms. Penman is
going to read to us about Anne and Richard at Middleham. Another really
special highlight, besides the ones that I've already mentioned, of which
the tour is going to be jam packed full, we are supposed to have a special
private visit to the Great Hall from Crosby Hall, which was where Richard
Gloucester lived when he was in London after Edward became King.



I feel very fortunate that I was able to get on the Waiting List, because
all the singles were taken. But then they matched people up. I will be
rooming with a lady from Alberta (they matched us because we're both
Canadian). The nice thing - by obliging us in that way, we save $400 - $500
which would have been the charge for the single supplement.



Loyaulte me lie,



Johanne



From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Pamela Bain
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 1:45 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Now this is more like it! (was RE:
Oh Dear Lord........)





At about $4,000 a pop, I bet there will be more tours!

I am so jealous! I wish I could go!
Vickie

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:50 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi, Pamela -
>
> Finances are pretty tight now, but I am going to do whatever I can, if I
> have to sell my silverware, LOL! Ms. Penman is supposed to read excerpts
> from the book at various places along the tour. For example, we will spend 3
> nights in York, tour the City including the city walls and the Mickelgate
> Bar where the heads were displayed, travel to Middleham, and Ms. Penman is
> going to read to us about Anne and Richard at Middleham. Another really
> special highlight, besides the ones that I've already mentioned, of which
> the tour is going to be jam packed full, we are supposed to have a special
> private visit to the Great Hall from Crosby Hall, which was where Richard
> Gloucester lived when he was in London after Edward became King.
>
> I feel very fortunate that I was able to get on the Waiting List, because
> all the singles were taken. But then they matched people up. I will be
> rooming with a lady from Alberta (they matched us because we're both
> Canadian). The nice thing - by obliging us in that way, we save $400 - $500
> which would have been the charge for the single supplement.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of Pamela Bain
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 1:45 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: Now this is more like it! (was RE:
> Oh Dear Lord........)
>
> At about $4,000 a pop, I bet there will be more tours!
>
>
>
>

If we're going to save Richard, I vote for letting Snape save Richard. Especially since "Snape" is a village in North Yorkshire.

~Weds

--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
> Wednesday wrote:
>
> > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first century." Helllp.
>
> Carol
>

Well, that's obvious and inevitable. I should probably stop there.

~Weds

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.

Schama's History of Britain ignored most of Britain, never mind the WOTR.  It was totally anglo-centric.



________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 14:39
Subject: Re: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment

 
That was my first reaction when I read your post, not very professional remarks. As for a " villains corner " in Westminster Abbey it already has one it is known as the Henry VII Chapel. Unfortunately for Elizabeth of York she is buried there too.

Ishita, I would not worry too much David Starkey and Simon Schama have been feted by the BBC and I believe Channel 4 for years. They are probably terrified that their hold over the British people's perception of WOTR will be broken. That is why they are trying to get in first with their comments. As for Schama if I remember correctly, when he did a programme, I think it was called The History of Britain, he completely ignored the WOTR.

I don't pretend to know everything about Richard's reign but from the evidence that we do have I realised, when I read those comments in the Standard, that Starkey obviously has no knowledge at all, he has obviously listened to More, Vergil et al. It takes hard work to do what John Ashdown Hill has done and it has taken him years to research his findings. Starkey obviously favours making a quick buck by trotting out all the traditionalist nonsense.

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Ishita Bandyo wrote:
>
> I still can't believe the unprofessionalism of it!!! What an ass!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Johanne Tournier wrote:
>
> > In Britain I think they would say, Don't get your knickers in a twist, Ishita. I know it's hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he's (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn't he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? What a maroon! to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
> >
> > Loyaulte me lie,
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@...
> >
> > or jltournier@...
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
> >
> > Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains' corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn't make the grade.
> > Full link:
> > http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> > Ishita Bandyo
> > www.ishitabandyo.com
> > www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> > www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Ignore it Marie, the fantasists are at it again!
Paul


On 09/02/2013 15:10, mairemulholland wrote:
> Lovell was gay?
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>> Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
>> him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
>> Richard/Lovell.
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: mcjohn_wt_net
>> To:
>> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
>> never, ever, ever to do it again?
>>
>> (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
>> she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
>>
>> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>>> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: justcarol67
>>> To:
>>> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
>>> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>> Wednesday wrote:
>>>
>>>> Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
>>>>
>>> Carol responds:
>>>
>>> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
>>>
>>> her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her
>>> rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
>>> century." Helllp.
>>>
>>> Carol
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Oh please!
Ridiculous in all aspects.
Paul

On 09/02/2013 15:09, Megan Lerseth wrote:
> Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> Richard/Lovell.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mcjohn_wt_net <mcjohn@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
> never, ever, ever to do it again?
>
> (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
> she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>> Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: justcarol67
>> To:
>> Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> Wednesday wrote:
>>
>>> Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
>>>
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and uses
>>
>> her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry her
>> rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
>> century." Helllp.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

There's a Poet's Corner in Westminster, so I think his highnessness was likely slant/slam--referencing that.

~Weds

--- In , "ricard1an" wrote:
>
> That was my first reaction when I read your post, not very professional remarks. As for a " villains corner " in Westminster Abbey it already has one it is known as the Henry VII Chapel. Unfortunately for Elizabeth of York she is buried there too.

Yes. No. Maybe. Only every other Friday.

Who knows?


--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Lovell was gay?
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> > him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> > Richard/Lovell.

I went there a number of times when it was part of a girls school and
all you had to do was ask nicely. I was always allowed to sit for as
long as I wanted and commune with the past. Wonderful roof!
Then a filthy rich politician bought it and built a Tudor style palace -
yes you read right, a Tudor style palace - attached to it and it became
invites only.
Paul

On 09/02/2013 18:50, Johanne Tournier wrote:
> a special
> private visit to the Great Hall from Crosby Hall, which was where Richard
> Gloucester lived when he was in London after Edward became King.


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Second rule: no pairing is off limits, though some pairings will squick people.


--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> First rule of fanfiction: everyone is gay if it allows you to write the story.
>
> ________________________________
> From: mairemulholland
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 10:10:40 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Lovell was gay?
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with
> > him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> > Richard/Lovell.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: mcjohn_wt_net
> > To:
> > Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they promise
>
> > never, ever, ever to do it again?
> >
> > (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I think
> >
> > she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
> >
> > --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> > >
> > > Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Wednesday wrote:
> > >
> > > > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> > > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and
> >uses
> >
> > >
> > > her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry
> >her
> >
> >
> > > rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> > > century." Helllp.
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Case in point: I just found some Edward IV/Jack Harkness (John Barrowman's
Doctor Who-verse character):

http://archiveofourown.org/works/393520/chapters/646473





________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 2:59:34 PM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
Richard


Second rule: no pairing is off limits, though some pairings will squick people.

--- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
>
> First rule of fanfiction: everyone is gay if it allows you to write the story.
>
> ________________________________
> From: mairemulholland
> To:
> Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 10:10:40 AM
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
> Richard
>
>
> Lovell was gay?
>
> --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> >
> > Admittedly, "Richard was straight and oblivious to Lovell being in love with

> > him" angstfests from Lovell's point of view is more popular than simple
> > Richard/Lovell.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: mcjohn_wt_net
> > To:
> > Sent: Sat, February 9, 2013 9:22:27 AM
> > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about
>
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > [Wincing too.] Can we give them credit for cleverness as long as they
>promise
>
>
> > never, ever, ever to do it again?
> >
> > (Damn skippy. I'd ditch Ron too. But I must put in a word for Joanna: I
>think
>
> >
> > she and Dickon together would be dynamite on roller skates.)
> >
> > --- In , Megan Lerseth wrote:
> > >
> > > Francis Lovell/Richard is already very popular.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Fri, February 8, 2013 11:12:03 PM
> > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
>about
>
> >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Wednesday wrote:
> > >
> > > > Give him another week, and just wait for the fanfiction. ::wince::
> > > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > Oh, no. "A grown-up Hermione Granger Weasley ditches her husband, Ron, and

> >uses
> >
> > >
> > > her Time Turner to save Richard III from his fate, persuading him to marry

> >her
> >
> >
> > > rather than that awful Joanna of Portugal and return to the twenty-first
> > > century." Helllp.
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

I went there too Paul...It was being used as the dining hall...Eileen

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> I went there a number of times when it was part of a girls school and
> all you had to do was ask nicely. I was always allowed to sit for as
> long as I wanted and commune with the past. Wonderful roof!
> Then a filthy rich politician bought it and built a Tudor style palace -
> yes you read right, a Tudor style palace - attached to it and it became
> invites only.
> Paul
>
> On 09/02/2013 18:50, Johanne Tournier wrote:
> > a special
> > private visit to the Great Hall from Crosby Hall, which was where Richard
> > Gloucester lived when he was in London after Edward became King.
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

When did she become an historian?


--- In , Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour ‘Lancaster and
> York’ telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
> 16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).
>
>
>
>

--- In , Johanne Tournier wrote:
>

"> You’ve got the basics correct as I remember them. Apparently the Duke of York (who was the chief peer of the realm at the time and of course had a better claim than the Lancastrians) had been named heir to Henry VI. That would have disinherited his “son” Edward of Lancaster, of course. Perhaps the Duke of York eventually felt that the Lancastrians were reneging on the promise. The Duke did some overt act like approaching the throne and putting his hand on it (it was unoccupied at the time) as if to claim it for his own. Sometime later he and Edmund, his second son, were at Sandal castle. Edward was off near the Welsh marches, I think. A foraging party went out from Sandal to do what foraging parties do, apparently, and was caught in an ambush by the Lancastrians. York, Rutland and about 500 supporters went out to save the foragers and most were slaughtered. Rutland was caught on the bridge, unarmed, and asked for quarter, and Clifford stabbed him to death. Yes, he was only 17, and Richard was only 7 or 8 at the time."


Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about. The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
Marie

[Cracking up.] I am so loving this, you guys!

--- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
>
> RICHARD: What is your name, fair maiden?
>
> WANNA-BE LOVER: Constancy.
>
> Is that better?
>
>
> --- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" wrote:
> >
> > [Gritting teeth.] Do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"... do not make joke about mistress named "Loyaulte"...
> >
> > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > >
> > > RICHARD: Well, loyaltie bind me! Comes up and see my new editions!
> > >
> > > --- In , "wednesday_mc" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > RICHARD: Why are you looking at me when my brother Adonis is standing just over there?
> > > >
> > > > WANNA-BE LOVER: Adonis who? You hold more possibilities and mysteries in your quiet, reserved way than anyone else in the room. Wanna go somewhere and talk about your book collection?
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard drives people wild!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > On a lighter note, I wonder when he was sowing his wild oats, if his mistresses were all going at each other with knives. Did he know the effect he had on people and was he completely bewildered by it? Or did he enjoy driving women (and, apparently, men) crazy? Maire.
>

In her imagination



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 20:27
Subject: Re: Oh Dear Lord........

 
When did she become an historian?

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Pamela Furmidge wrote:
>
> Historian Alison Weir leads an extensive eight-day tour â¬ÜLancaster and
> Yorkâ¬" telling the story of the Wars of the Roses which runs from May
> 16-May 23 from £2,795 per person (alisonweirtours.com).
>
>
>
>

--- In , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
> Has anyone read Helen Cox's book on Wakefield? It's on my 'to read' list but I haven't got round to it yet.

From what I understand she has a slightly different take on what happened.
>
>

>
> Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about. The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
> Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
> Marie
>

No, I must admit I haven't read Helen Cox's book, but I probably should. I think the controversy centres a lot around whether on the day itself York's foraging party was attacked and he came rushing out into a trap to rescue them.
Marie

--- In , "Katherine" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone read Helen Cox's book on Wakefield? It's on my 'to read' list but I haven't got round to it yet.
>
> From what I understand she has a slightly different take on what happened.
> >
> >
>
> >
> > Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about. The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
> > Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
> > Marie
> >
>

I read somewhere - I can't remember where, I've read so much Richard related stuff just lately - someone comparing Richard of York's actions at Wakefield with his son's charge towards Tudor at Bosworth; basically saying that his 'recklessness' was obviously a family trait.

I'm really keen to read the Cox book now to see what she makes of it.



--- In , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
>
> No, I must admit I haven't read Helen Cox's book, but I probably should. I think the controversy centres a lot around whether on the day itself York's foraging party was attacked and he came rushing out into a trap to rescue them.
> Marie
>
> --- In , "Katherine" wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone read Helen Cox's book on Wakefield? It's on my 'to read' list but I haven't got round to it yet.
> >
> > From what I understand she has a slightly different take on what happened.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about. The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
> > > Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
> > > Marie
> > >
> >
>

--- In , "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Lovell was gay?

Carol responds:

Only in the fanfic world. BTW, just in case someone took me seriously, I made up the Richard-Hermione example based on the silly nonsense invented by Harry Potter fans. But I don't want to go there. I think we might want to stay on topic now since we're averaging about five hundred posts a day. Did anyone notice that we've gone from 336 posts for the whole of August (the month that the dig was announced) to 2,250 for the nine days so far of February, with most of them dating from February 4 onward? I think we should probably have some compassion for those who read this forum from their e-mail and are spending a lot of time and energy deleting messages. (For those people, may I suggest at least temporarily switching over to reading your messages on the website?)

Carol, who will try to respond only to on-topic posts from this point until the volume shrinks to something like normal

--- In , Aidan Donnelly wrote:

> If you are descended from an O'Neil then we are almost without doubt related, distant though it might be, such is the joy of clans and septs :)
>
> Yes, I believe Richard was a chivalrous man and acted that way, and that would explain his leniency to Stanly, Margaret Beaufort and Jane Swynford too.
>
> Which of course lead to his downfall in an age that had become markedly more ruthless

Carol responds:

I think you may be confusing "Jane" Shore (real name Elizabeth Lambert; Shore was her married name though the marriage was annulled, ostensibly because the husband was impotent) with Katherine Swynford (Richard's maternal great-grandmother).

There's actually a book about Richard's belief in chivalry leading to his death in battle, David Hipshon's Richard III and the Death of Chivalry. Henry VII, being a "modern" monarch, ended all that, which may be why some historians conveniently mark the end of the Middle Ages in England as August 22, 1485. (That's nonsense, in my view. Tudor borrowed many of his innovations from the Yorkists. He reinstituted "benevolences" (involuntary monetary contributions) after Richard had outlawed them, but most of Richard's legislation is still on the books--reforms predating the "Tudor Renaissance."

What Tudor historians don't understand is that humanism and religious reform and all the rest of it would have come to England in any case and Richard, an enlightened monarch, would have welcomed it. He was not the last medieval monarch nor was Henry VII (or VIII) the first Renaissance one. It doesn't work that way. Change for the most part is gradual, and different aspects of life and culture change at different rates. In many ways, early Tudor England was just a continuation of Yorkist England (only Henry's taxes were higher and he was more concerned to keep the nobles from becoming "overmighty subjects" than in making life better for the people of England.

Regarding your last point, Buck was the first writer to say that Richard was insufficiently ruthless, and many people have pointed out that if he had executed women (Margaret Beaufort) and priests (Morton, Urswick), he would not have fallen at Bosworth and would probably have had a long and successful reign, succeeded by his own dynasty with no Tudor line. But had he done that, he wouldn't be the Richard III that we admire and mourn and there would be no Richard III Society.

Carol

I read mine on my e mail and guess what I've been doing ALL day?  :-) 



________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 23:43
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 


--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Lovell was gay?

Carol responds:

Only in the fanfic world. BTW, just in case someone took me seriously, I made up the Richard-Hermione example based on the silly nonsense invented by Harry Potter fans. But I don't want to go there. I think we might want to stay on topic now since we're averaging about five hundred posts a day. Did anyone notice that we've gone from 336 posts for the whole of August (the month that the dig was announced) to 2,250 for the nine days so far of February, with most of them dating from February 4 onward? I think we should probably have some compassion for those who read this forum from their e-mail and are spending a lot of time and energy deleting messages. (For those people, may I suggest at least temporarily switching over to reading your messages on the website?)

Carol, who will try to respond only to on-topic posts from this point until the volume shrinks to something like normal

George Butterfield wrote:
>
> One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
>
> http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
>
> George

Carol responds:

Someone registered as a Wikipedia editor (Paul?) might want to change the date of the Battle of Wakefield on that first site from 1410 to 1460. As for the hawthorn bush, maybe they have it mixed up with the hawthorn bush on which Sir William Stanley supposedly found Richard's crown? Apparently, the hawthorn bush was a Tudor symbol, but I haven't researched the topic.

Carol

Newmillerdam is just up the road from me. I must go and have a look.


--- In , George Butterfield wrote:
>
> Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> George
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

It is on the side where the sluice is about 1/2 mile to the side of the down stream. As I have not been there since I was 15 you will have to excuse any mistakes. Let me know how you get on
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 7:42 PM, "Katherine" <katherine.michaud@...> wrote:

> Newmillerdam is just up the road from me. I must go and have a look.
>
> --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> >
> > Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> > George
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Another Wakey lass...or at least as good as. Surely this cannot be a coincidence...(said tongue firmly in cheek)

--- In , "Katherine" wrote:
>
> Newmillerdam is just up the road from me. I must go and have a look.
>
>
> --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> >
> > Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> > George
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Yes, I did know, George. I have yet to have a look at the original. Even though I do not believe in the paranormal, there is a theory that ancient stone can give off what happened near it, as a form of recording, if you will. Even if Edmund was not killed in front of it, no doubt some were, as they were cut down fleeing towards Wakefield after the battle.

Angela

--- In , "Katherine" wrote:
>
> Newmillerdam is just up the road from me. I must go and have a look.
>
>
> --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> >
> > Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> > George
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Helen presents the various competing 'theories' and identifies which one she
supports. The book isn't without its flaws, but I do recommend it. We have
so little information on Wakefield and anything that (sensibly) adds to the
discussion is a good thing.

Karen

From: Katherine <katherine.michaud@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 20:55:55 -0000
To: <>
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
about Richard








--- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
> Has anyone read Helen Cox's book on Wakefield? It's on my 'to read' list but I
haven't got round to it yet.

From what I understand she has a slightly different take on what happened.
>
>

>
> Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had
returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the
compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was
not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially
to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted
the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about.
The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of
York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
> Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is
debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being
deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
> Marie
>

No I am not that kind of editor, and really don't have enough time
anyway to spend endlessly correcting the many mistakes on Wikipedia.
Sorry
Paul

On 10/02/2013 00:27, justcarol67 wrote:
> George Butterfield wrote:
>> One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
>> I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
>>
>> http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
>>
>> George
> Carol responds:
>
> Someone registered as a Wikipedia editor (Paul?) might want to change the date of the Battle of Wakefield on that first site from 1410 to 1460. As for the hawthorn bush, maybe they have it mixed up with the hawthorn bush on which Sir William Stanley supposedly found Richard's crown? Apparently, the hawthorn bush was a Tudor symbol, but I haven't researched the topic.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

I'm with Carol. By creating all this diversion over fresh air isn't H7 achieving just what he wants us to - get away from the REAL topic. I suggest we move on.
H (with email indigestion)


________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Sunday, 10 February 2013, 0:16
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 

I read mine on my e mail and guess what I've been doing ALL day?  :-) 

________________________________
From: justcarol67 mailto:justcarol67%40yahoo.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013, 23:43
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

 

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "mairemulholland" wrote:
>
> Lovell was gay?

Carol responds:

Only in the fanfic world. BTW, just in case someone took me seriously, I made up the Richard-Hermione example based on the silly nonsense invented by Harry Potter fans. But I don't want to go there. I think we might want to stay on topic now since we're averaging about five hundred posts a day. Did anyone notice that we've gone from 336 posts for the whole of August (the month that the dig was announced) to 2,250 for the nine days so far of February, with most of them dating from February 4 onward? I think we should probably have some compassion for those who read this forum from their e-mail and are spending a lot of time and energy deleting messages. (For those people, may I suggest at least temporarily switching over to reading your messages on the website?)

Carol, who will try to respond only to on-topic posts from this point until the volume shrinks to something like normal

Thank you for the recommendation, Karen. I'm glad to know that it's worth reading.

Wakefield has always fascinated me. Partly because I live quite close and also because there is so little information.



--- In , Karen Clark wrote:
>
> Helen presents the various competing 'theories' and identifies which one she
> supports. The book isn't without its flaws, but I do recommend it. We have
> so little information on Wakefield and anything that (sensibly) adds to the
> discussion is a good thing.
>
> Karen
>
> From: Katherine
> Reply-To:
> Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 20:55:55 -0000
> To:
> Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> about Richard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In
> , mariewalsh2003 wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone read Helen Cox's book on Wakefield? It's on my 'to read' list but I
> haven't got round to it yet.
>
> From what I understand she has a slightly different take on what happened.
> >
> >
>
> >
> > Actually York did not get named as Kuing Henry's heir until AFTER he had
> returned from Ireland and put his hand on the throne to claim it - that was the
> compromise settlement that was reached. The problem was that Queen Margaret was
> not there. She had fled with her young son and her chief supporters, initially
> to Wales, after they lost the battle of Northampton. The Queen never accepted
> the disinheritance of her son. That was how the Battle of Wakefield came about.
> The queen's northern supporters were seemingly attacking the Yorkshire lands of
> York and Salisbury, and they went north to defend them.
> > Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is
> debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being
> deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
> > Marie
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Well, strictly speaking, a Barnsley lass - but I live much nearer to Wakefield these days.

I was trying to persuade the husband that we needed to take the dog to Newmillerdam today. "She needs a nice long walk", I said.

He is so unreasonable. He said no, just because it's snowing.



--- In , "angela" wrote:
>
>
> Another Wakey lass...or at least as good as. Surely this cannot be a coincidence...(said tongue firmly in cheek)
>
> --- In , "Katherine" wrote:
> >
> > Newmillerdam is just up the road from me. I must go and have a look.
> >
> >
> > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > >
> > > Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> > > George
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Ooops, perfectly correct Carol,I switched the surnames in my head somehow - Jane Shore is who I meant, Richard's rather bemused and amused letter to Russell regarding

Lyom's desire to marry her is one of the most telling and endearing regarding Richards' nature :)


To:
Sent: Sunday, 10 February 2013 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard


 


--- In , Aidan Donnelly wrote:

> If you are descended from an O'Neil then we are almost without doubt related, distant though it might be, such is the joy of clans and septs :)
>
> Yes, I believe Richard was a chivalrous man and acted that way, and that would explain his leniency to Stanly, Margaret Beaufort and Jane Swynford too.
>
> Which of course lead to his downfall in an age that had become markedly more ruthless

Carol responds:

I think you may be confusing "Jane" Shore (real name Elizabeth Lambert; Shore was her married name though the marriage was annulled, ostensibly because the husband was impotent) with Katherine Swynford (Richard's maternal great-grandmother).

There's actually a book about Richard's belief in chivalry leading to his death in battle, David Hipshon's Richard III and the Death of Chivalry. Henry VII, being a "modern" monarch, ended all that, which may be why some historians conveniently mark the end of the Middle Ages in England as August 22, 1485. (That's nonsense, in my view. Tudor borrowed many of his innovations from the Yorkists. He reinstituted "benevolences" (involuntary monetary contributions) after Richard had outlawed them, but most of Richard's legislation is still on the books--reforms predating the "Tudor Renaissance."

What Tudor historians don't understand is that humanism and religious reform and all the rest of it would have come to England in any case and Richard, an enlightened monarch, would have welcomed it. He was not the last medieval monarch nor was Henry VII (or VIII) the first Renaissance one. It doesn't work that way. Change for the most part is gradual, and different aspects of life and culture change at different rates. In many ways, early Tudor England was just a continuation of Yorkist England (only Henry's taxes were higher and he was more concerned to keep the nobles from becoming "overmighty subjects" than in making life better for the people of England.

Regarding your last point, Buck was the first writer to say that Richard was insufficiently ruthless, and many people have pointed out that if he had executed women (Margaret Beaufort) and priests (Morton, Urswick), he would not have fallen at Bosworth and would probably have had a long and successful reign, succeeded by his own dynasty with no Tudor line. But had he done that, he wouldn't be the Richard III that we admire and mourn and there would be no Richard III Society.

Carol

Marie wrote:
[snip]
> Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.

Carol responds:

Along with the divine retribution of Clifford choking to death on his own blood? That was Hall, wasn't it? And, of course, Shakespeare takes it even further by making Edmund a child (whose older brother, Richard, fights in the battle). What do previous versions say about Edmund of Rutland's death? (There's no question about what happened afterward with the heads on Micklegate Bar.)

Regarding the York brothers murdering Edward of Lancaster (almost exactly one year younger than Richard), that's the best example we have of the legend building and growing. Whether he was killed in battle or in flight afterward by Clarence's men (with or without the fruitless cry for help to his brother-in-law, Clarence), he certainly didn't die at the hands of Gloucester, Clarence, Hastings et al. in Edward's tent. In the unlikely case that Richard and Lancaster had met in battle, it would have been a sad case of two teenage boys fighting to the death. What a cruel world they lived in at times.

Carol

Hi Carol,

Sorry this is long. It's just a cut and paste from a compilation I made. As you will see, the story originated with William Wyrcestre, or at least it does in the extant written record, but precisely when he wrote it is not clear.

1) Written straight after the battle:-

Antonio de la Torre from London to the Duke of Milan (9th January 1461)
"Accordingly the Duke of York, with two of his sons and Warwick's father, the Earl of Salisbury (Dariberi), went out to meet them. And it came to pass that, although they were three times stronger (piu forti tretanti), yet from lack of discipline, because they allowed a large part of the force to go pillaging and searching for victuals, their adversaries, who are desperate, attacked the duke and his followers. Ultimately they routed them, slaying the duke and his younger son, the Earl of Rutland, Warwick's father and many others."
(From: 'Milan: 1461', Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts in the Archives and Collections of Milan: 1385-1618 (1912), pp. 37-106. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=92248 Date accessed: 04 July 2012.)


2) These are the accounts that may or may not have been written directly after the battle; the latest possible date of composition is given in brackets:-


Davies, English Chronicle (anonymous, but stops at 1461)

"And when they saw a convenient time for to fill their cruel intent, the last day of December they fell upon the said Duke Richard, and him killed, and his son th'earl of Rutland, and many other knights and squires...." (Lander, The Wars of the Roses, pp. 116-117)


Whethamstede (d. 1465)

"Duos vero Dominos dictos ceperunt in bello vivos, ipsosque, et praecipue Ducem Eboracensem, multum ludibriose intractavere. Nam statuentes eum super unum parvum formicarium colliculum, et quoddam serum vile, ex palustri gramine confectum, imponentes per modum coronae super caput suum, non aliter quam Judaei coram Domino, incurvaverunt genua sua coram ipso, dicentes illusorie,- `Ave, Rex, sine regimine. Ave, dux et princeps, absque omni populo penitus, et possessione.' Et hijs, un cum aliis variis, et eum probose opprobioseque dictis, coegerunt ipsum demum, per capitis abscissionem, clameum relinquere suae justitiae vendicationis."

York and Salisbury were taken alive. "They stood him [York] on a little anthill and placed on his head, as if a crown, a vile garland made of reeds, just as the Jews did to the Lord, and bent the knee to him, saying in jest, `Hail King, without rule. Hail King, without ancestry. Hail leader and prince, with almost no subjects or possessions.' And having said this and various other shameful and dishonourable things to him, at last they cut off his head.' (translation by Keith Dockray, Ricardian no 117, p. 248)
Salisbury was taken to Pontefract and beheaded there. There seems to be no mention of Rutland.


Gregory (William Gregory, skinner of London, d. beginning of 1467; however, the extant copy of the chronicle has been continued to 1469, and there is therefore the possibility that the copyist-continuator may also have been edited Gregory's text)

"... there they made a grete jorney a-pon the Lorde and Duke of Yorke, and toke hym and the Erle of Saulysbury, the Erle of Rutlonde, and the Lorde Haryngdon, and Syr Thomas Nevyle, and Syr Thomas Haryngdon, and many mo knyghtys were take a slayne by syde alle the comyns. But thys good Duke of Yorke with hys lordys a-fore sayde loste hyr heddys."
After Towton, Edward "toke downe hys fadyrs hedde fro the walls of Yorke."


Crowland 1 (completed 1470)

"Richard Duke of York incautiously engaged the northern army at Wakefield, which was fighting for the King, without waiting to bring up the whole of his own forces, upon which, a charge was made by the enemy on his men, and he was without mercy or respect relentlessly slain. There fell with him at the same place many nobles and illustrious men, and countless numbers of the common people, who had followed him, met their deaths there, and all to no purpose."


Waurin (d. 1474-5, chronicle probably completed by 1470)

"And the said duke of Sombresset, being near, charged right vigorously upon the duke of Yorc and his men, against whom Andrew Trolot soon turned with his following, and also those who had been sent by him [Trollope] into the said town that night: so died there the duke of York and the earl of Roteland his son, the earl of Salsebery and Sir Thomas his son, with many other noble men of their company. The which battle took place before the town of Wacquefild on the penultimate day of December in the year fourteen sixty."
(My translation from the French, vol 6, p. 326)


Annales Rerum Anglicarum by William Worcestre (d. 1491)

"... in the flight after the battle Lord Clifford killed the Lord Edmund, Earl of Rutland, son of the Duke of York, upon the bridge at Wakefield."



3) Definitely written some years later:-


Crowland 2 (this passage probably written 1471, but possibly as late as 1485)

Mentions York's death at Wakefield (p. 113), but not Rutland's death or the paper crown.


Vitellius AXVI (c. 1490-95)

"And the xxxth day of Decembre they met with the Quenys party at Wakefeld, wher the Duke of York, and therle of Rutland, and Sir Thomas Nevill were slayne, and many other."

Fabyan (c.1500-13)

"Wherof the quene with hyr lordys beynge ware, & hauynge with them a great strength of nortnerne, mett with the duke of Yorke vpon the xxx. daye of December nere a towne in the northe callyd Wakefelde, were atwene them was foughten a sharpe fyght, in whiche the duke of Yorke was slayen, with his sone callyd erle of Rutlande...."


Vergil (written c.1510-12, but this is 1555 edition)

"And the queen, who had made up her mind to rescue her husband by arms and so had already assembled a large army, when she learned her enemies were approaching, immediately went to meet them and engaged them in a battle. They fought with wonderful dash until many of those who had joined battle were killed and York's men were surrounded by her multitude, because they were few in numbers. Then the queen exhorted her men, and in a trice they overwhelmed their surviving enemies. In that battle fell Duke Richard of York, the head of this faction, with his son Earl Edmund of Rutland, and likewise Thomas Neville, David Hall, John Parr, Walter Limbrick, John Gedding, Eustace Wentworth, Guy Harington, all knights, and also those sturdy officers James Fitzjames, Ralph Hastings, John Baume, and Roland Digby. Among the captives were Earl Richard of Salisbury, the other head of the conspiracy, who together with some others was beheaded a little later, and their heads, mounted on pikes, were carried to York as a spectacle to terrorize the people and the rest of Henry's adversaries."
Note 1. Queen Margaret was, of course, actually in Scotland at the time.
Note 2. Hall, of course, claimed that Sir David Hall – a man difficult to indentify from contemporry sources - was his own ancestor and personally tried to dissuade York from fighting. I would therefore be interested to know whether he appears in Vergil's original manuscript or was added after the publication of Hall's account.


Hall (1548)

"While this battle was in fighting, a priest called Sir Robert Aspall, chaplain and schoolmaster to the young Earl of Rutland, .... scarce of the age of twelve years, a fair gentleman and maiden-like person, perceiving that flight was more safeguard than tarrying, both for him and his master, secretly conveyed the Earl out of the field, by the Lord Clifford's band, towards the town but ere he could enter into a house, he was by the said Lord Clifford espied, followed and taken, and by reason of his apparel, [he] demanded what he was. The young gentleman, dismayed, had not a word to speak, but kneeled on his knees imploring mercy, and befitting grace, both with holding up his hands and making dolorous countenance, for his speech was gone with fear. `Save him', said the chaplain, `for he is a prince's son and, peradventure, may do you good hereafter'. With that word the Lord Clifford marked him and said: `By God's blood, they father slew mine, and so will I do thee and all thy kin', and with that word struck the Earl to the heart with his dagger, and bade his chaplain bear [to] the Earl's mother and brother word what he had done and said."




--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
> Marie wrote:
> [snip]
> > Whether Rutland was deliberately killed by Clifford on the bridge is debatable. It seems no more reliable than the tale of Edward of Lancaster being deliberately murdered by the york brothers at Tewkesbury.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Along with the divine retribution of Clifford choking to death on his own blood? That was Hall, wasn't it? And, of course, Shakespeare takes it even further by making Edmund a child (whose older brother, Richard, fights in the battle). What do previous versions say about Edmund of Rutland's death? (There's no question about what happened afterward with the heads on Micklegate Bar.)
>
> Regarding the York brothers murdering Edward of Lancaster (almost exactly one year younger than Richard), that's the best example we have of the legend building and growing. Whether he was killed in battle or in flight afterward by Clarence's men (with or without the fruitless cry for help to his brother-in-law, Clarence), he certainly didn't die at the hands of Gloucester, Clarence, Hastings et al. in Edward's tent. In the unlikely case that Richard and Lancaster had met in battle, it would have been a sad case of two teenage boys fighting to the death. What a cruel world they lived in at times.
>
> Carol
>

Marie wrote:
>
> Hi Carol,
>
> Sorry this is long. It's just a cut and paste from a compilation I made. As you will see, the story originated with William Wyrcestre, or at least it does in the extant written record, but precisely when he wrote it is not clear.

{Snip the quotes; I've bookmarked this post for later reference.]

Carol responds:

Thank you very much, Marie. I haven't read any books specifically on Wakefield, but it would be very interesting to see a comparison of these accounts and to know which, if any, are eyewitness accounts. (The first one seems to have an anti-Yorkist bias, but maybe I'm reading it in too big a hurry trying to catch up on all the posts.) I had forgotten that it was Hall who made Edmund of Rutland a "maidenly" boy of twelve and turned Clifford into a butcher. Apparently, Shakespeare only followed and embellished his account.

Do you think that the paper (or wicker) crown is a myth, too? And is there a good biography of Richard Duke of York that deals with the battle, or is he a neglected figure? (Everything I've read about him has been in books devoted to other people, especially Richard.)

Carol

--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
> Marie wrote:
> >
> > Hi Carol,
> >
> > Sorry this is long. It's just a cut and paste from a compilation I made. As you will see, the story originated with William Wyrcestre, or at least it does in the extant written record, but precisely when he wrote it is not clear.
>
> {Snip the quotes; I've bookmarked this post for later reference.]
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Thank you very much, Marie. I haven't read any books specifically on Wakefield, but it would be very interesting to see a comparison of these accounts and to know which, if any, are eyewitness accounts. (The first one seems to have an anti-Yorkist bias, but maybe I'm reading it in too big a hurry trying to catch up on all the posts.) I had forgotten that it was Hall who made Edmund of Rutland a "maidenly" boy of twelve and turned Clifford into a butcher. Apparently, Shakespeare only followed and embellished his account.
>
> Do you think that the paper (or wicker) crown is a myth, too? And is there a good biography of Richard Duke of York that deals with the battle, or is he a neglected figure? (Everything I've read about him has been in books devoted to other people, especially Richard.)
>
> Carol
>


I don't know about the paper crown. It is mentioned as early as 1465 (Whethamstede) but comes complete with the story about his being taken alive and put on a little hill and mocked - seems to echo the crucifixion too much to be really believable.
The only biography of York that I'm aware of is Johnson's, but it's rather hostile and brief. I thought Michael K Jones was working on one at one time but perhaps he abandoned the project. But there have been several accounts of Wakefield in recent years.
Marie

It there a memorial in Wakefield to Edmund. I live in Doncaster and have visited Fotheringay which was very moving and Sheffifg Hutton before it was rejected as the site. I hope to visit Middlelam this year. Take care. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone

-----Original Message-----
From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
Sender:
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:41:12
To: <>
Reply-To:
Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard

Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:37 PM, George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:

> I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
> My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" amertzanis@...> wrote:
>
> > I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
> >
> > Angela
> >
> > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> > >
> > > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> > >
> > > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > > countess of Salisbury.
> > > >
> > > > Karen
> > > >
> > > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@...>
> > > > Reply-To: >
> > > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > > To: ""
> > > > >
> > > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > > believe ?
> > > >
> > > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > > over York's city gates
> > > >
> > > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@... >
> > > > To:
> > > >
> > > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > about Richard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Carol responds:
> > > >
> > > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > > >
> > > > Carol
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Sorry, no memorial to Edmund in Wakefield.

Angela

--- In , c.nelson1@... wrote:
>
> It there a memorial in Wakefield to Edmund. I live in Doncaster and have visited Fotheringay which was very moving and Sheffifg Hutton before it was rejected as the site. I hope to visit Middlelam this year. Take care. Coral
> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...>
> Sender:
> Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:41:12
> To: <>
> Reply-To:
> Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments about Richard
>
> Ps did you know that the chantry chapel is a "modern" restoration the original chantry face is located near the dam at new miller dam.
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:37 PM, George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:
>
> > I was born in Leeds but lived in Sandal Magna went to school at Silcoates, before Uni and the RN.
> > My dad was a surgeon so when he moved south I came as part of the goods and chattels.
> > George
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "angela" amertzanis@...> wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't know you were a Wakefield man, George. I am a Wakey lass and my parents' home is near both the Duke of York memorial and Chantry bridge, where they say Edmund was killed.
> > >
> > > Angela
> > >
> > > --- In , George Butterfield wrote:
> > > >
> > > > One of the stories that I heard growing up in Wakefield, was that when a school was being built on the reputed spot were York was killed a finger was found in the roots of a Hawthorne bush.
> > > > I have no way of knowing if this was true but it certainly had been passed down through time.
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_of_York_Memorial_-_geograph.org.uk_-_858000.jpg
> > > >
> > > > http://www.heritage-explorer.co.uk/web/he/imagebythemedetail.aspx?crit=&ctid=94&id=5541
> > > >
> > > > George
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPad
> > > >
> > > > On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Karen Clark wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Salisbury's second son, Thomas, and his daughter Katheryn's husband were
> > > > > also killed at Wakefield. Salisbury survived the battle and was taken the
> > > > > next day to Pontefract where he was beheaded. The Bastard of Exeter and
> > > > > others, including (reputedly) the chap who went on to marry Thomas Nevill's
> > > > > widow were among those later accused of unlawful death by the widowed
> > > > > countess of Salisbury.
> > > > >
> > > > > Karen
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Aidan Donnelly aidan.donnelly@>
> > > > > Reply-To: >
> > > > > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
> > > > > To: ""
> > > > > >
> > > > > Subject: Re: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > > about Richard
> > > > >
> > > > > Taken prisoner on a bridge attempting the flee the lost battle of Wakefield,
> > > > > taken prisoner and then murdered while helpless and unarmed - by Clifford I
> > > > > believe ?
> > > > >
> > > > > York and Salisbury were also killed and the three heads were stuck on spikes
> > > > > over York's city gates
> > > > >
> > > > > Edmund was only 17 I think
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: justcarol67 justcarol67@ >
> > > > > To:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 11:35 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: David Starkey and his comments
> > > > > about Richard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Aidan Donnelly wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > But sadly we moved to Rutland when I was eight months old [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > Carol responds:
> > > > >
> > > > > So you have a Richard III connection. Do you know the sad story of Richard's
> > > > > older brother, Edmund Earl of Rutland?
> > > > >
> > > > > Carol
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I remember in the '80s the West Ham used to kick the crap out of Leicester City. It was classic. Turned over the town centre good and proper too. Leicester? Behave yerself-!

--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> I read that on the train the other day.  He is such an arse.
>  
> What really annoys me is how rude they are all being about Leicester.  I've never been there but judging by the website, the Cathedral looks fine.  It's partly southern snottiness about the Midlands of course because the South is the be all and end all (can tell I didn't grow up there can't you?) and because the Cathedral isn't one of the big three.
>  
>  
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013, 22:56
> Subject: RE: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
>  
> In Britain I think they would say, “Don’t get your knickers in a twist,” Ishita. I know it’s hard not to but, really, is Starkey worth it? I think he’s (at least in part) just trying to get a rise from Ricardians. Isn’t he the guy who put on such a terrible showing in *The Trial of Richard III*? “What a maroon!” to quote my hero Bugs Bunny.
>
> Loyaulte me lie,
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
> Email - mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com
>
> or mailto:jltournier%40xcountry.tv
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ishita Bandyo
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:46 PM
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Subject: I am shaking with rage!!!! Read Starkey's comment
>
> Tudor historian Dr David Starkey said: “I think there is a very good reason why Richard found himself in a car park in Leicester. He was a disastrous monarch who destroyed his own royal house, the House of York.“Unless Westminster Abbey opens a villains’ corner where we can put him, I think Leicester is quite appropriate. Frankly, he doesn’t make the grade.”
> Full link:
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/let-battle-begin-should-richard-iii-have-state-funeral-at-westminster-abbey-8482757.html
> Ishita Bandyo
> www.ishitabandyo.com
> www.facebook.com/ishitabandyofinearts
> www.ishitabandyoarts.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>