GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.

Hello All,

First off, thanks for the add. I appreciate it. I am trying to find out something fairly important about a far distant relative of mine. I am a Swinburne, and so when I found out that Richard III was found, I was surprised to find two separate instances claiming that

"GILBERT SWINBURNE, was standard bearer to King Richard III and was killed at Bosworth Field on 2 August 1485."

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/e/o/David-Albert-George/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0255.html

That is one link. But everything I read claims that Sir Percival Thirwell was the banner man. Got his legs cut off and hacked to death. It is interesting to note that since Gilbert was a son of an illegitimate father history would be quick to overlook him. I would personally like to know how these accounts came to be confused. I appreciate any help you can afford this mystery, thanks!

Regards,

Jeremiah

I knew there was a third candidate - Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell. The other you didn't mention is Sir William Parker.

We'll probably never know the truth.


________________________________
From: quaddle2000 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013, 20:38
Subject: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


 
Hello All,

First off, thanks for the add. I appreciate it. I am trying to find out something fairly important about a far distant relative of mine. I am a Swinburne, and so when I found out that Richard III was found, I was surprised to find two separate instances claiming that

"GILBERT SWINBURNE, was standard bearer to King Richard III and was killed at Bosworth Field on 2 August 1485."

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/e/o/David-Albert-George/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0255.html

That is one link. But everything I read claims that Sir Percival Thirwell was the banner man. Got his legs cut off and hacked to death. It is interesting to note that since Gilbert was a son of an illegitimate father history would be quick to overlook him. I would personally like to know how these accounts came to be confused. I appreciate any help you can afford this mystery, thanks!

Regards,

Jeremiah

From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


> I knew there was a third candidate - Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell. The
> other you didn't mention is Sir William Parker.

Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?

Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer
or who was killed holding the standard?

As I've suggested one of them could have born the Royal standard, but which was which I don't know. Parker was the only one who survived the battle, albeit wounded.


________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013, 21:03
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


 
From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.

> I knew there was a third candidate - Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell. The
> other you didn't mention is Sir William Parker.

Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?

Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer
or who was killed holding the standard?

Well, I have a York in my background, and got all excited myself, when I found a birth record in Olney. But, I would imagine he was issue, of issue, of issue, probably on the wrong side or a not very clean blanket! Good hunting. It is fun and also extremely tedious to track back.


From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of quaddle2000
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 2:38 PM
To:
Subject: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.



Hello All,

First off, thanks for the add. I appreciate it. I am trying to find out something fairly important about a far distant relative of mine. I am a Swinburne, and so when I found out that Richard III was found, I was surprised to find two separate instances claiming that

"GILBERT SWINBURNE, was standard bearer to King Richard III and was killed at Bosworth Field on 2 August 1485."

http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/e/o/David-Albert-George/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0255.html

That is one link. But everything I read claims that Sir Percival Thirwell was the banner man. Got his legs cut off and hacked to death. It is interesting to note that since Gilbert was a son of an illegitimate father history would be quick to overlook him. I would personally like to know how these accounts came to be confused. I appreciate any help you can afford this mystery, thanks!

Regards,

Jeremiah

From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


> As I've suggested one of them could have born the Royal standard, but
> which was which I don't know. Parker was the only one who survived the
> battle, albeit wounded.

What happened to him then - do we know?

We don't know a great deal, apparently he was imprisoned and attainted. However his son went on to become Lord Morley.

http://www.oxforddnb.com/templates/article.jsp?articleid=21305&back=




________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013, 21:11
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


 
From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.

> As I've suggested one of them could have born the Royal standard, but
> which was which I don't know. Parker was the only one who survived the
> battle, albeit wounded.

What happened to him then - do we know?

More on the Swinburns here:

http://www.webring.org/l/rd?ring=ukgen;id=1;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebspace%2Ewebring%2Ecom%2Fpeople%2Fau%2Fum_7035%2Findex%2Ehtml




________________________________
From: david rayner <theblackprussian@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013, 22:26
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


 
We don't know a great deal, apparently he was imprisoned and attainted. However his son went on to become Lord Morley.

http://www.oxforddnb.com/templates/article.jsp?articleid=21305&back=

________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013, 21:11
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


 
From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.

> As I've suggested one of them could have born the Royal standard, but
> which was which I don't know. Parker was the only one who survived the
> battle, albeit wounded.

What happened to him then - do we know?

Jeremiah wrote:
>[snip] I am trying to find out something fairly important about a far distant relative of mine. I am a Swinburne, and so when I found out that Richard III was found, I was surprised to find two separate instances claiming that
>
> "GILBERT SWINBURNE, was standard bearer to King Richard III and was killed at Bosworth Field on 2 August 1485."
>
> http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/e/o/David-Albert-George/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0255.html
>
> That is one link. But everything I read claims that Sir Percival Thirwell was the banner man. Got his legs cut off and hacked to death. It is interesting to note that since Gilbert was a son of an illegitimate father history would be quick to overlook him. I would personally like to know how these accounts came to be confused. I appreciate any help you can afford this mystery, thanks!

Carol responds:

We've just been discussing the little we know about Sir Percival Thirwell. The only reference to him that I know of is "The Ballad of Bosworth Field":

"Sir Perciuall Thriball, the other hight,
& noble Knight, & in his hart was true;
King Richards standard hee kept vpright
vntill both his leggs were hewen him froe; -- 157.628

to the ground he wold neuer lett itt goe,
whilest the breath his brest ws within;"

http://www.r3.org/bosworth/ballad2.html

I did note one small error in the item you quoted on Gilbert Swinburne. If he died at Bosworth, it would have been on August 22, not August 2, 1485.

Carol

"Claire M Jordan" wrote:

> Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
>
> Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
>
Carol responds:

A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)

Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.

I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.

Carol

Hello Jeremiah,

I am also a descendant of Gilbert Swinburne, and I always believed he had been Richard III's standard bearer.

If you type "gilbert swinburne bosworth" into Google Books (but without the quotes):

http://books.google.co.uk/bkshp?hl=en&tab=wp

the first entry is an extract from A History of Northumberland, and it reads:

Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's ...

Unfortunately Google doesn't let you read any more, so I suppose it just might have been King Richard's lunch box, but I doubt it!

Regards

Tony



--- In , quaddle2000 <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> First off, thanks for the add. I appreciate it. I am trying to find out something fairly important about a far distant relative of mine. I am a Swinburne, and so when I found out that Richard III was found, I was surprised to find two separate instances claiming that
>
> "GILBERT SWINBURNE, was standard bearer to King Richard III and was killed at Bosworth Field on 2 August 1485."
>
> http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/g/e/o/David-Albert-George/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0255.html
>
> That is one link. But everything I read claims that Sir Percival Thirwell was the banner man. Got his legs cut off and hacked to death. It is interesting to note that since Gilbert was a son of an illegitimate father history would be quick to overlook him. I would personally like to know how these accounts came to be confused. I appreciate any help you can afford this mystery, thanks!
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
>

From: bty15420109
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.


> the first entry is an extract from A History of Northumberland, and it
> reads:

> Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's ...


Although there's no ebook available the book is searcheable. Click on the
title of the book and it takes you to page 132 and: a tiny, barely legible
family tree entry which I *think* says:

Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's standard
(d); had a lease, 26th April 1476, from Balliol College, of lands in Heugh
and Stamfordham (4).

I'm not sure about the letters/numbers in brackets, but the rest is fairly
clear.

You'll also find another book, called Northumberland Families, which says:

Of the third son Gilbert, the same sources tells us that he was "slain at
Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's standard". This must have been
family tradition but the statement lacks confirmation. The battle of
Bosworth was fought on 22 August 1485. Ten years before this, on 16 April
1475 the master and scholars of Balliol college had leased their lands in
Heugh to "Thomas and Gilbert Swinburne, the sons of John Swinburne

I may be able to coax it into showing me the preceding and following pages
but right now I need to go shop.

Thanks Claire,

The complete PDF of A History of Northumberland is availale here:

http://www.electricscotland.com/northumberland/index.htm

Vol 7 contains the bit about Gilbert Swinburne - I can't believe the Northumberland County History Committee got it wrong.

Regards,

Tony

--- In , "Claire M Jordan" <whitehound@...> wrote:
>
> From: bty15420109
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 2:31 PM
> Subject: Re: GILBERT SWINBURNE mystery.
>
>
> > the first entry is an extract from A History of Northumberland, and it
> > reads:
>
> > Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's ...
>
>
> Although there's no ebook available the book is searcheable. Click on the
> title of the book and it takes you to page 132 and: a tiny, barely legible
> family tree entry which I *think* says:
>
> Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's standard
> (d); had a lease, 26th April 1476, from Balliol College, of lands in Heugh
> and Stamfordham (4).
>
> I'm not sure about the letters/numbers in brackets, but the rest is fairly
> clear.
>
> You'll also find another book, called Northumberland Families, which says:
>
> Of the third son Gilbert, the same sources tells us that he was "slain at
> Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's standard". This must have been
> family tradition but the statement lacks confirmation. The battle of
> Bosworth was fought on 22 August 1485. Ten years before this, on 16 April
> 1475 the master and scholars of Balliol college had leased their lands in
> Heugh to "Thomas and Gilbert Swinburne, the sons of John Swinburne
>
> I may be able to coax it into showing me the preceding and following pages
> but right now I need to go shop.
>

--- In , "bty15420109" <tskitt@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Jeremiah,
>
> I am also a descendant of Gilbert Swinburne, and I always believed he had been Richard III's standard bearer.
>
> If you type "gilbert swinburne bosworth" into Google Books (but without the quotes):
>
> http://books.google.co.uk/bkshp?hl=en&tab=wp
>
> the first entry is an extract from A History of Northumberland, and it reads:
>
> Gilbert Swinburne, slain at Bosworth Field, bearing King Richard's ...
>
> Unfortunately Google doesn't let you read any more, so I suppose it just might have been King Richard's lunch box, but I doubt it!
>
> Regards
>
> Tony

Carol responds:

There are ways to work your way around blocked quotations in Google Books. I typed in "bearing King Richard's" in quotes and got this:

"Of the third son Gilbert, the same source tells us that he was 'slain at Bosworth Field, bearing king Richard's standard'. This must have been a family tradition but the statement lacks confirmation. The battle of Bosworth was fought on 22 August ..."

This quotation is from "Northumberland Families, Volume 1:

http://books.google.com/books?id=rfIIAQAAIAAJ&q=%22bearing+King+Richard%27s%22&dq=%22bearing+King+Richard%27s%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-sUjUcK7N6bjiwK144HoBw&ved=0CHEQ6AEwCQ

Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/bbuzaoj

You can see the rest of the quotation from there despite the limited view of this source.

If you click on the link to "A History of Northumberland" in your own search, you can probably see the family tree with the entry that this source is referring to. Or use this link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=3mogAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=%22bearing+King+Richard%27s%22&source=bl&ots=o68PKY6YbG&sig=Dtoeq6HaivX0i1BkTdCUv9M9Pm8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bcQjUcmoGa3ciQLWqoCgCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=%22bearing%20King%20Richard%27s%22&f=false

Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/b3dxbps (Whoever invented Tinyurls has my admiration forever!)

I don't know anything about the topic, but I hope this helps.

Carol

Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:

sanglier (plural sangliers)

(obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).

So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?

~Weds


--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
> "Claire M Jordan" wrote:
>
> > Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
> >
> > Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)
>
> Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.
>
> I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.
>
> Carol
>

I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white boar standard) or herald. I think it was quite common to denote these people by the standard they bore or wore. (sorry about boars, bores and wores). Why do I think the standard bearer was killed?



________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 16:03
Subject: Blanc Sanglier

 

Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:

sanglier (plural sangliers)

(obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).

So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?

~Weds

--- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
>
>
> "Claire M Jordan" wrote:
>
> > Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
> >
> > Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
> >
> Carol responds:
>
> A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)
>
> Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.
>
> I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.
>
> Carol
>

From: wednesday_mc
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:03 PM
Subject: Blanc Sanglier


> Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male?

There was a second-rank herald whose title was Blanc Sanglier Pursuivant
(this link http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=118267says he
was called More and probably a son of "John More, Norroy 1478" - Norroy
being the title of a more senior herald). It's assumed that it was this
pursuivant who rode ahead of Richard, although it's possible that the story
has grown in the telling and that it was, instead, a boar-banner which was
meant.

From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier


> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white
> boar standard) or herald.

I thought it was the standard bearer too but somebody pointed out the other
day that I'd got them conflated and that there would be a standar-bearer and
two heralds, and Blanc Sanglier was one of the heralds. Accounts seem to
agree that the standard-bearer died on the battlefield, but disagree as to
whether he was called Thirlwell or Swynbourne.

Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?



________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 16:36
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

 

From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white
> boar standard) or herald.

I thought it was the standard bearer too but somebody pointed out the other
day that I'd got them conflated and that there would be a standar-bearer and
two heralds, and Blanc Sanglier was one of the heralds. Accounts seem to
agree that the standard-bearer died on the battlefield, but disagree as to
whether he was called Thirlwell or Swynbourne.

From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier


> Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?

No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
probably be measured in seconds.

I'm sure Marie will give us the quote - nasty.



________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 16:58
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

 

From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

> Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?

No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
probably be measured in seconds.

Heralds and standard bearers are two different things.

A standard bearer is a soldier with a flag as well as a weapon, to be seen by both sides. The Tydder's standard bearer was William Brandon, illegally knighted a few hours before Richard killed him. Richard's were among these men: Percival Thirlwell, William Parker and Gilbert Swinburne

A herald exists permanently to regulate the bearing of arms. The College of Heralds was founded by Richard so it is unsurprising that one of them is always named after his emblem (Blanc Sanglier). There are Kings of Arms (senior heralds) and one of them looks after the North of England (Norroy) and Ulster.
A herald would be an observer only and it would be unseemly to attack, arrest or attain one.

----- Original Message -----
From: Claire M Jordan
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier



From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

> Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?

No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
probably be measured in seconds.

Stephan
Where did you find the information about a Herald being an observer only as the information I have says that he was the equivalent of a mailman/home secretary/ ombudsman and I have found several instances where he was attacked an killed. Was that just bad manners or the opposition being bloody minded?
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:08 PM, "Stephen Lark" <stephenmlark@...> wrote:

> Heralds and standard bearers are two different things.
>
> A standard bearer is a soldier with a flag as well as a weapon, to be seen by both sides. The Tydder's standard bearer was William Brandon, illegally knighted a few hours before Richard killed him. Richard's were among these men: Percival Thirlwell, William Parker and Gilbert Swinburne
>
> A herald exists permanently to regulate the bearing of arms. The College of Heralds was founded by Richard so it is unsurprising that one of them is always named after his emblem (Blanc Sanglier). There are Kings of Arms (senior heralds) and one of them looks after the North of England (Norroy) and Ulster.
> A herald would be an observer only and it would be unseemly to attack, arrest or attain one.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Claire M Jordan
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> From: Hilary Jones
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> > Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> > had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?
>
> No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
> death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
> major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
> probably be measured in seconds.
>
>
>
>

A herald's principal duty in battle is to identify and bury the dead. If he (and not just a standard-bearer) is attacked, this breaks the usual rules of chivalry.

----- Original Message -----
From: George Butterfield
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier



Stephan
Where did you find the information about a Herald being an observer only as the information I have says that he was the equivalent of a mailman/home secretary/ ombudsman and I have found several instances where he was attacked an killed. Was that just bad manners or the opposition being bloody minded?
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:08 PM, "Stephen Lark" stephenmlark@...> wrote:

> Heralds and standard bearers are two different things.
>
> A standard bearer is a soldier with a flag as well as a weapon, to be seen by both sides. The Tydder's standard bearer was William Brandon, illegally knighted a few hours before Richard killed him. Richard's were among these men: Percival Thirlwell, William Parker and Gilbert Swinburne
>
> A herald exists permanently to regulate the bearing of arms. The College of Heralds was founded by Richard so it is unsurprising that one of them is always named after his emblem (Blanc Sanglier). There are Kings of Arms (senior heralds) and one of them looks after the North of England (Norroy) and Ulster.
> A herald would be an observer only and it would be unseemly to attack, arrest or attain one.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Claire M Jordan
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> From: Hilary Jones
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> > Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> > had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?
>
> No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
> death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
> major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
> probably be measured in seconds.
>
>
>
>

Thank you for your reply however I did a little research and I don't think they became such esteemed members of medieval society till later





Colleges of Heralds: English College is incorporated by Richard III in 1484, although this is one of Richard's acts that was later undone by his successors. The College was under the Earl Marshal with Garter acting as the effective day to day head.



In France, the heralds incorporate Le College des Hérauts de France, and acquire the Chapel of Petit Saint Antoine for housing their library and their meetings in 1406/1407. The articles of incorporation of their College confirm the traditional privileges of the heralds [HH p.96, George p.20].



General Social Standing of Heralds: Raised somewhat over the early days but the "vagabond associations" stay with them. In the 1st half of the 15th c. Heralds continue to be classed in a homilectic work with crafts such as "harlots, jugglers, sham cripples, beggars, public buffoons, professional champions, false toll collectors and executioners." [HE p.19] Ongoing Minstrel vs. Herald friction seen in the works by the minstrels about the heralds, which former see the latter as pompous, expensive and arguably useless. In the late 14th c. poem "Dit des Hyraus" the poet explains that (in addition to other problems with the expense of tournaments) "every knight has to maintain three or four heralds and cannot get rid of them... So, one must be enterprising and it is [the author's] wish to become a herald; for there is no profession more convenient for an idle, greedy man, nor any in which one may talk so much and do so little." [HH p.30] Still, the heralds in 15th c. London lived in a fashion as did the members of the Guilds, and socialized with them, a fairly high social class for a non-noble [HE p.126].



Servants in time of War:

Messengers (but not Spies!) - developed into Ambassadors Not supposed to 'spy on' the message recipient [HH p.42], such discretion helped along by gifts from the receiver of the message [Neubecker p.14]. However, heralds were allowed to give 'useful advice' without going into specifics. Ocasionally there are reports of heralds who let important information slip by accident, to the detriment of the herald's Lord. Over time the role becomes more of an ambassador than mere message carrier.



Quartered in their Prince's tents, for easy access. [Neubecker p.14]



French heralds who were carrying ultimatums or declarations of war delivered these with their faces covered with a veil of wool. This symbolized the fact that they really were unhappy to have to make such an announcement, and helped identify them as special (thus inviolate) people [George p.24].



Observers of the battle for their Lords. This information was used not only on the spot, but eventually, by historians (who interviewed heralds). Some heralds wrote their own chronicles about their masters, or about the history they had seen [HE p.23].



After the battle: The herald of the victor should raise his Lord's standard immediately, and then ensure that the banner of the loser was obtained. Heralds were to identify and count the dead (identification based on armory and on physical characteristics), arrange for burials, communicate with prisoners and handle ransom requests. Heralds, in principle, were not taken prisoner, although this was sometimes not observed. [Neubecker p.16-18]



George



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Stephen Lark
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 1:51 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier





A herald's principal duty in battle is to identify and bury the dead. If he (and not just a standard-bearer) is attacked, this breaks the usual rules of chivalry.

----- Original Message -----
From: George Butterfield
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

Stephan
Where did you find the information about a Herald being an observer only as the information I have says that he was the equivalent of a mailman/home secretary/ ombudsman and I have found several instances where he was attacked an killed. Was that just bad manners or the opposition being bloody minded?
George

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 21, 2013, at 12:08 PM, "Stephen Lark" stephenmlark@... <mailto:stephenmlark%40talktalk.net> > wrote:

> Heralds and standard bearers are two different things.
>
> A standard bearer is a soldier with a flag as well as a weapon, to be seen by both sides. The Tydder's standard bearer was William Brandon, illegally knighted a few hours before Richard killed him. Richard's were among these men: Percival Thirlwell, William Parker and Gilbert Swinburne
>
> A herald exists permanently to regulate the bearing of arms. The College of Heralds was founded by Richard so it is unsurprising that one of them is always named after his emblem (Blanc Sanglier). There are Kings of Arms (senior heralds) and one of them looks after the North of England (Norroy) and Ulster.
> A herald would be an observer only and it would be unseemly to attack, arrest or attain one.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Claire M Jordan
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> From: Hilary Jones
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier
>
> > Yes I'm sure they said somewhere that the standard bearer fought till he
> > had his legs cut from under him? Or was that another battle?
>
> No, Bosworth. And he supposedly kept the standard raised until he bled to
> death - although if his legs had been severed he'd be bleeding out from two
> major arteries, so the interval between being cut and collapsing would
> probably be measured in seconds.
>
>
>
>

Wednesday wrote:
>
> Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:
>
> sanglier (plural sangliers)
>
> (obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).
>
> So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?
>
> ~Weds

Carol responds:

That wasn't his name; it was his title, which matched Richard's white boar cognizance. "The History of the College of Arms" (which properly credits Richard as the college's founder even though it holds the standard eighteenth-century view of him in other respects, is the best source I know for distinguishing between a herald and a pursuivant (junior herald) and providing all the "names" of the different heralds, including Garter King at Arms and other strange ones. So, yes, Blanc Sanglier herald was a real person, as was Gloucester herald (whose identity is known). Apparently, Blanc Sanglier's last sad duty was to lead that horse. After that, he disappeared into obscurity. If I remember correctly, another of Richard's heralds was killed at Bosworth and attainted along with the Duke of Norfolk.

I haven't read the History straight through, just the relevant parts on Google Books, but one of these days, if I can find a readable copy in a modern typeface, I'll read it straight through.

Carol

From: George Butterfield
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 7:07 PM
Subject: RE: Blanc Sanglier


> Thank you for your reply however I did a little research and I don't think
> they became such esteemed members of medieval society till later

A fascinating post, I thought.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white boar standard) or herald. I think it was quite common to denote these people by the standard they bore or wore. (sorry about boars, bores and wores). Why do I think the standard bearer was killed?

Carol responds:

I thought that we'd already covered this point. The standard bearer (Sir Percival Thirwall, according to tradition) was killed in the battle. Blanc Sanglier, one of Richard's heralds (who had apparently been with him when he was Duke of Gloucester and was promoted now to a royal herald) is a different person altogether. According to the History of the College of Arms, leading the horse carrying Richard's body was his last duty (probably imposed on him by Henry) and nothing is known of him afterwards. Attempts have been made to identify him, but I don't recall the proposed names or the reasons behind them.

A herald, as I said in another message, was an ambassador, not a soldier, and was not supposed to be killed. Heralds were also officers of arms, ranking higher than pursuivants but lower than kings at arms, responsible (in peacetime) for devising and granting coats of arms. All of Richard's officers of arms were members of the College of Arms that he had established at the request (according to the History of the College of Arms) of Gloucester herald, another of the heralds who had apparently been with Richard since he was Duke of Gloucester.

Sorry. Interrupted!

Carol

"Claire M Jordan" wrote:
>
>
> There was a second-rank herald whose title was Blanc Sanglier Pursuivant (this link http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=118267says he
> was called More and probably a son of "John More, Norroy 1478" - Norroy being the title of a more senior herald). It's assumed that it was this pursuivant who rode ahead of Richard, although it's possible that the story has grown in the telling and that it was, instead, a boar-banner which was meant.
>
Carol responds:

Your URL includes "says," but will link if you delete that word from the end.)

You're right that Blanc Sanglier was a pursuivant, not a full-fledged herald, but I'm fairly sure that this identification is an error. Norroy King at Arms during Edward IV's reign and Richard's was indeed John Moore, Esq., who according to the History of the College of Arms "was so obnoxious to Henry VII, that he was particularly exempted in the statute of resumption, passed in the first year of [Henry's] reign, so that his office expired with the life of Richard, whom, however, he survived by some years, dying in 1491."

He is not the same person as Blanc Sanglier (or Blanch Sanglier, as the History calls him): "This office owes its name to the White Boar, which . . . had beeen [Richard's] cognizance. . . . Richard has a pursuivant of this name previous to his usurpation [source's word, not mine], after that event he made [the ducal pursuivant] a royal one. Some writers call the person who bore the office 'Saint Leger," but I have seen nothing upon this subject to authorize calling him so. The melancholy office he was employed in after the battle of Bosworth has been mentioned. Of his future lot, no writer speaks. The name [of the office] died, probably, with Richard."

Earlier, he says, "The pursuivant, whose lot it was to thus indecently convey the dead body of his late sovereign to Leicester, where it lay 'a spectacle of hate and scorn for two days, bare and uninterred,' was Blanch-Sanglier, or White Boar . . . "the King's own pursuivant at arms, i.e. so before [Richard] became a sovereign, and probably for that reason fixed upon to perform this office. There was something unmanly and indecent in this usage of a fallen enemy, thought that enemy had been most criminally ambitious and cruel." From here he says nothing more about Blanc Sanglier and only reports correctly that Richard's body was buried at Grey Friars and that Henry VII later erected a tomb but incorrectly gives the story of his coffin being used as a horse trough.

Since the author of this treatise, Mark Noble, was using the College's own records, his information regarding the heralds and pursuivants is reliable. But, of course, the information on Richard himself available at the time (1791-1804) is much less reliable.

At any rate, I think that the identification of Blanc Sanglier as being related to or connected with Norroy King at Arms is incorrect. Richard kept the same person as Norroy who had served in this office under Edward IV; Blanc Sanglier (like Gloucester herald, Richard Champney) had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester.

None of these men was the same person as the standard bearer, which, if I'm not mistaken, was a dangerous but temporary honor perhaps given to one of Richard's household knights and had nothing to do with heralds or pursuivants.

I've typed these quotations by hand, so they may contain typos. Unfortunately, if there's a way to copy and paste a .pdf file into a Yahoo forum, I haven't figured it out yet.

Carol

From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

> Your URL includes "says," but will link if you delete that word from the
> end.)

Ta.

> You're right that Blanc Sanglier was a pursuivant, not a full-fledged
> herald, but I'm fairly sure that this identification is an error. Norroy
> King at Arms during Edward IV's reign and Richard's was indeed John Moore,
> Esq.,

Ah, right, so the confusion is over whether it was Norroy or Blanc Sanglier
who was concerned, rather than this name belonging to Blanc Sanglier.

> He is not the same person as Blanc Sanglier (or Blanch Sanglier, as the
> History calls him): "This office owes its name to the White Boar, which .
> . . had beeen [Richard's] cognizance. . . . Richard has a pursuivant of
> this name previous to his usurpation [source's word, not mine], after that
> event he made [the ducal pursuivant] a royal one. Some writers call the
> person who bore the office 'Saint Leger," but I have seen nothing upon
> this subject to authorize calling him so.

Right, so St Leger is the only name we have for him but we don't know
whether that's right ot not.

> that Henry VII later erected a tomb but incorrectly gives the story of his
> coffin being used as a horse trough.

Had we not found Richard's body it would, actually, have been quite nice if
he'd been thrown into the Soar. One of the major tributaries of the Soar is
the Ure, which is the stream which flows past Middleham, so he would have
been going into home waters. I wonder if it was his tombstone which was
taken during the Dissolution, and that's where the story started.

> I've typed these quotations by hand, so they may contain typos.
> Unfortunately, if there's a way to copy and paste a .pdf file into a Yahoo
> forum, I haven't figured it out yet.

It depends on the pdf. A proper pdf which is searcheable should also be
capable of having text highlighted and copied, just like a Word document -
there are little controls for doing this at top left in Adobe. But some
pdfs don't contain searcheable text but just photographs of text, and in
that case you can't do anything except copy by hand, or use an Optical
Character Recognition Engine. If you want to email me the pdf you're having
trouble with, I could have a look at it.

--- In , "George Butterfield" <gbutterf1@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your reply however I did a little research and I don't think they became such esteemed members of medieval society till later [snip]

Carol responds:

Richard certainly used heralds as messengers and ambassadors. He even at one point sent a message via Buckingham herald, presumably before Buckingham's rebellion. He had about eighteen kings of arms, heralds, and pursuivants altogether, surely more than he needed for ceremonial purposes or even their primary function of establishing genealogies and coats of arms.

This paragraph sums up the duties of a medieval herald nicely:

"The use of heralds as messengers (as in the modern sense of the word "herald", e.g. names of newspapers, "to herald the arrival of spring", etc) appears in the 1330s in England, in connection with the beginning of the Hundred Years War. In the late Middle Ages, one often sees heralds taking letters to sovereigns, or even acting as ambassadors, as well as performing various tasks before and after battle: transmitting challenges, declarations of war and other messages such as offers of surrender, identify friend and foe, and also the dead after the battle and negotiate ransoms for prisoners. Also, from the second half of the 14th century, we have the first rolls of arms firmly attributed to heralds, although the earliest rolls date to the late 13th century. The compilation of rolls of arms in their respective areas becomes a standard part of the kings of arms' duties in the 15th century."

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/heralds.htm

Here's an excerpt from another very interesting and informative article:

"The heralds of the fourteenth century were highly respected members of chivalrous society. At this point in time, kings and nobles were hiring heralds on a permanent basis. The differentiation of heralds into ranks based in part upon their own learning and in part upon the status of their employers began at this time, when certain heralds working for kings or great lords were referred to as kings of arms. Also, kings of arms were considered experts on the coats of arms in use in a specific region, called a march (for example, Lyon in Scotland, Ulster in Ireland, etc.). The custom of hiring a herald spread from the kings and dukes all the way down to common mercenary captains, because of the usefulness of a herald. *He was given diplomatic immunity,* he was learned in martial law (which, at the time, covered more than just individual soldiers' behavior) and troop identification by number and nature, and essentially was indispensable as a staff officer. Often, a herald working for a member of the lesser nobility was referred to as a pursuivant, confusing the nice system of kings of arms, heralds, and pursuivants, since one might well find a very skilled herald in the employ of a mercenary. Heralds' records of chivalrous deeds were used extensively by historians like Froissart to track the Hundred Years War and the conflicts between the various claimants to the thrones of the Christian states in the Iberian Peninsula.

"Fifteenth century heralds continued the proud legacy of their predecessors. A copy of the oaths of English fifteenth century kings of arms, heralds, and pursuivants of the royal household is in the Black Book of the Admiralty, which is really a code of martial and naval law. [snip segment on the oaths taken by the three levels]

"At the end of the fifteenth century, then, the herald had reached the apex of his medieval career. Respected as a moral guide, an expert in military matters and genealogy, tournament organization, and a force for right against might, one cannot imagine a more attractive figure. Yet the herald was to decline and all but vanish, save for a few relics in the royal households of the Renaissance. . ."

http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/hduties.html

I recommend the whole article for anyone interested in the subject. It's certainly easier going that "The History of the College of Arms," which is much more detailed but hard to read because of the old-fashioned type face.

Heraldry and chivalry were tied together. No wonder Richard established the College of Arms--and Henry kicked the heralds out so that his mother could live in their house.

Carol

Mine was the first post to answer Wed's question. I think you could be reading your posts in backwards order - blame Yahoo.



________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 23:11
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

 



--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white boar standard) or herald. I think it was quite common to denote these people by the standard they bore or wore. (sorry about boars, bores and wores). Why do I think the standard bearer was killed?

Carol responds:

I thought that we'd already covered this point. The standard bearer (Sir Percival Thirwall, according to tradition) was killed in the battle. Blanc Sanglier, one of Richard's heralds (who had apparently been with him when he was Duke of Gloucester and was promoted now to a royal herald) is a different person altogether. According to the History of the College of Arms, leading the horse carrying Richard's body was his last duty (probably imposed on him by Henry) and nothing is known of him afterwards. Attempts have been made to identify him, but I don't recall the proposed names or the reasons behind them.

A herald, as I said in another message, was an ambassador, not a soldier, and was not supposed to be killed. Heralds were also officers of arms, ranking higher than pursuivants but lower than kings at arms, responsible (in peacetime) for devising and granting coats of arms. All of Richard's officers of arms were members of the College of Arms that he had established at the request (according to the History of the College of Arms) of Gloucester herald, another of the heralds who had apparently been with Richard since he was Duke of Gloucester.

Sorry. Interrupted!

Carol

Ah yes,
He was a herald, and heralds were known by their heraldic titles. In a note to his Richard III and the Bosworth Campaign Peter Hammond seems to be saying he was a son of John More, who was Norroy King of Arms.
Marie

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:
>
> sanglier (plural sangliers)
>
> (obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).
>
> So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Claire M Jordan" wrote:
> >
> > > Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
> > >
> > > Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
> > >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)
> >
> > Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.
> >
> > I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>

No, he wasn't a standard bearer, he was a herald, Blanc Sanglier (ie White Boar) Herald; he had been Richard's personal herald before he became king (I think). Heralds, as someone has already pointed out, were non-combatants. They acted as go-betweens between the two sides and had a sort of diplomatic immunity.
Marie

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white boar standard) or herald. I think it was quite common to denote these people by the standard they bore or wore. (sorry about boars, bores and wores). Why do I think the standard bearer was killed?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 16:03
> Subject: Blanc Sanglier
>
>  
>
> Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:
>
> sanglier (plural sangliers)
>
> (obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).
>
> So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Claire M Jordan" wrote:
> >
> > > Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
> > >
> > > Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
> > >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)
> >
> > Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.
> >
> > I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

I think George answered this. I was merely saying that people were referred to by the uniform that they wore./



________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Friday, 22 February 2013, 20:15
Subject: Re: Blanc Sanglier

 

No, he wasn't a standard bearer, he was a herald, Blanc Sanglier (ie White Boar) Herald; he had been Richard's personal herald before he became king (I think). Heralds, as someone has already pointed out, were non-combatants. They acted as go-betweens between the two sides and had a sort of diplomatic immunity.
Marie

--- In , Hilary Jones wrote:
>
> I've always taken that to mean his standard bearer (ie who held the white boar standard) or herald. I think it was quite common to denote these people by the standard they bore or wore. (sorry about boars, bores and wores). Why do I think the standard bearer was killed?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013, 16:03
> Subject: Blanc Sanglier
>
>  
>
> Are we certain Blanc Sanglier existed as a human male? Because the meaning of the French "sanglier" is:
>
> sanglier (plural sangliers)
>
> (obsolete) wild boar (specifically, a full-grown wild boar).
>
> So we've got "white boar" leading the horse carrying Richard's body?
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In , "justcarol67" wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Claire M Jordan" wrote:
> >
> > > Is it definite that Thirlwell was the Blanc Sanglier herald?
> > >
> > > Whis part is in doubt: who was Blanc Sanglier, who was the standard bearer or who was killed holding the standard?
> > >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > A herald and a standard bearer are not the same thing. A herald is a messenger or ambassador and is not supposed to be attacked whereas a standard bearer is both an honor and a very dangerous symbolic position. A pursuivant is a kind of junior herald. Both are experts in arms and heraldry. (One of Richard's achievements is the founding of the College of Arms for heralds and pursuivants.)
> >
> > Blanc Sanglier (unlike Richard's standard bearer) survived the battle and was forced to lead the horse that carried the body of his dead master. According to "A History of the College of Arms" (available as an ebook via Google Books), he was probably chosen for this terrible duty because he had been with Richard when he was Duke of Gloucester (Richard promoted him from ducal to royal herald) and because the White Boar was Richard's personal cognizance. What happened to him afterward is unknown. He did not take another position under Henry. This book names some of Richard's heralds and pursuivants, (for example, Gloucester herald was Richard Champney), but Blanc Sanglier is not named in the history.
> >
> > I think that someone on this list mentioned his name as Norrey, but that seems to be confusion with Norroy King of Arms, John Moore, who "became so obnoxious to Henry" that he was not allowed to keep his office and died in 1491.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Marie wrote:
>
> He was a herald, and heralds were known by their heraldic titles. In a note to his Richard III and the Bosworth Campaign Peter Hammond seems to be saying he [Blanc Sanglier] was a son of John More, who was Norroy King of Arms.

Carol responds:

I'm pretty sure that this identification is an error and that John More (d. 1591) was still Norroy King of Arms under Richard and was a different from his own ducal herald turned royal herald, Blanc Sanglier, as indicated in the History of the College of Arms. Where the idea that Blanc Sanglier (Richard's own pursuivant with him in the North before he became king) was a son of Norroy King at Arms (appointed by Edward and retained by Richard) came from, I don't know, but it seems unlikely. Here's a link to my earlier post:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group//message/27873

Carol

--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
> Marie wrote:
> >
> > He was a herald, and heralds were known by their heraldic titles. In a note to his Richard III and the Bosworth Campaign Peter Hammond seems to be saying he [Blanc Sanglier] was a son of John More, who was Norroy King of Arms.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I'm pretty sure that this identification is an error and that John More (d. 1591) was still Norroy King of Arms under Richard and was a different from his own ducal herald turned royal herald, Blanc Sanglier, as indicated in the History of the College of Arms. Where the idea that Blanc Sanglier (Richard's own pursuivant with him in the North before he became king) was a son of Norroy King at Arms (appointed by Edward and retained by Richard) came from, I don't know, but it seems unlikely.

But recently repeated by Peter Hammond, a specialist on heraldry, so perhaps worth investigating.
Marie


Here's a link to my earlier post:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//message/27873
>
> Carol
>