22nd August

Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.

Loyalty always.

Paul
Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night of
the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.

Respectfully posted in remembrance of Richard III of
England and all his loyal supporters.

Marion



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

--- In , marion davis
<phaecilia@y...> wrote:
> Respectfully posted in remembrance of Richard III of
> England and all his loyal supporters.
>
> Marion

And (though bit late - UK time at least) of all the dead, Richard II
especially.

Marie

Back from visit soutj to my umm, returned via battlefield
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

--- In , "mariewalsh2003"
<marie@r...> wrote:
> --- In , marion davis
> <phaecilia@y...> wrote:
> > Respectfully posted in remembrance of Richard III of
> > England and all his loyal supporters.
> >
> > Marion
>
> And (though bit late - UK time at least) of all the dead, Richard
II
> especially.
>
> Marie
>
> Back from visit soutj to my umm, returned via battlefield


Apologies for that last typo-ridden effort. I got up in the night as
I couldn't sleep, but couldn't find my glasses (very shortsighted
indeed). Especially for the tribute to Richard II! Back from my
mum's, in case anybody's wondering.
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
Loyauté me lie
Paul


for whom
Richard Liveth Yet!

Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.

I second your Remembrance.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
Subject: 22nd August


 
Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
Loyauté me lie
Paul

for whom
Richard Liveth Yet!

Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....

I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...

RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
Eileen Loyaulte me lie











--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
>
> I second your Remembrance.
>
> Judy
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> Subject: 22nd August
>
>
>  
> Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> Loyauté me lie
> Paul
>
> for whom
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?

My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.

Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.

The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.

So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  

Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 

Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....

I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...

RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
Eileen Loyaulte me lie

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
>
> I second your Remembrance.
>
> Judy
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> Subject: 22nd August
>
>
>  
> Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> Loyauté me lie
> Paul
>
> for whom
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Is it possible to be both a Ricardian and a Republican?! ;)

Good luck everyone. Will be buying The Times of course.

--- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...> wrote:
>
>
> Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
>
> Loyalty always.
>
> Paul
> Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night of
> the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
>

That's an interesting question.  Maybe a bit more of "Tudorising" history?




________________________________
From: david rayner <theblackprussian@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012 4:37 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?

My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.

Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.

The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.

So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  

Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.

________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 

Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....

I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...

RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
Eileen Loyaulte me lie

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
>
> I second your Remembrance.
>
> Judy
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> Subject: 22nd August
>
>
>  
> Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> Loyauté me lie
> Paul
>
> for whom
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Count me in.
And an atheist to boot.


--- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
> Is it possible to be both a Ricardian and a Republican?! ;)
>
>

"Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like
this probably happened after that battle,"

I'f you're referring to the documentary 'Blood Red Roses', I recommend you
watch it. While the initial analysis of one of the skeletons seemed to
suggest he was buried with his hands tied behind his back, further
investigation showed that this wasn't the case. There is no evidence of a
massacre after Towton. There certainly were 'massacres' after some of the
WoR battles, with many noblemen executed. I believe there was only one
immediate post-Bosworth execution (William Catesby) and again, no evidence
of a massacre.

I'm not defending the victor of Bosworth, but nor would I want him (or
anyone) accused of a such an horrific crime as butchering captured prisoners
on flimsy, circumstantial or no evidence. Blood Red Roses is an excellent
documentary. Its clear conclusion, based on the skeletons unearthed and
studied, is that there was no massacre after Towton.

Karen

From: Dorothea Preis <dorotheapreis@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
To: ""
<>
Subject: Re: 22nd August






That's an interesting question. Maybe a bit more of "Tudorising" history?

________________________________
From: david rayner <theblackprussian@...
<mailto:theblackprussian%40yahoo.co.uk> >
To: "
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> "
<
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012 4:37 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August



Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after
Bosworth?

My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely
high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list
of "killed at" references.

Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively
few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they
learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much
smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion
that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third
of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.

The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as
the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the
battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at
Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that
there was no rout at Bosworth.

So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly
recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to
identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of
rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning
captains.

Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like
this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a
similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went
unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the
incident.

This is a remembrance David, so I find your post rather inappropriate. Perhaps you could delay your question until after the sad day has passed.
Paul


On 20 Aug 2012, at 19:37, david rayner wrote:

> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
>>
>> I second your Remembrance.
>>
>> Judy
>> Â
>> Loyaulte me lie
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
>> To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
>> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
>> Subject: 22nd August
>>
>>
>> Â
>> Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
>> Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
>> Loyauté me lie
>> Paul
>>
>> for whom
>> Richard Liveth Yet!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Hi All.
 Yes Paul it's that awful time again but I agree with you Richard would have made in my opinion the best King this country would have seen.
I attended the Yorkshire Branch memorial informal service for Richard at Middleham church on Sunday God Bless him. It was excellent.
Great bunch of people the Yorkshire Branch, very friendly and we have good discussions and a laugh when appropriate of course.
Christine
Richard is always with me.


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 14:55
Subject: 22nd August



 

Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
Loyauté me lie
Paul

for whom
Richard Liveth Yet!

A very interesting and relevant historical question.

Will answer you on the 23rd ;)

--- In , david rayner <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> >
> > I second your Remembrance.
> >
> > Judy
> >  
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > Subject: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >  
> > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > Loyauté me lie
> > Paul
> >
> > for whom
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
us what we, and Richard, need.

I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
gift to Richard and us.

Maria
ejbronte@...

Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
Regards, Annette

Dear Friends and Ricardians

Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August

Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!

What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.

We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.

You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.

C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!

It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!

Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:

Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.

http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us

N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.

Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
Philippa Langley

----- Original Message -----
From: Maria Torres
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
us what we, and Richard, need.

I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
gift to Richard and us.

Maria
ejbronte@...

Did an Obit. go in this year?

--- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...> wrote:
>
>
> Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
>
> Loyalty always.
>
> Paul
> Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night of
> the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
>

Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen

--- In , "Annette Carson" <email@...> wrote:
>
> Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> Regards, Annette
>
> Dear Friends and Ricardians
>
> Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
>
> Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
>
> What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
>
> We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
>
> You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
>
> C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
>
> It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
>
> Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
>
> Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
>
> http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
>
> N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
>
> Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> Philippa Langley
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Maria Torres
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> us what we, and Richard, need.
>
> I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> gift to Richard and us.
>
> Maria
> ejbronte@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi All - I sent a note to everyone out yesterday about this:

"Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
year: the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
Times was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
and since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
made sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
giving us what we, and Richard, need.

I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
gift to Richard and us.

Maria
ejbronte@..."

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:32 AM, blancsanglier1452 <
blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Did an Obit. go in this year?
>
>
> --- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> > Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> > those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
> >
> > Loyalty always.
> >
> > Paul
> > Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night
> of
> > the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
> >
>
>
>

Yes thank you for that, which I saw yesterday.

I was referring to a UK-based organ rather than their colonial cousins ;) The NYT not generally being readily available...

Good luck with your pussies though!

--- In , Maria Torres <ejbronte@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All - I sent a note to everyone out yesterday about this:
>
> "Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
> year: the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
> Times was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
> and since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
> made sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
> giving us what we, and Richard, need.
>
> I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> gift to Richard and us.
>
> Maria
> ejbronte@..."
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:32 AM, blancsanglier1452 <
> blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Did an Obit. go in this year?
> >
> >
> > --- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> > > Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> > > those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
> > >
> > > Loyalty always.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night
> > of
> > > the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.


----- Original Message -----
From: EileenB
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August



Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen

--- In , "Annette Carson" <email@...> wrote:
>
> Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> Regards, Annette
>
> Dear Friends and Ricardians
>
> Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
>
> Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
>
> What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
>
> We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
>
> You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
>
> C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
>
> It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
>
> Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
>
> Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
>
> http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
>
> N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
>
> Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> Philippa Langley
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Maria Torres
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> us what we, and Richard, need.
>
> I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> gift to Richard and us.
>
> Maria
> ejbronte@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen

--- In , "Annette Carson" <email@...> wrote:
>
> Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>
> Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
>
> --- In , "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > Regards, Annette
> >
> > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> >
> > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> >
> > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> >
> > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> >
> > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> >
> > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> >
> > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> >
> > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> >
> > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> >
> > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> >
> > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> >
> > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> >
> > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > Philippa Langley
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Maria Torres
> > To:
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > us what we, and Richard, need.
> >
> > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > gift to Richard and us.
> >
> > Maria
> > ejbronte@
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Tragic. What happpened?

--- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...> wrote:
>
>
> Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
>
> Loyalty always.
>
> Paul
> Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night of
> the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
>

Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they, so what's the problem?  I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to narrate the programme.  



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@...> wrote:
>
> Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> Regards, Annette
>
> Dear Friends and Ricardians
>
> Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
>
> Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
>
> What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
>
> We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
>
> You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
>
> C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
>
> It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
>
> Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
>
> Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
>
> http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
>
> N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
>
> Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> Philippa Langley
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Maria Torres
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> us what we, and Richard, need.
>
> I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> gift to Richard and us.
>
> Maria
> ejbronte@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That seems awfully expensive.



________________________________
From: Maria Torres <ejbronte@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:45
Subject: Re: Re: 22nd August

Hi All - I sent a note to everyone out yesterday about this:

"Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
year:  the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
Times was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
and since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
made sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
giving us what we, and Richard, need.

I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year.  Now that
I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
gift to Richard and us.

Maria
ejbronte@..."

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:32 AM, blancsanglier1452 <
blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Did an Obit. go in this year?
>
>
> --- In , "P.T.Bale" <paultrevor@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Well here we are again, worst day of the year for us Ricardians.
> > Let us take a quiet moment today to remember our beloved King Richard and
> > those who died fighting with him to try to save England and his crown.
> >
> > Loyalty always.
> >
> > Paul
> > Slightly early to take time zones into consideration, although the night
> of
> > the 21st is always a rotten one for me personally.
> >
>
> 
>






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

Yahoo! Groups Links

I left my feedback & got the following unhelpful response - anyone got
else got the same? Maybe we're targetting the wrong people...??

Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding your
programme idea.

We would advise you that Channel 4 do not make the programmes we transmit
but commission or purchase them from independent production companies and
distributors.

Therefore, you would need to approach an independent production company
with your outline and try to persuade them to help develop the idea as we
only accept submissions for programmes from production companies.

The television trade newspaper, BROADCAST, publishes a directory called
'The Production Guide' which lists names and addresses of independent
production companies. The British Film Institute also publishes a Year
Book which lists production companies and PACT (Producers Alliance for
Cinema and Television) have an on-line resource which lists contact details
for independent production companies. This can be found at:

www.pact.co.uk

Channel 4 is not responsible for third-party websites.

or you may be able to find an old copy of the Directory in your local
library under the reference section.

We are sorry we could not be of assistance in this matter, but we thank you
for your interest in Channel 4 and we wish you the best with your project.

Kind regards,

Damien McCandless
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries

On 22 August 2012 15:38, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they, so
> what's the problem? I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to
> narrate the programme.
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and
> haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people
> interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the
> dross they have on.....Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson"
> <email@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the
> archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given
> information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now
> which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from
> Philippa Langley ....
> > Regards, Annette
> >
> > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> >
> > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> >
> > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal,
> the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going
> ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but
> they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't
> believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary
> about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> >
> > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the
> footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never
> been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the
> historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about
> the real Richard's life.
> >
> > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them
> there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> >
> > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a
> Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2
> minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday
> 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> >
> > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their
> audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience
> exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change
> their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is
> found at the dig!
> >
> > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined
> above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention.
> Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes
> abroad which means you get to see it too!
> >
> > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of
> message you might like to leave:
> >
> > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for
> his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I
> just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well
> done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover
> all about the real, historical Richard III.
> >
> > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> >
> > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say:
> "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your
> comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would
> be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK
> postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3
> 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX,
> EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> >
> > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > Philippa Langley
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Maria Torres
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
> year:
> > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > us what we, and Richard, need.
> >
> > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > gift to Richard and us.
> >
> > Maria
> > ejbronte@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>



--
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>

To be fair, that's a professional and informative response.

-try the BBC... did you ever see John Birt's replies??? lol


________________________________
From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August

I left  my feedback & got the following unhelpful response - anyone got
else got the same? Maybe we're targetting the wrong people...??

Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding your
programme idea.

We would advise you that Channel 4 do not make the programmes we transmit
but commission or purchase them from independent production companies and
distributors.

Therefore, you would need to approach an independent production company
with your outline and try to persuade them to help develop the idea as we
only accept submissions for programmes from production companies.

The television trade newspaper, BROADCAST, publishes a directory called
'The Production Guide' which lists names and addresses of independent
production companies.  The British Film Institute also publishes a Year
Book which lists production companies and PACT (Producers Alliance for
Cinema and Television) have an on-line resource which lists contact details
for independent production companies.  This can be found at:

www.pact.co.uk

Channel 4 is not responsible for third-party websites.

or you may be able to find an old copy of the Directory in your local
library under the reference section.

We are sorry we could not be of assistance in this matter, but we thank you
for your interest in Channel 4 and we wish you the best with your project.

Kind regards,

Damien McCandless
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries

On 22 August 2012 15:38, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they, so
> what's the problem?  I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to
> narrate the programme.
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and
> haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people
> interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the
> dross they have on.....Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson"
> <email@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the
> archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given
> information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now
> which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from
> Philippa Langley ....
> > Regards, Annette
> >
> > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> >
> > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> >
> > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal,
> the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going
> ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but
> they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't
> believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary
> about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> >
> > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the
> footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never
> been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the
> historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about
> the real Richard's life.
> >
> > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them
> there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> >
> > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a
> Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2
> minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday
> 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> >
> > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their
> audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience
> exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change
> their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is
> found at the dig!
> >
> > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined
> above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention.
> Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes
> abroad which means you get to see it too!
> >
> > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of
> message you might like to leave:
> >
> > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for
> his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I
> just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well
> done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover
> all about the real, historical Richard III.
> >
> > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> >
> > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say:
> "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your
> comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would
> be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK
> postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3
> 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX,
> EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> >
> > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > Philippa Langley
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Maria Torres
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
> year:
> > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > us what we, and Richard, need.
> >
> > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > gift to Richard and us.
> >
> > Maria
> > ejbronte@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 
>



--
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

Sorry - I meant unhelpful to me as in it didnt achieve what I thought it
was supposed to achieve! ;-) We've been asked to write to them & they are
saying they are not the ones to ask, so those who bother to write will be
getting the same 'run-around'. I dont know who is producing this
documentary - does anyone else?



On 22 August 2012 15:54, Edward Shine <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> To be fair, that's a professional and informative response.
>
> -try the BBC... did you ever see John Birt's replies??? lol
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:49 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
> I left my feedback & got the following unhelpful response - anyone got
> else got the same? Maybe we're targetting the wrong people...??
>
> Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding your
> programme idea.
>
> We would advise you that Channel 4 do not make the programmes we transmit
> but commission or purchase them from independent production companies and
> distributors.
>
> Therefore, you would need to approach an independent production company
> with your outline and try to persuade them to help develop the idea as we
> only accept submissions for programmes from production companies.
>
> The television trade newspaper, BROADCAST, publishes a directory called
> 'The Production Guide' which lists names and addresses of independent
> production companies. The British Film Institute also publishes a Year
> Book which lists production companies and PACT (Producers Alliance for
> Cinema and Television) have an on-line resource which lists contact details
> for independent production companies. This can be found at:
>
> www.pact.co.uk
>
> Channel 4 is not responsible for third-party websites.
>
> or you may be able to find an old copy of the Directory in your local
> library under the reference section.
>
> We are sorry we could not be of assistance in this matter, but we thank you
> for your interest in Channel 4 and we wish you the best with your project.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Damien McCandless
> Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
>
> On 22 August 2012 15:38, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...
> >wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they,
> so
> > what's the problem? I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to
> > narrate the programme.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and
> > haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people
> > interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the
> > dross they have on.....Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson"
> > <email@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the
> > archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being
> given
> > information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment
> now
> > which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from
> > Philippa Langley ....
> > > Regards, Annette
> > >
> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > >
> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > >
> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal,
> > the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going
> > ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but
> > they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't
> > believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary
> > about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > >
> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the
> > footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never
> > been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the
> > historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about
> > the real Richard's life.
> > >
> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them
> > there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > >
> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a
> > Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2
> > minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday
> > 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > >
> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their
> > audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an
> audience
> > exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help
> change
> > their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what
> is
> > found at the dig!
> > >
> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined
> > above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention.
> > Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes
> > abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > >
> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of
> > message you might like to leave:
> > >
> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for
> > his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I
> > just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well
> > done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to
> discover
> > all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > >
> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > >
> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say:
> > "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your
> > comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would
> > be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK
> > postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD,
> NE3
> > 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX,
> > EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > Philippa Langley
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Maria Torres
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
> > year:
> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
> Times
> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
> and
> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
> made
> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
> giving
> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > >
> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses
> got
> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now
> that
> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a
> personal
> > > gift to Richard and us.
> > >
> > > Maria
> > > ejbronte@...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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>

Sorry, can't help regarding the C4 campaign organised by Philippa. There is
a production company already on board and booked to film the dig - this
company has pitched the project to C4 who have agreed to underwrite the
preliminary filming, but are not yet committed to making a full-length
documentary.

The fact that you got this particular reply seems to indicate that your
email message was read by someone who pushed what they thought was the
appropriate response button. If they receive a large number of messages
saying the same thing, maybe it will provoke a different reaction, who
knows? At least perhaps someone's attention may be drawn to the fact that
multiple messages are arriving. You were actually a little early - perhaps
the response will be different on 24-25 August by which time the media
release will be public knowledge. I'm just guessing, really.
Regards, Annette


----- Original Message -----
From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


> Sorry - I meant unhelpful to me as in it didnt achieve what I thought it
> was supposed to achieve! ;-) We've been asked to write to them & they are
> saying they are not the ones to ask, so those who bother to write will be
> getting the same 'run-around'. I dont know who is producing this
> documentary - does anyone else?
>
>
>
> On 22 August 2012 15:54, Edward Shine <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> To be fair, that's a professional and informative response.
>>
>> -try the BBC... did you ever see John Birt's replies??? lol
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
>> To:
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>>
>> I left my feedback & got the following unhelpful response - anyone got
>> else got the same? Maybe we're targetting the wrong people...??
>>
>> Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding your
>> programme idea.
>>
>> We would advise you that Channel 4 do not make the programmes we transmit
>> but commission or purchase them from independent production companies and
>> distributors.
>>
>> Therefore, you would need to approach an independent production company
>> with your outline and try to persuade them to help develop the idea as we
>> only accept submissions for programmes from production companies.
>>
>> The television trade newspaper, BROADCAST, publishes a directory called
>> 'The Production Guide' which lists names and addresses of independent
>> production companies. The British Film Institute also publishes a Year
>> Book which lists production companies and PACT (Producers Alliance for
>> Cinema and Television) have an on-line resource which lists contact
>> details
>> for independent production companies. This can be found at:
>>
>> www.pact.co.uk
>>
>> Channel 4 is not responsible for third-party websites.
>>
>> or you may be able to find an old copy of the Directory in your local
>> library under the reference section.
>>
>> We are sorry we could not be of assistance in this matter, but we thank
>> you
>> for your interest in Channel 4 and we wish you the best with your
>> project.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Damien McCandless
>> Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
>>
>> On 22 August 2012 15:38, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > **
>> >
>> >
>> > Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they,
>> so
>> > what's the problem? I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to
>> > narrate the programme.
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
>> > To:
>> > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
>> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum
>> > and
>> > haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people
>> > interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the
>> > dross they have on.....Eileen
>> >
>> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette
>> > Carson"
>> > <email@...> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that
>> > > the
>> > archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being
>> given
>> > information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment
>> now
>> > which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from
>> > Philippa Langley ....
>> > > Regards, Annette
>> > >
>> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
>> > >
>> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
>> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
>> > >
>> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our
>> > > appeal,
>> > the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is
>> > going
>> > ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but
>> > they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't
>> > believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary
>> > about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
>> > >
>> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all
>> > > the
>> > footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has
>> > never
>> > been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the
>> > historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers
>> > about
>> > the real Richard's life.
>> > >
>> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to
>> > > them
>> > there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
>> > >
>> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a
>> > Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2
>> > minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on
>> > Friday
>> > 24 and Saturday 25 August.
>> > >
>> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their
>> > audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an
>> audience
>> > exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help
>> change
>> > their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what
>> is
>> > found at the dig!
>> > >
>> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined
>> > above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention.
>> > Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their
>> > programmes
>> > abroad which means you get to see it too!
>> > >
>> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of
>> > message you might like to leave:
>> > >
>> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for
>> > his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig,
>> > I
>> > just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character.
>> > Well
>> > done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to
>> discover
>> > all about the real, historical Richard III.
>> > >
>> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
>> > >
>> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they
>> > > say:
>> > "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with
>> > your
>> > comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details
>> > would
>> > be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK
>> > postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD,
>> NE3
>> > 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX,
>> > EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
>> > >
>> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
>> > > Philippa Langley
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: Maria Torres
>> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
>> > year:
>> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
>> Times
>> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
>> and
>> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
>> made
>> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
>> giving
>> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
>> > >
>> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses
>> got
>> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now
>> that
>> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a
>> personal
>> > > gift to Richard and us.
>> > >
>> > > Maria
>> > > ejbronte@...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> 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>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

In haste - Philippa suggests substituting the words 'please commission the programme' rather than 'please make the programme'.


----- Original Message -----
From: Annette Carson
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August



Sorry, can't help regarding the C4 campaign organised by Philippa. There is
a production company already on board and booked to film the dig - this
company has pitched the project to C4 who have agreed to underwrite the
preliminary filming, but are not yet committed to making a full-length
documentary.

The fact that you got this particular reply seems to indicate that your
email message was read by someone who pushed what they thought was the
appropriate response button. If they receive a large number of messages
saying the same thing, maybe it will provoke a different reaction, who
knows? At least perhaps someone's attention may be drawn to the fact that
multiple messages are arriving. You were actually a little early - perhaps
the response will be different on 24-25 August by which time the media
release will be public knowledge. I'm just guessing, really.
Regards, Annette

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August

> Sorry - I meant unhelpful to me as in it didnt achieve what I thought it
> was supposed to achieve! ;-) We've been asked to write to them & they are
> saying they are not the ones to ask, so those who bother to write will be
> getting the same 'run-around'. I dont know who is producing this
> documentary - does anyone else?
>
>
>
> On 22 August 2012 15:54, Edward Shine <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> To be fair, that's a professional and informative response.
>>
>> -try the BBC... did you ever see John Birt's replies??? lol
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: "Lisa @ The Antiques Boutique" <lisa.holtjones@...>
>> To:
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>>
>> I left my feedback & got the following unhelpful response - anyone got
>> else got the same? Maybe we're targetting the wrong people...??
>>
>> Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding your
>> programme idea.
>>
>> We would advise you that Channel 4 do not make the programmes we transmit
>> but commission or purchase them from independent production companies and
>> distributors.
>>
>> Therefore, you would need to approach an independent production company
>> with your outline and try to persuade them to help develop the idea as we
>> only accept submissions for programmes from production companies.
>>
>> The television trade newspaper, BROADCAST, publishes a directory called
>> 'The Production Guide' which lists names and addresses of independent
>> production companies. The British Film Institute also publishes a Year
>> Book which lists production companies and PACT (Producers Alliance for
>> Cinema and Television) have an on-line resource which lists contact
>> details
>> for independent production companies. This can be found at:
>>
>> www.pact.co.uk
>>
>> Channel 4 is not responsible for third-party websites.
>>
>> or you may be able to find an old copy of the Directory in your local
>> library under the reference section.
>>
>> We are sorry we could not be of assistance in this matter, but we thank
>> you
>> for your interest in Channel 4 and we wish you the best with your
>> project.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Damien McCandless
>> Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
>>
>> On 22 August 2012 15:38, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > **
>> >
>> >
>> > Well they've done Time Team digs that amounted to nothing haven't they,
>> so
>> > what's the problem? I am going to suggest they ask Richard Armitage to
>> > narrate the programme.
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
>> > To:
>> > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 14:38
>> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum
>> > and
>> > haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people
>> > interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the
>> > dross they have on.....Eileen
>> >
>> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette
>> > Carson"
>> > <email@...> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that
>> > > the
>> > archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being
>> given
>> > information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment
>> now
>> > which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from
>> > Philippa Langley ....
>> > > Regards, Annette
>> > >
>> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
>> > >
>> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
>> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
>> > >
>> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our
>> > > appeal,
>> > the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is
>> > going
>> > ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but
>> > they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't
>> > believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary
>> > about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
>> > >
>> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all
>> > > the
>> > footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has
>> > never
>> > been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the
>> > historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers
>> > about
>> > the real Richard's life.
>> > >
>> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to
>> > > them
>> > there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
>> > >
>> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a
>> > Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2
>> > minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on
>> > Friday
>> > 24 and Saturday 25 August.
>> > >
>> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their
>> > audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an
>> audience
>> > exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help
>> change
>> > their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what
>> is
>> > found at the dig!
>> > >
>> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined
>> > above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention.
>> > Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their
>> > programmes
>> > abroad which means you get to see it too!
>> > >
>> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of
>> > message you might like to leave:
>> > >
>> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for
>> > his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig,
>> > I
>> > just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character.
>> > Well
>> > done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to
>> discover
>> > all about the real, historical Richard III.
>> > >
>> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
>> > >
>> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they
>> > > say:
>> > "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with
>> > your
>> > comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details
>> > would
>> > be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK
>> > postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD,
>> NE3
>> > 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX,
>> > EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
>> > >
>> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
>> > > Philippa Langley
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: Maria Torres
>> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this
>> > year:
>> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the
>> Times
>> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year,
>> and
>> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I
>> made
>> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't
>> giving
>> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
>> > >
>> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses
>> got
>> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now
>> that
>> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a
>> personal
>> > > gift to Richard and us.
>> > >
>> > > Maria
>> > > ejbronte@...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> 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>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
 
 
 
The dig is in the news.
 
 
 
and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.

From: blancsanglier1452 <blancsanglier1452@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
A very interesting and relevant historical question.

Will answer you on the 23rd ;)

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> >
> > I second your Remembrance.
> >
> > Judy
> > à
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > Subject: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > à
> > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > LoyautÒ© me lie
> > Paul
> >
> > for whom
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:


Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
they are aware of the interest this would receive.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.


Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.

Cheers, Dorothea


________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
 
 
 
The dig is in the news.
 
 
 
and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.

From: blancsanglier1452 <blancsanglier1452@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
Subject: Re: 22nd August

 
A very interesting and relevant historical question.

Will answer you on the 23rd ;)

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> >
> > I second your Remembrance.
> >
> > Judy
> > à
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > Subject: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > à
> > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > LoyautÒ© me lie
> > Paul
> >
> > for whom
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
Sir John Babington of Chilwell
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
Sir John Grey
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
Sir John Huddleston, attainted
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
Sir William Parker of London
Sir John Paston
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire

Lancastrians

Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire

Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.

Great list, Paul!

Karen

On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...> wrote:

>Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
>at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
>more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
>mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
>for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
>The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
>been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
>Paul
>
>
>Yorkists
>Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
>Henry VII
>Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
>Sir John Babington of Chilwell
>Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
>Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
>Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
>Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
>Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
>Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
>Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
>Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
>the battle
>Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
>Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
>Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
>Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
>Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
>Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
>Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
>killed in battle
>John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
>Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
>Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
>Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
>of the North under Henry VII
>Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
>Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
>Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
>Sir John Grey
>Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
>under Henry VII
>Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
>Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
>Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
>Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
>John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
>battle
>Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
>Sir John Huddleston, attainted
>Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
>George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
>Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
>Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
>Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
>Yorkshire under Henry VII*
>Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
>Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
>Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
>Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
>Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
>Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
>under Henry VII
>Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
>Cumberland under Henry VII
>Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
>Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
>Sir William Parker of London
>Sir John Paston
>Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
>imprisoned, then released
>Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
>Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
>Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
>Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
>John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
>Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
>Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
>Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
>Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
>John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
>Battle of Stoke (1487)
>Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
>Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
>Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
>Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
>Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
>Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
>Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
>Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
>
>Lancastrians
>
>Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
>reversed
>Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
>Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
>Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
>Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
>Bosworth*
>Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
>VII
>Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
>Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
>under Henry VII
>Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
>Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
>Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
>Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
>III
>Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
>Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
>Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
>under Richard III
>Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
>Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
>Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
>Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
>Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
>Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
>Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
>Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
>Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
>Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
>Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>Sir Roger Tocotes
>Sir John Treffry of Fowey
>Sir Richard Tunstall
>Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
>Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
>Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
>John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
>Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
>Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
>Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
>battle
>Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
>VII¹s household
>Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
>Great Chamberlain of England*
>John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
>Deeping, Lincolnshire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

I wouldn't go that far but from what I've read, it seems obvious that Catesby was shocked to hear he was going to lose his head after Bosworth, so I can only assume he had a reason for thinking he would be okay.  I would have expected  all of Richard's closest friends to assume that they would get the chop if they survived.  Maybe Tudor simply ended up picking on him because he was one of Richard's closest and actually survived the battle but of course with the scant evidence available to us, we are not likely to ever know for sure.
 
The list is fascinating.
 
Liz
 
From: Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:07
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.

Great list, Paul!

Karen

On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <mailto:paul.bale%40sky.com> wrote:

>Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
>at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
>more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
>mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
>for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
>The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
>been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
>Paul
>
>
>Yorkists
>Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
>Henry VII
>Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
>Sir John Babington of Chilwell
>Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
>Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
>Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
>Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
>Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
>Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
>Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
>Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
>the battle
>Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
>Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
>Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
>Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
>Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
>Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
>Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
>killed in battle
>John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
>Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
>Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
>Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
>of the North under Henry VII
>Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
>Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
>Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
>Sir John Grey
>Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
>under Henry VII
>Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
>Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
>Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
>Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
>John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
>battle
>Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
>Sir John Huddleston, attainted
>Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
>George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
>Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
>Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
>Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
>Yorkshire under Henry VII*
>Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
>Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
>Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
>Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
>Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
>Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
>under Henry VII
>Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
>Cumberland under Henry VII
>Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
>Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
>Sir William Parker of London
>Sir John Paston
>Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
>imprisoned, then released
>Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
>Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
>Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
>Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
>John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
>Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
>Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
>Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
>Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
>John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
>Battle of Stoke (1487)
>Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
>Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
>Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
>Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
>Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
>Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
>Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
>Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
>
>Lancastrians
>
>Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
>reversed
>Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
>Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
>Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
>Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
>Bosworth*
>Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
>VII
>Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
>Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
>under Henry VII
>Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
>Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
>Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
>Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
>III
>Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
>Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
>Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
>under Richard III
>Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
>Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
>Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
>Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
>Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
>Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
>Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
>Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
>Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
>Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
>Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>Sir Roger Tocotes
>Sir John Treffry of Fowey
>Sir Richard Tunstall
>Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
>Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
>Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
>John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
>Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
>Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
>Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
>battle
>Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
>VII¹s household
>Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
>Great Chamberlain of England*
>John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
>Deeping, Lincolnshire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Well done, Paul.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:03 AM
Subject: 22nd August roll call

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists                                                         
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
Sir John Grey   
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
Sir William Parker of London   
Sir John Paston   
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       

Lancastrians   
       
Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Cheers!
Three executions, inc. yer man the Cat: Croyland Continuator lists two fellas from the west country (???) father & son hanged after the battle. Can't remember names right now.


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 1:03 PM
Subject: 22nd August roll call

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists                                                         
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
Sir John Grey   
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
Sir William Parker of London   
Sir John Paston   
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       

Lancastrians   
       
Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

--- In , Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...> wrote:
>
> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
> wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
> remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
> Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
> most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.
>
> Great list, Paul!
>
> Karen
>
> On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> >Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
> >at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
> >more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
> >mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
> >for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> >The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
> >been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> >Paul
> >
> >
> >Yorkists
> >Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
> >Henry VII
> >Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> >Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> >Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> >Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> >Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> >Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> >Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> >Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
> >the battle
> >Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> >Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> >Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> >Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> >Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> >Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
> >killed in battle
> >John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> >Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> >Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> >Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> >Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
> >of the North under Henry VII
> >Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> >Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Grey
> >Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> >Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> >Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> >Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> >John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
> >battle
> >Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> >Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> >Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> >George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> >Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> >Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> >Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
> >Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> >Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
> >Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> >Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> >Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> >Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
> >Cumberland under Henry VII
> >Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> >Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> >Sir William Parker of London
> >Sir John Paston
> >Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
> >imprisoned, then released
> >Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> >Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> >John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> >Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> >Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> >Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> >John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
> >Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> >Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> >Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> >Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> >Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
> >
> >Lancastrians
> >
> >Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
> >reversed
> >Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> >Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
> >Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
> >Bosworth*
> >Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
> >VII
> >Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> >Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> >Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> >Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> >Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
> >III
> >Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> >Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> >Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
> >under Richard III
> >Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> >Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> >Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> >Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> >Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> >Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> >Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> >Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> >Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Roger Tocotes
> >Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> >Sir Richard Tunstall
> >Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> >Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> >Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> >Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
> >battle
> >Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
> >VII¹s household
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
> >Great Chamberlain of England*
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
> >Deeping, Lincolnshire
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Thanks, Stephen. I have that book, and referenced it earlier tonight on a
different subject/forum. But I didn't think to check the Catesby lineage
while I had it open!

Karen

From: stephenmlark <stephenmlark@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:25:04 -0000
To: <>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call






He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady
Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

--- In
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> , Karen Clark
<Ragged_staff@...> wrote:
>
> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
> wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
> remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
> Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
> most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.
>
> Great list, Paul!

...and we REALLY use her as a source?!?!?!

Crikey.


________________________________
From: stephenmlark <stephenmlark@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

--- In , Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...> wrote:
>
> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
> wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
> remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
> Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
> most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.
>
> Great list, Paul!
>
> Karen
>
> On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> >Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
> >at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
> >more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
> >mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
> >for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> >The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
> >been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> >Paul
> >
> >
> >Yorkists
> >Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
> >Henry VII
> >Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> >Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> >Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> >Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> >Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> >Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> >Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> >Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
> >the battle
> >Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> >Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> >Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> >Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> >Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> >Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
> >killed in battle
> >John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> >Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> >Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> >Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> >Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
> >of the North under Henry VII
> >Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> >Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Grey
> >Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> >Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> >Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> >Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> >John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
> >battle
> >Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> >Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> >Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> >George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> >Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> >Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> >Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
> >Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> >Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
> >Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> >Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> >Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> >Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
> >Cumberland under Henry VII
> >Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> >Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> >Sir William Parker of London
> >Sir John Paston
> >Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
> >imprisoned, then released
> >Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> >Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> >John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> >Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> >Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> >Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> >John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
> >Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> >Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> >Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> >Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> >Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
> >
> >Lancastrians
> >
> >Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
> >reversed
> >Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> >Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
> >Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
> >Bosworth*
> >Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
> >VII
> >Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> >Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> >Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> >Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> >Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
> >III
> >Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> >Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> >Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
> >under Richard III
> >Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> >Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> >Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> >Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> >Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> >Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> >Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> >Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> >Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Roger Tocotes
> >Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> >Sir Richard Tunstall
> >Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> >Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> >Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> >Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
> >battle
> >Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
> >VII¹s household
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
> >Great Chamberlain of England*
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
> >Deeping, Lincolnshire
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Better than Alison Weird ....


From: Edward Shine <blancsanglier1452@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 15:42
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
...and we REALLY use her as a source?!?!?!

Crikey.

________________________________
From: stephenmlark <mailto:stephenmlark%40talktalk.net>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...> wrote:
>
> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
> wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
> remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
> Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
> most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.
>
> Great list, Paul!
>
> Karen
>
> On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> >Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
> >at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
> >more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
> >mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
> >for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> >The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
> >been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> >Paul
> >
> >
> >Yorkists
> >Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
> >Henry VII
> >Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> >Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> >Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> >Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> >Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> >Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> >Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> >Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
> >the battle
> >Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> >Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> >Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> >Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> >Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> >Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
> >killed in battle
> >John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> >Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> >Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> >Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> >Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
> >of the North under Henry VII
> >Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> >Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Grey
> >Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> >Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> >Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> >Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> >John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
> >battle
> >Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> >Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> >Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> >George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> >Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> >Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> >Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
> >Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> >Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
> >Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> >Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> >Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> >Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
> >Cumberland under Henry VII
> >Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> >Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> >Sir William Parker of London
> >Sir John Paston
> >Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
> >imprisoned, then released
> >Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> >Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> >John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> >Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> >Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> >Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> >John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
> >Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> >Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> >Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> >Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> >Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
> >
> >Lancastrians
> >
> >Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
> >reversed
> >Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> >Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
> >Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
> >Bosworth*
> >Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
> >VII
> >Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> >Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> >Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> >Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> >Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
> >III
> >Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> >Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> >Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
> >under Richard III
> >Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> >Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> >Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> >Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> >Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> >Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> >Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> >Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> >Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Roger Tocotes
> >Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> >Sir Richard Tunstall
> >Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> >Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> >Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> >Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
> >battle
> >Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
> >VII¹s household
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
> >Great Chamberlain of England*
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
> >Deeping, Lincolnshire
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

.......... all confirmed by the DNB and it's contributor.

----- Original Message -----
From: Edward Shine
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call



...and we REALLY use her as a source?!?!?!

Crikey.

________________________________
From: stephenmlark <stephenmlark@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call



He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

--- In , Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...> wrote:
>
> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him. He
> wasn't the only Catesby in history to come to a sticky end. I can't
> remember the exact connection between them but Robert C of the Gunpowder
> Plot was certainly of the same family. William C is one of the people I'm
> most looking forward to researching, when I get to it.
>
> Great list, Paul!
>
> Karen
>
> On 24/08/12 10:03 PM, "Paul Trevor Bale" <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> >Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought
> >at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far
> >more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor
> >mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted
> >for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> >The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having
> >been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> >Paul
> >
> >
> >Yorkists
> >Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under
> >Henry VII
> >Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> >Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> >Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> >Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> >Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> >Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> >Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> >Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after
> >the battle
> >Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> >Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> >Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> >Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> >Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> >Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire,
> >killed in battle
> >John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> >Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> >Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> >Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> >Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant
> >of the North under Henry VII
> >Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> >Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> >Sir John Grey
> >Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> >Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> >Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> >Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> >John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in
> >battle
> >Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> >Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> >Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> >George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> >Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> >Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> >Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of
> >Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> >Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for
> >Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> >Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> >Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> >Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of
> >Cumberland under Henry VII
> >Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> >Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> >Sir William Parker of London
> >Sir John Paston
> >Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland,
> >imprisoned, then released
> >Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> >Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> >Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> >John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> >Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> >Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> >Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> >John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at
> >Battle of Stoke (1487)
> >Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> >Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> >Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> >Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> >Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> >Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> >Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
> >
> >Lancastrians
> >
> >Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III
> >reversed
> >Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> >Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> >Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun¹s Ottery, Devon
> >Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after
> >Bosworth*
> >Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry
> >VII
> >Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> >Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor
> >under Henry VII
> >Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> >Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> >Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> >Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard
> >III
> >Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> >Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> >Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder
> >under Richard III
> >Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> >Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> >Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> >Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> >Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> >Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> >Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> >Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> >Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> >Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> >Sir Roger Tocotes
> >Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> >Sir Richard Tunstall
> >Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> >Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> >Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> >Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> >Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after
> >battle
> >Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry
> >VII¹s household
> >Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> >John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary
> >Great Chamberlain of England*
> >John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East
> >Deeping, Lincolnshire
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Some of her books are sounder than others. The Gunpowder Plot book and her
Cromwell book are pretty good.

Karen

From: Edward Shine <blancsanglier1452@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 07:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: <>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call






...and we REALLY use her as a source?!?!?!

Crikey.

________________________________
From: stephenmlark <stephenmlark@...
<mailto:stephenmlark%40talktalk.net> >
To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call



He is a direct descendant - see "Catesby" under files. Sources include Lady
Antonia Fraser (book on the Plot).

Hi All, I did the same Dorothea and got the same reply, not too prommising was it.
Chris


________________________________
From: Dorothea Preis <dorotheapreis@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 11:12
Subject: Re: 22nd August



 

I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:

Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
they are aware of the interest this would receive.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.

Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.

Cheers, Dorothea

________________________________
From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
 
 
 
The dig is in the news.
 
 
 
and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.

From: blancsanglier1452 <mailto:blancsanglier1452%40yahoo.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
Subject: Re: 22nd August

 
A very interesting and relevant historical question.

Will answer you on the 23rd ;)

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> >
> > I second your Remembrance.
> >
> > Judy
> > à
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > Subject: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > à
> > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > LoyautÒ© me lie
> > Paul
> >
> > for whom
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Wasn't he originally associated with Lord Hastings, serving as his advisor
or something?
If so, mightn't Catesby have known how deeply involved Hastings actually was
in any plot to depose/remove Richard from the Protectorate? Can't have the
truth getting in the way of a good alibi now, can we?
It would seem sensible, if one were Henry Tudor anyway, to have already
drawn up a list of those to "suffer" various pains and penalties upon his
gaining the throne. Stillington survived, but he wasn't found until well
after the battle and any trial might bring up things Tudor/Morton didn't
want.
Catesby, on the other hand, was captured immediately after Bosworth and his
death could, again from Tudor's viewpoint, be put down to Catesby's actions
DURING the battle; ie, he'd fought against Tudor. Slim evidence, but that's
our Harry!
I don't know about the others executed, but they might very well be worth
looking into for similar reasons.


----- Original Message -----
From: "liz williams" <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


"...Maybe Tudor simply ended up picking on him because he was one of
Richard's closest and actually survived the battle but of course with the
scant evidence available to us, we are not likely to ever know for sure.

The list is fascinating.

Liz

I got it too
From: C HOLMES <christineholmes651@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 16:19
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Hi All, I did the same Dorothea and got the same reply, not too prommising was it.
Chris


________________________________
From: Dorothea Preis <mailto:dorotheapreis%40yahoo.com.au>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 11:12
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 

I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:

Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
they are aware of the interest this would receive.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.

Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.

Cheers, Dorothea

________________________________
From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August

 
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
 
 
 
The dig is in the news.
 
 
 
and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.

From: blancsanglier1452 <mailto:blancsanglier1452%40yahoo.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
Subject: Re: 22nd August

 
A very interesting and relevant historical question.

Will answer you on the 23rd ;)

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
>
> My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
>
> Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
>
> The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
>
> So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
>
> Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
>
> Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
>
> I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
>
> RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> Eileen Loyaulte me lie
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> >
> > I second your Remembrance.
> >
> > Judy
> > à
> > Loyaulte me lie
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > Subject: 22nd August
> >
> >
> > à
> > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > LoyautÒ© me lie
> > Paul
> >
> > for whom
> > Richard Liveth Yet!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>










Me too

Yes and I read a book that suggested he told Richard that Hstings knew all about Eleanor butler. 
 
If I were Tudor I too would have had a list of people to get rid of once and for all.  When you think of his disgusting trick of predating his reign and accusing Richard's supporters therefore of treason, I am surprised that he didn't kill more of the Yorkist side.

From: Douglas Eugene Stamate <destama@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:37
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
Wasn't he originally associated with Lord Hastings, serving as his advisor
or something?
If so, mightn't Catesby have known how deeply involved Hastings actually was
in any plot to depose/remove Richard from the Protectorate? Can't have the
truth getting in the way of a good alibi now, can we?
It would seem sensible, if one were Henry Tudor anyway, to have already
drawn up a list of those to "suffer" various pains and penalties upon his
gaining the throne. Stillington survived, but he wasn't found until well
after the battle and any trial might bring up things Tudor/Morton didn't
want.
Catesby, on the other hand, was captured immediately after Bosworth and his
death could, again from Tudor's viewpoint, be put down to Catesby's actions
DURING the battle; ie, he'd fought against Tudor. Slim evidence, but that's
our Harry!
I don't know about the others executed, but they might very well be worth
looking into for similar reasons.

----- Original Message -----
From: "liz williams" <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

"...Maybe Tudor simply ended up picking on him because he was one of
Richard's closest and actually survived the battle but of course with the
scant evidence available to us, we are not likely to ever know for sure.

The list is fascinating.

Liz

There were still far fewer people executed after Bosworth than other battles
during the WoR. John Nevill tops the list with his spectacular score of 15
after Hexham. (This doesn't make me pro Henry and anti John. Anyone who
knows me knows my feelings about the Nevills, but I'm not incapable of
recognising when they did things that weren't terribly nice!)

Karen

From: Douglas Eugene Stamate <destama@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 11:37:26 -0500
To: <>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call






Wasn't he originally associated with Lord Hastings, serving as his advisor
or something?
If so, mightn't Catesby have known how deeply involved Hastings actually was
in any plot to depose/remove Richard from the Protectorate? Can't have the
truth getting in the way of a good alibi now, can we?
It would seem sensible, if one were Henry Tudor anyway, to have already
drawn up a list of those to "suffer" various pains and penalties upon his
gaining the throne. Stillington survived, but he wasn't found until well
after the battle and any trial might bring up things Tudor/Morton didn't
want.
Catesby, on the other hand, was captured immediately after Bosworth and his
death could, again from Tudor's viewpoint, be put down to Catesby's actions
DURING the battle; ie, he'd fought against Tudor. Slim evidence, but that's
our Harry!
I don't know about the others executed, but they might very well be worth
looking into for similar reasons.

----- Original Message -----
From: "liz williams" <ferrymansdaughter@...
<mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com> >
To: <
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

"...Maybe Tudor simply ended up picking on him because he was one of
Richard's closest and actually survived the battle but of course with the
scant evidence available to us, we are not likely to ever know for sure.

The list is fascinating.

Liz

Dear Ricardian friends,

News about the dig in Leicester are now available on line in the Daily Mail site. I am very excited about the possibility of Archaeologists finding Richard's burial place and his remains.

Kaye
LML

--- In , "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen
>
> --- In , "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: EileenB
> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
> >
> > --- In , "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > > Regards, Annette
> > >
> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > >
> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > >
> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > >
> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> > >
> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > >
> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > >
> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> > >
> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > >
> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> > >
> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > >
> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > >
> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > Philippa Langley
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Maria Torres
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > >
> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > > gift to Richard and us.
> > >
> > > Maria
> > > ejbronte@
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

After reading Sharon Penman I 'm had a bit of a soft spot for  John Neville (or rather Penman's version of him!)



________________________________
From: Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:14
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
There were still far fewer people executed after Bosworth than other battles
during the WoR. John Nevill tops the list with his spectacular score of 15
after Hexham. (This doesn't make me pro Henry and anti John. Anyone who
knows me knows my feelings about the Nevills, but I'm not incapable of
recognising when they did things that weren't terribly nice!)

Karen

From: Douglas Eugene Stamate <mailto:destama%40kconline.com>
Reply-To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 11:37:26 -0500
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

Wasn't he originally associated with Lord Hastings, serving as his advisor
or something?
If so, mightn't Catesby have known how deeply involved Hastings actually was
in any plot to depose/remove Richard from the Protectorate? Can't have the
truth getting in the way of a good alibi now, can we?
It would seem sensible, if one were Henry Tudor anyway, to have already
drawn up a list of those to "suffer" various pains and penalties upon his
gaining the throne. Stillington survived, but he wasn't found until well
after the battle and any trial might bring up things Tudor/Morton didn't
want.
Catesby, on the other hand, was captured immediately after Bosworth and his
death could, again from Tudor's viewpoint, be put down to Catesby's actions
DURING the battle; ie, he'd fought against Tudor. Slim evidence, but that's
our Harry!
I don't know about the others executed, but they might very well be worth
looking into for similar reasons.

----- Original Message -----
From: "liz williams" <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com
<mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com> >
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

"...Maybe Tudor simply ended up picking on him because he was one of
Richard's closest and actually survived the battle but of course with the
scant evidence available to us, we are not likely to ever know for sure.

The list is fascinating.

Liz

--- In , C HOLMES <christineholmes651@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All, I did the same Dorothea and got the same reply, not too prommising was it.
> Chris
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dorothea Preis <dorotheapreis@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 11:12
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>
>  
>
> I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:
>
> Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
> comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
> they are aware of the interest this would receive.
>
> Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.
>
> Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.
>
> Cheers, Dorothea
>
> ________________________________
> From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
> To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
>  
>  
>  
> The dig is in the news.
>  
>  
>  
> and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.
>
> From: blancsanglier1452 <mailto:blancsanglier1452%40yahoo.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>  
> A very interesting and relevant historical question.
>
> Will answer you on the 23rd ;)
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@> wrote:
> >
> > Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
> >
> > My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
> >
> > Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
> >
> > The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
> >
> > So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
> >
> > Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
> >
> > I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
> >
> > RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> > Eileen Loyaulte me lie
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> > >
> > > I second your Remembrance.
> > >
> > > Judy
> > >  
> > > Loyaulte me lie
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > > Subject: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > > LoyautÃÆ'© me lie
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > for whom
> > > Richard Liveth Yet!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Looks like my answer got lost in cyberspace. Here's a 2nd try:

My answer is different from the others'. Maybe that means Channel 4 has received so many requests that it's going to change its mind.

Here's the answer I received:

Hello,

Thank you for your enquiry.

A member of our Viewer Enquiries team will review your e-mail and will reply to you within the next 7 days.

If we need to forward your correspondence through to another Channel 4 department for an answer, we cannot guarantee a response time, but will get back to you as soon as we can.

For information about Channel 4 have a look at our FAQ section at www.channel4.com/4viewers/faq .


Hopefully,

Marion


--- In , "phaecilia" <phaecilia@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , C HOLMES <christineholmes651@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All, I did the same Dorothea and got the same reply, not too prommising was it.
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Dorothea Preis <dorotheapreis@>
> > To: "" <>
> > Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 11:12
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:
> >
> > Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
> > comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
> > they are aware of the interest this would receive.
> >
> > Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.
> >
> > Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.
> >
> > Cheers, Dorothea
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
> > To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >  
> > http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > The dig is in the news.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.
> >
> > From: blancsanglier1452 <mailto:blancsanglier1452%40yahoo.com>
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >  
> > A very interesting and relevant historical question.
> >
> > Will answer you on the 23rd ;)
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
> > >
> > > My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
> > >
> > > Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
> > >
> > > The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
> > >
> > > So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains.  
> > >
> > > Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > > Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
> > >
> > > I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
> > >
> > > RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> > > Eileen Loyaulte me lie
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> > > >
> > > > I second your Remembrance.
> > > >
> > > > Judy
> > > >  
> > > > Loyaulte me lie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > > > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > > > Subject: 22nd August
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > > > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > > > LoyautÃÆ'© me lie
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > for whom
> > > > Richard Liveth Yet!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

I have a huge soft spot for them all, Liz! I see John a little differently
to Sharon (though I like hers as well). He was quite the lad!

Karen

From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 19:42:01 +0100 (BST)
To: ""
<>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call






After reading Sharon Penman I 'm had a bit of a soft spot for John Neville
(or rather Penman's version of him!)

________________________________
From: Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...
<mailto:Ragged_staff%40bigpond.com> >
To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:14
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


There were still far fewer people executed after Bosworth than other battles
during the WoR. John Nevill tops the list with his spectacular score of 15
after Hexham. (This doesn't make me pro Henry and anti John. Anyone who
knows me knows my feelings about the Nevills, but I'm not incapable of
recognising when they did things that weren't terribly nice!)

Karen

I got that first then got the other one about an hour later.
 
 


________________________________
From: phaecilia <phaecilia@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 19:50
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Looks like my answer got lost in cyberspace. Here's a 2nd try:

My answer is different from the others'. Maybe that means Channel 4 has received so many requests that it's going to change its mind.

Here's the answer I received:

Hello,

Thank you for your enquiry.

A member of our Viewer Enquiries team will review your e-mail and will reply to you within the next 7 days.

If we need to forward your correspondence through to another Channel 4 department for an answer, we cannot guarantee a response time, but will get back to you as soon as we can.

For information about Channel 4 have a look at our FAQ section at www.channel4.com/4viewers/faq .

Hopefully,

Marion

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "phaecilia" <phaecilia@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, C HOLMES <christineholmes651@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All, I did the same Dorothea and got the same reply, not too prommising was it.
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Dorothea Preis <dorotheapreis@>
> > To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 11:12
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> > I send my message to Channel 4, hoping to encourage them to make the documentary, no matter what.  This is the reply I  got:
> >
> > Unfortunately, we do not have any plans to make a documentary based on a search for Richard III's remains; however, please be assured that your
> > comments have been passed on to our Commissioning Department so that
> > they are aware of the interest this would receive.
> >
> > Thank you again for taking the time to contact us here at Channel 4 and for your interest in our programming.
> >
> > Does not sound too hopeful, does it?  But please keep it up and contact them as well!  The details are on the What's New page of the website of the parent society.
> >
> > Cheers, Dorothea
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
> > To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 6:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >  
> > http://uk.news.yahoo.com/archaeologists-richard-iii-dig-032624776.html
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > The dig is in the news.
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > and yes, that is an intersting question.  Look forward to an interesting discussion.
> >
> > From: blancsanglier1452 <mailto:blancsanglier1452%40yahoo.com>
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 17:02
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >  
> > A very interesting and relevant historical question.
> >
> > Will answer you on the 23rd ;)
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, david rayner <theblackprussian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Been wondering for a while, but do members think was there a massacre after Bosworth?
> > >
> > > My database of the nobility and knightage of the period shows an extremely high casualty rate for this battle; only Towton seems to have a longer list of "killed at" references.
> > >
> > > Yet all surviving accounts of the battle state that there were relatively few killed, as the Royal Army "gave up the fight" and dispersed when they learned of the King's death. The armies involved were by all accounts much smaller than at Towton (though I do not agree with the oft used assertion that most of the nobility didn't turn up to support Richard), and the third of the King's army under Northumberland didn't engage at all.
> > >
> > > The majority of casualties in these fights were inflicted in the rout, as the defeated army were cut down as they attempted escape from the battlefield; and as one would expect the great majority of those killed at Bosworth were on the losing side; yet once again the records suggest that there was no rout at Bosworth.
> > >
> > > So why the high number of slain knights? Certainly the battle is poorly recorded, and some of the men listed as killed have proved impossible to identify and are rather suspect, but one possibility is that captured men of rank on the losing side were simply butchered on the orders of the winning captains. à
> > >
> > > Evidence from the Towton mass grave excavations suggest that something like this probably happened after that battle, so it seems a possibility that a similar massacre may have taken place after Bosworth, but then went unrecorded by chroniclers who were uninformed or too politic to mention the incident.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 17:42
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > > à
> > >
> > > Yes...I absolutely hate this date and anniversary....
> > >
> > > I wonder what Richard would have thought if he had known, well over 500 years after he had lived, how many people still think about him, still talk about and salute him on this anniversary...
> > >
> > > RIP Your Majesty and all your brave followers who died with you on that day and afterwards...
> > > Eileen Loyaulte me lie
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you, Paul. As the terrible day approaches, it's good to be reminded his story is more than an intriguing mystery or gripping yarn.
> > > >
> > > > I second your Remembrance.
> > > >
> > > > Judy
> > > > Ã’â¬aà
> > > > Loyaulte me lie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@>
> > > > To: RichardIIISociety forum <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 8:55 AM
> > > > Subject: 22nd August
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ã’â¬aà
> > > > Because of time differences I thought I'd post a remembrance of that dreadful day in August 1485 a little early to ensure everyone remembers when and how we lost our king, in my opinion, one showing the potential for becoming one of the best of monarchs, and one of the first showing he cared for all his subjects, not just a minority, something we still struggle to find in our governments.
> > > > Let us remember King Richard, and all those who died fighting for him, on Bosworth Field on August 22nd 1485.
> > > > LoyautÃ’Æ'é me lie
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > for whom
> > > > Richard Liveth Yet!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

________________________________
From: Karen Clark <Ragged_staff@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 19:57
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call


 
I have a huge soft spot for them all, Liz! I see John a little differently
to Sharon (though I like hers as well). He was quite the lad!

Karen

From: liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com>
Reply-To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 19:42:01 +0100 (BST)
To: "mailto:%40yahoogroups.com"
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

After reading Sharon Penman I 'm had a bit of a soft spot for John Neville
(or rather Penman's version of him!)

________________________________
From: Karen Clark <mailto:Ragged_staff%40bigpond.com
<mailto:Ragged_staff%40bigpond.com> >
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:14
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

There were still far fewer people executed after Bosworth than other battles
during the WoR. John Nevill tops the list with his spectacular score of 15
after Hexham. (This doesn't make me pro Henry and anti John. Anyone who
knows me knows my feelings about the Nevills, but I'm not incapable of
recognising when they did things that weren't terribly nice!)

Karen

Have you read the readers' comments? Many are pro Richard but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one ...
 
 You will be saying next Richard III didn't usurp the throne. He declared his nephews (that he had been entrusted to take care of) illegitimate with no evidence, just to gain power. It is obvious he had them done away with, as they were a major threat to his legitimacy to the throne. Edward VII was a lot more benevolent with usurpers, only executing Perkin Warbeck after his persistent threats. - Bobcat, London, 24/8/2012 12:48
Click to rate     Rating   17
Report abuse

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2192914/Is-lost-grave-King-Richard-III-Archaeologists-dig-council-car-park-monarch-killed-Battle-Bosworth.html#ixzz24Uq9AD00


________________________________
From: Kaye <kayenorfolk@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:52
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Dear Ricardian friends,

News about the dig in Leicester are now available on line in the Daily Mail site. I am very excited about the possibility of Archaeologists finding Richard's burial place and his remains.

Kaye
LML

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: EileenB
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > > Regards, Annette
> > >
> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > >
> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > >
> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > >
> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> > >
> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > >
> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > >
> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> > >
> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > >
> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> > >
> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > >
> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > >
> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > Philippa Langley
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Maria Torres
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > >
> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > > gift to Richard and us.
> > >
> > > Maria
> > > ejbronte@
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Some people are so convinced they know what they are talking about!


From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August


 
Have you read the readers' comments? Many are pro Richard but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one ...
 
 You will be saying next Richard III didn't usurp the throne. He declared his nephews (that he had been entrusted to take care of) illegitimate with no evidence, just to gain power. It is obvious he had them done away with, as they were a major threat to his legitimacy to the throne. Edward VII was a lot more benevolent with usurpers, only executing Perkin Warbeck after his persistent threats. - Bobcat, London, 24/8/2012 12:48
Click to rate     Rating   17
Report abuse

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2192914/Is-lost-grave-King-Richard-III-Archaeologists-dig-council-car-park-monarch-killed-Battle-Bosworth.html#ixzz24Uq9AD00

________________________________
From: Kaye <mailto:kayenorfolk%40yahoo.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:52
Subject: Re: 22nd August

 
Dear Ricardian friends,

News about the dig in Leicester are now available on line in the Daily Mail site. I am very excited about the possibility of Archaeologists finding Richard's burial place and his remains.

Kaye
LML

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: EileenB
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > > Regards, Annette
> > >
> > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > >
> > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > >
> > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > >
> > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> > >
> > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > >
> > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > >
> > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> > >
> > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > >
> > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> > >
> > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > >
> > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > >
> > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > Philippa Langley
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Maria Torres
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > >
> > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > > gift to Richard and us.
> > >
> > > Maria
> > > ejbronte@
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

The following additions can be made to those killed at Bosworth. Not all are Knights, but are are of landowning families.

William Allington of Horsheath
Richard Bagot of Blithfield (Lan)
John Bernard of Abington
Roger Betham of Betham
Richard Boughton of Little Lawford (killed while recruiting August 20th)
John Brabazon of Eastwell
Henry Brome of Brome (Lan)
Richard Charlton of Edmonton
Robert Claxton of Westhall
Humphrey Cotes of Woodcote
Thomas Curzon of Croxall
Ralph Danby of Little Danby
William Gilpin of Kentmere
Thomas Hampden of Upton
John Harbottle of Beamish (killed August 21st)
Roger Heron of the Ford
Walter Hopton (Treasurer)
John Hutton of Hunwick
John Iwardby of Missenden
John Joyce of Windsor
John Kendal of York
Thomas Lynde of Stoke Lynde
Robert Mortimer of Thorpe-le-Soken
John Mynde of Little Sutton (Lan)
John Nesfield?
Ralph Perceval of Tykenham
John Radcliffe of Radcliffe Tower
John Sacheverall of Ratcliffe on Soar
Geoffrey St German of Broughton
William Sapcote of Burley
Thomas Strange of Walton
Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell
Ralph Valentine of Flixton
John Whittingham of Pendley (Lan)
Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham

(William Bracher & son - executed) 


Altogether its a fairly long list for a battle which is considered to have been short, and not to have ended in a rout. Men clad in steel plate were hard to kill, which is why I question the accepted accounts of a relatively bloodless battle.





________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:03
Subject: 22nd August roll call

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists                                                         
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
Sir John Grey   
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
Sir William Parker of London   
Sir John Paston   
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       

Lancastrians   
       
Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi Liz,

Better laugh than cry! At least our "cause"is in the news. If there are no questions, there is no opportunity to explain our points.
Also, I think (I can't say that I believe) that the first impulse that draw many of us to Richard was the like of some controversy. That is what keeps the debate/conversation open.

Kaye
LML

--- In , Vickie Cook <lolettecook@...> wrote:
>
> Some people are so convinced they know what they are talking about!
>
>
> From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
>  
> Have you read the readers' comments? Many are pro Richard but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one ...
>  
>  You will be saying next Richard III didn't usurp the throne. He declared his nephews (that he had been entrusted to take care of) illegitimate with no evidence, just to gain power. It is obvious he had them done away with, as they were a major threat to his legitimacy to the throne. Edward VII was a lot more benevolent with usurpers, only executing Perkin Warbeck after his persistent threats. - Bobcat, London, 24/8/2012 12:48
> Click to rate     Rating   17
> Report abuse
>
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2192914/Is-lost-grave-King-Richard-III-Archaeologists-dig-council-car-park-monarch-killed-Battle-Bosworth.html#ixzz24Uq9AD00
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kaye <mailto:kayenorfolk%40yahoo.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:52
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>  
> Dear Ricardian friends,
>
> News about the dig in Leicester are now available on line in the Daily Mail site. I am very excited about the possibility of Archaeologists finding Richard's burial place and his remains.
>
> Kaye
> LML
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: EileenB
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > > > Regards, Annette
> > > >
> > > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > > >
> > > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > > >
> > > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> > > >
> > > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > > >
> > > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > > >
> > > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> > > >
> > > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > > >
> > > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> > > >
> > > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > > >
> > > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > > Philippa Langley
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Maria Torres
> > > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > > >
> > > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > > > gift to Richard and us.
> > > >
> > > > Maria
> > > > ejbronte@
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That is an interesting list.
I was wondering what the asterick against the name of Sir John Neville of Liversedge, Yorkshire was for since I am suppose to be descended from that gentleman. I hope it was something good. I do know that he survived. I read once that this gentleman's son attended the funeral of Henry VII, wonder what he was thinking when he was there.
 
Helen


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012 10:03 PM
Subject: 22nd August roll call

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists                                                         
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
Sir John Grey   
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
Sir William Parker of London   
Sir John Paston   
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       

Lancastrians   
       
Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

On 24 Aug 2012, at 13:07, Karen Clark wrote:

> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him.


I think it is chiefly because he showed himself to be a time server. Fine, he defected to Richard from Hastings at the time of the Hastings plot, and was a very efficient administrator, but his appeal to Stanley with the seeming certainty that he would be taken into Tudor's service, makes him a traitor to Richard as far as I am concerned, and the kind of time server I detest.
Paul



Richard Liveth Yet!

I left out the non knights and 'ordinary' folk out of my list David as the original post was saying there had been a massacre of knights after the battle and wanted simply to disprove it.
Paul

On 24 Aug 2012, at 22:19, david rayner wrote:

> The following additions can be made to those killed at Bosworth. Not all are Knights, but are are of landowning families.
>
> William Allington of Horsheath
> Richard Bagot of Blithfield (Lan)
> John Bernard of Abington
> Roger Betham of Betham
> Richard Boughton of Little Lawford (killed while recruiting August 20th)
> John Brabazon of Eastwell
> Henry Brome of Brome (Lan)
> Richard Charlton of Edmonton
> Robert Claxton of Westhall
> Humphrey Cotes of Woodcote
> Thomas Curzon of Croxall
> Ralph Danby of Little Danby
> William Gilpin of Kentmere
> Thomas Hampden of Upton
> John Harbottle of Beamish (killed August 21st)
> Roger Heron of the Ford
> Walter Hopton (Treasurer)
> John Hutton of Hunwick
> John Iwardby of Missenden
> John Joyce of Windsor
> John Kendal of York
> Thomas Lynde of Stoke Lynde
> Robert Mortimer of Thorpe-le-Soken
> John Mynde of Little Sutton (Lan)
> John Nesfield?
> Ralph Perceval of Tykenham
> John Radcliffe of Radcliffe Tower
> John Sacheverall of Ratcliffe on Soar
> Geoffrey St German of Broughton
> William Sapcote of Burley
> Thomas Strange of Walton
> Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell
> Ralph Valentine of Flixton
> John Whittingham of Pendley (Lan)
> Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham
>
> (William Bracher & son - executed)
>
>
> Altogether its a fairly long list for a battle which is considered to have been short, and not to have ended in a rout. Men clad in steel plate were hard to kill, which is why I question the accepted accounts of a relatively bloodless battle.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:03
> Subject: 22nd August roll call
>
> Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> Paul
>
>
> Yorkists
> Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle
> Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle
> John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII
> Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> Sir John Grey
> Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle
> Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII
> Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> Sir William Parker of London
> Sir John Paston
> Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released
> Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
>
> Lancastrians
>
> Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
> Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
> Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
> Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
> Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
> Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
> Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Roger Tocotes
> Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> Sir Richard Tunstall
> Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
> Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Yes, my question was a little tongue in cheek.
Karen

From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 10:21:45 +0100
To: <>
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call







On 24 Aug 2012, at 13:07, Karen Clark wrote:

> Why does everyone have it in for Catesby? No-one loves him, poor bloke.
> Well, Richard seemed to, so he must have had something going for him.

I think it is chiefly because he showed himself to be a time server. Fine,
he defected to Richard from Hastings at the time of the Hastings plot, and
was a very efficient administrator, but his appeal to Stanley with the
seeming certainty that he would be taken into Tudor's service, makes him a
traitor to Richard as far as I am concerned, and the kind of time server I
detest.
Paul

Richard Liveth Yet!

I can't bear Dan Snow, he is so pompous and full of himself.  If you watch him on some programmes  he comes over as so patronising - The One Show 2011 when he was so condescending to Ray Winstone and also in that programme he did a piece on Sir Walter Raleigh that lacks impartiality - a cardinal sin for a historian.  Also there is another programme connected to Remembrance week, when he is researching into an ancestor of his and there is a lack of empathy, when he discovers the consequences of this ancestor's actions and he meets a descendent of one of the soldiers who died.  I think it is a case of nepotism as his father evidently smoothed his way for him.

I don't know whether anyone remembers the days when A J P Taylor would stand an deliver a historical lecture on television without props or notes.  He was was a true historian - no intrusion of personality unlike some we could mention.  Ah, those were the days! 
Elaine 

By "Knights" I had originally intended to imply armoured men, including esquires, but point taken. However the list of men killed is still 2nd only to Towton on my lists. I suspect many of these were part of Richard's charge, and fought to the death expecting no mercy.
Another possible explanation is that the new methods of warfare used by Henry's largely continental mercenary army were particularly deadly against mounted knights.


________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 25 August 2012, 10:34
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

I left out the non knights and 'ordinary' folk out of my list David as the original post was saying there had been a massacre of knights after the battle and wanted simply to disprove it.
Paul

On 24 Aug 2012, at 22:19, david rayner wrote:

> The following additions can be made to those killed at Bosworth. Not all are Knights, but are are of landowning families.
>
> William Allington of Horsheath
> Richard Bagot of Blithfield (Lan)
> John Bernard of Abington
> Roger Betham of Betham
> Richard Boughton of Little Lawford (killed while recruiting August 20th)
> John Brabazon of Eastwell
> Henry Brome of Brome (Lan)
> Richard Charlton of Edmonton
> Robert Claxton of Westhall
> Humphrey Cotes of Woodcote
> Thomas Curzon of Croxall
> Ralph Danby of Little Danby
> William Gilpin of Kentmere
> Thomas Hampden of Upton
> John Harbottle of Beamish (killed August 21st)
> Roger Heron of the Ford
> Walter Hopton (Treasurer)
> John Hutton of Hunwick
> John Iwardby of Missenden
> John Joyce of Windsor
> John Kendal of York
> Thomas Lynde of Stoke Lynde
> Robert Mortimer of Thorpe-le-Soken
> John Mynde of Little Sutton (Lan)
> John Nesfield?
> Ralph Perceval of Tykenham
> John Radcliffe of Radcliffe Tower
> John Sacheverall of Ratcliffe on Soar
> Geoffrey St German of Broughton
> William Sapcote of Burley
> Thomas Strange of Walton
> Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell
> Ralph Valentine of Flixton
> John Whittingham of Pendley (Lan)
> Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham
>
> (William Bracher & son - executed)
>
>
> Altogether its a fairly long list for a battle which is considered to have been short, and not to have ended in a rout. Men clad in steel plate were hard to kill, which is why I question the accepted accounts of a relatively bloodless battle.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:03
> Subject: 22nd August roll call
>
> Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> Paul
>
>
> Yorkists                                                         
> Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
> Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
> Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
> Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
> Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
> Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
> Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
> Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
> Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
> Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
> Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
> Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
> Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
> Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
> Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
> Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
> Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
> John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
> Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
> Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
> Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
> Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
> Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
> Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
> Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
> Sir John Grey   
> Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
> Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
> Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
> Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
> Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
> John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
> Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
> Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
> Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
> Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
> Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
> Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
> Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
> Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
> Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
> Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
> Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
> Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
> Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
> Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
> Sir William Parker of London   
> Sir John Paston   
> Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
> Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
> Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
> Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
> Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
> John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
> Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
> Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
> Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
> Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
> John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
> Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
> Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
> Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
> Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
> Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
> Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
> Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
> Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       
>
> Lancastrians   
>       
> Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
> Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
> Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
> Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
> Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
> Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
> Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Roger Tocotes
> Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> Sir Richard Tunstall
> Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
> Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!





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

Yahoo! Groups Links

A-R-T-I-L-L-E-R-Y?

----- Original Message -----
From: david rayner
To:
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call



By "Knights" I had originally intended to imply armoured men, including esquires, but point taken. However the list of men killed is still 2nd only to Towton on my lists. I suspect many of these were part of Richard's charge, and fought to the death expecting no mercy.
Another possible explanation is that the new methods of warfare used by Henry's largely continental mercenary army were particularly deadly against mounted knights.

________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 25 August 2012, 10:34
Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call

I left out the non knights and 'ordinary' folk out of my list David as the original post was saying there had been a massacre of knights after the battle and wanted simply to disprove it.
Paul

On 24 Aug 2012, at 22:19, david rayner wrote:

> The following additions can be made to those killed at Bosworth. Not all are Knights, but are are of landowning families.
>
> William Allington of Horsheath
> Richard Bagot of Blithfield (Lan)
> John Bernard of Abington
> Roger Betham of Betham
> Richard Boughton of Little Lawford (killed while recruiting August 20th)
> John Brabazon of Eastwell
> Henry Brome of Brome (Lan)
> Richard Charlton of Edmonton
> Robert Claxton of Westhall
> Humphrey Cotes of Woodcote
> Thomas Curzon of Croxall
> Ralph Danby of Little Danby
> William Gilpin of Kentmere
> Thomas Hampden of Upton
> John Harbottle of Beamish (killed August 21st)
> Roger Heron of the Ford
> Walter Hopton (Treasurer)
> John Hutton of Hunwick
> John Iwardby of Missenden
> John Joyce of Windsor
> John Kendal of York
> Thomas Lynde of Stoke Lynde
> Robert Mortimer of Thorpe-le-Soken
> John Mynde of Little Sutton (Lan)
> John Nesfield?
> Ralph Perceval of Tykenham
> John Radcliffe of Radcliffe Tower
> John Sacheverall of Ratcliffe on Soar
> Geoffrey St German of Broughton
> William Sapcote of Burley
> Thomas Strange of Walton
> Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell
> Ralph Valentine of Flixton
> John Whittingham of Pendley (Lan)
> Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham
>
> (William Bracher & son - executed)
>
>
> Altogether its a fairly long list for a battle which is considered to have been short, and not to have ended in a rout. Men clad in steel plate were hard to kill, which is why I question the accepted accounts of a relatively bloodless battle.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:03
> Subject: 22nd August roll call
>
> Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
> The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
> Paul
>
>
> Yorkists
> Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
> Sir John Babington of Chilwell
> Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
> Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
> Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
> Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
> Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
> Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
> Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
> Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle
> Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
> Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
> Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
> Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
> Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
> Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
> Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle
> John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
> Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
> Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
> Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII
> Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
> Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
> Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
> Sir John Grey
> Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
> Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
> Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
> Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
> John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle
> Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
> Sir John Huddleston, attainted
> Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
> George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
> Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
> Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
> Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*
> Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
> Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
> Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
> Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
> Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII
> Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
> Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
> Sir William Parker of London
> Sir John Paston
> Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released
> Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
> Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
> Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
> Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
> John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
> Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
> Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
> Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
> Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
> John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
> Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
> Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
> Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
> Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
> Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
> Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
> Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
> Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
>
> Lancastrians
>
> Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
> Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
> Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
> Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
> Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
> Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
> Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
> Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
> Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
> Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
> Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
> Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
> Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
> Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
> Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
> Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
> Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
> Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
> Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
> Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
> Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
> Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
> Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
> Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
> Sir Roger Tocotes
> Sir John Treffry of Fowey
> Sir Richard Tunstall
> Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
> Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
> Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
> Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
> Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
> Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
> John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

your list is fascinating and makes Bosworth very real



________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 1:03 PM
Subject: 22nd August roll call

Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
Paul


Yorkists                                                         
Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire   
Sir John Babington of Chilwell   
Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle   
Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire   
Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted   
Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle   
Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*   
Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed   
Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle   
Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle   
Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned   
Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire   
Sir William Conyers, killed in battle   
Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria   
Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle   
John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII   
Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle   
Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned   
Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII   
Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle   
Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire   
Sir John Grey   
Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham   
Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*   
Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire   
Richard Hastings, Lord Welles   
John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle   
Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*   
Sir John Huddleston, attainted   
Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham   
Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned   
Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland   
Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*   
Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire   
Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland   
Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted   
Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII   
Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII   
Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire   
Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned   
Sir William Parker of London   
Sir John Paston   
Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released   
Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle   
Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire   
Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted   
Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire   
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk   
Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire   
Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire   
Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire   
John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)   
Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire   
Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted   
Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire   
Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland   
Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire   
Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle   
Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire   
Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire       

Lancastrians   
       
Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
Sir Roger Tocotes
Sir John Treffry of Fowey
Sir Richard Tunstall
Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

i honestly don't know where you get your lists from David, as even if all the men in my Bosworth lists were killed the number would come nowhere near the number of dead at Towton. And Bosworth was probably over by 10 in the morning while Towton lasted all day. An entire day of killing against one of a couple of hours during which not all those present engaged.
Paul


On 25 Aug 2012, at 20:19, david rayner wrote:

> By "Knights" I had originally intended to imply armoured men, including esquires, but point taken. However the list of men killed is still 2nd only to Towton on my lists. I suspect many of these were part of Richard's charge, and fought to the death expecting no mercy.
> Another possible explanation is that the new methods of warfare used by Henry's largely continental mercenary army were particularly deadly against mounted knights.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 25 August 2012, 10:34
> Subject: Re: 22nd August roll call
>
> I left out the non knights and 'ordinary' folk out of my list David as the original post was saying there had been a massacre of knights after the battle and wanted simply to disprove it.
> Paul
>
> On 24 Aug 2012, at 22:19, david rayner wrote:
>
>> The following additions can be made to those killed at Bosworth. Not all are Knights, but are are of landowning families.
>>
>> William Allington of Horsheath
>> Richard Bagot of Blithfield (Lan)
>> John Bernard of Abington
>> Roger Betham of Betham
>> Richard Boughton of Little Lawford (killed while recruiting August 20th)
>> John Brabazon of Eastwell
>> Henry Brome of Brome (Lan)
>> Richard Charlton of Edmonton
>> Robert Claxton of Westhall
>> Humphrey Cotes of Woodcote
>> Thomas Curzon of Croxall
>> Ralph Danby of Little Danby
>> William Gilpin of Kentmere
>> Thomas Hampden of Upton
>> John Harbottle of Beamish (killed August 21st)
>> Roger Heron of the Ford
>> Walter Hopton (Treasurer)
>> John Hutton of Hunwick
>> John Iwardby of Missenden
>> John Joyce of Windsor
>> John Kendal of York
>> Thomas Lynde of Stoke Lynde
>> Robert Mortimer of Thorpe-le-Soken
>> John Mynde of Little Sutton (Lan)
>> John Nesfield?
>> Ralph Perceval of Tykenham
>> John Radcliffe of Radcliffe Tower
>> John Sacheverall of Ratcliffe on Soar
>> Geoffrey St German of Broughton
>> William Sapcote of Burley
>> Thomas Strange of Walton
>> Gilbert Swinburne of Chopwell
>> Ralph Valentine of Flixton
>> John Whittingham of Pendley (Lan)
>> Thomas Wingfield of Letheringham
>>
>> (William Bracher & son - executed)
>>
>>
>> Altogether its a fairly long list for a battle which is considered to have been short, and not to have ended in a rout. Men clad in steel plate were hard to kill, which is why I question the accepted accounts of a relatively bloodless battle.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
>> To:
>> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 13:03
>> Subject: 22nd August roll call
>>
>> Here is a roll call of the knights [plus assorted lords etc] who fought at Bosworth, and what happened to them. As you can see there were far more fighting for their king than were with Tudor, and those with Tudor mostly had an axe to grind of a personal nature with Richard [attainted for involvement in a conspiracy mainly].
>> The number of dead is not large, and only two names came up as having been executed after the battle, one our "dear" Catesby.
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> Yorkists
>> Sir Ralph Ashton of Ashton Under Lyne, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>> Sir John Audley of Markeaton, Derbyshire
>> Sir John Babington of Chilwell
>> Sir Humphrey Beaufort of Barford St. John, Oxfordshire, killed in battle
>> Sir Willialm Berkeley of Uley, Gloucestershire
>> Sir Henry Bodrugan of Restronget, Cornwall, attainted
>> Sir Reginald Bray of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire
>> Sir Robert Brackenbury of Denton, Durham, killed in battle
>> Sir Thomas Broughton of Broughton in Furness, Lancashire, attainted*
>> Sir John Buck of Harthill, Yorkshire, executed
>> Sir William Catesby of Ashby St. Legers, Northamptonshire, executed after the battle
>> Sir Richard Charlton of Edmonton, Middlesex, killed in battle
>> Sir Gervase Clifton of Clifton, Nottinghamshire
>> Sir Marmaduke Constable* of Somersby, Lincolnshire, pardoned
>> Sir John Conyers of Hornby, Yorkshire
>> Sir William Conyers, killed in battle
>> Lord Thomas Dacre of Gilsland, Cumbria
>> Walter Devereaux, Lord Ferrers of Chartley of Weobley, Herefordshire, killed in battle
>> John Lord Dudley, created Sheriff of Sussex by Henry VII
>> Sir John Ferrers, killed in battle
>> Thomas Fiennes, Lord Dacre, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>> Thomas Fitzalan, Lord Maltravers, pardoned
>> Richard Lord Fitzhugh of Ravensworth, Yorkshire, created chief lieutenant of the North under Henry VII
>> Sir William Gascoigne of Gawthorpe, Yorkshire
>> Sir Thomas Gower of Sittenham, Durham, killed in battle
>> Lord Henry Grey of Codnor, Derbyshire
>> Sir John Grey
>> Ralph Lord Greystoke of Greystoke, Cumbria*, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>> Sir Ralph Harbottle of Beamish, Durham
>> Sir James Harrington of Brearley, Yorkshire, attainted*
>> Sir Robert Harrington of Badsworth, Yorkshire
>> Richard Hastings, Lord Welles
>> John Howard, Duke of Norfolk* of Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, killed in battle
>> Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey of Ashwellthorp, Norfolk, imprisoned*
>> Sir John Huddleston, attainted
>> Sir Piers Legh of Lymm, Cheshire
>> George Lord Lumley of Lumley, Durham
>> Thomas Lord Lumley, pardoned
>> Sir Robert Manners of Etal, Northumberland
>> Sir Thomas Markenfield of Markenfield, Yorkshire, created Sheriff of Yorkshire under Henry VII*
>> Sir Thomas Maulever of Allerton Mauleverer, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
>> Sir John Melton of Ashton by Sheffield, Yorkshire
>> Sir John Middleton of Belsay, Northumberland
>> Sir Robert Middleton of Dalton, Westmoreland, attainted
>> Sir Thomas Montgomery of Faulkborn, Essex, did not suffer forfeiture under Henry VII
>> Sir Christopher Moresby* of Windermere, Westmoreland, created Sheriff of Cumberland under Henry VII
>> Sir John Neville* of Liversedge, Yorkshire
>> Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmorland, pardoned
>> Sir William Parker of London
>> Sir John Paston
>> Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland*, of Alnwick, Northumberland, imprisoned, then released
>> Sir Robert Percy* of Scotton, Yorkshire, killed in battle
>> Sir Henry Pierpont of Holme Pierrepoint, Nottinghamshire
>> Sir Thomas Pilkington* of Pilkington, Lancashire, attainted
>> Sir Robert Plumpton of Plumpton, Yorkshire
>> John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, of Wingfield, Suffolk
>> Sir John Pudsey of Arnford, Yorkshire
>> Sir Richard Ratcliffe of Derwentwater, Cumbria*, killed in battle
>> Sir Robert Ryther of Ryther, Yorkshire
>> Sir Martin del See, Barmston, Yorkshire
>> John Lord Scrope of Castle Bolton, Yorkshire, fought for Yorkists at Battle of Stoke (1487)
>> Thomas Lord Scrope of Masham, Yorkshire
>> Sir Humphrey Stafford of Grafton, Worcestershire, attainted
>> Sir Brian Stapleton of Carleton, Yorkshire
>> Sir Thomas Strickland of Sizergh, Westmoreland
>> Sir Richard Tempest of Bracewell, Yorkshire
>> Sir Percival Thirlwall of Thirlwall, Northumberland, killed in battle
>> Sir Robert Ughtered of Kexby, Yorkshire
>> Sir Christopher Warde of Givendale, Yorkshire
>>
>> Lancastrians
>>
>> Sir James Blount of Tutbury, Staffordshire, attainder under Richard III reversed
>> Sir Thomas Bourchier* of Horsley, Surrey
>> Sir William Brandon* of Soham, Cambridgeshire, killed in battle
>> Sir Edmund Carew of Mohun's Ottery, Devon
>> Sir John Cheyne of Falstone Cheney, Wiltshire, created Lord Cheyne after Bosworth*
>> Sir Edward Courtnenay of Tiverton, Devon, created Earl of Devon by Henry VII
>> Sir Richard Corbet of Moreton Corbet, Shropshire
>> Sir Giles Daubeney of South Petherton, Somerset, became royal councillor under Henry VII
>> Sir Simon Digby of Coleshill, Warwickshire
>> Sir Richard Edgecombe of Cotehele, Cornwall,
>> Sir John ap Ellis Eyton of Ruabon, Denbighshire
>> Sir John Fortescue of Ponsbourne, Hertfordshire, attainder under Richard III
>> Sir John Hallwell of Bigbury, Devon
>> Sir Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire
>> Sir Walter Hungerford* of Heytesbury, Wiltshire, knighted, attainder under Richard III
>> Sir Nicholas Latimer of Buckland in Duntish, Dorset
>> Sir Roger Kynaston of Hordley, Shropshire
>> Sir Thomas Milbourn of Salisbury, Wiltshire
>> Sir John Morgan, rewarded after battle
>> Sir John Mordaunt of Turvey, Bedforshire
>> Sir James Parker, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>> Sir Thomas Perrott of Haroldston, Pembrokeshire
>> Sir Hugh Pershall of Knightley, Staffordshire,
>> Sir John Risley of Laenham, Suffolk, attainder under Richard III
>> Sir Brian Sandford ofThorpe Salvin, Yorkshire
>> Sir Charles Somerset of Chepstow, Monmouthshire
>> Sir Humphrey Stanley, awarded part of Clevedon, Somerset
>> Sir Roger Tocotes
>> Sir John Treffry of Fowey
>> Sir Richard Tunstall
>> Sir William Tyler of Snarestone, Leicestershire
>> Sir Robert Willoughby of Beer Ferrers, Devon
>> Sir Christopher of Urswick of London
>> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire,
>> Sir John Wogan of Wiston, Pembrokeshire
>> Sir Edward Woodville, rewarded after battle
>> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>> Thomas Lord Stanley of Lathom Lancashire, created Earl of Derby after battle
>> Sir William Stanley* of Holt Denbighshire, created Chamberlain of Henry VII's household
>> Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, Pembrokeshire, created Duke of Bedford*
>> John de Vere, Earl of Oxford of Hedingham, Essex, created hereditary Great Chamberlain of England*
>> John Lord Welles of Maxey, Northamptonshire, awarded property in East Deeping, Lincolnshire
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Ah yes, Edward VII was the one who executed Warbeck of course. At least he didn't do away with his nephew the Kaiser. Honestly, some people...

----- Original Message -----

From: "Kaye" <kayenorfolk@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 8:30:27 PM
Subject: Re: 22nd August





Hi Liz,

Better laugh than cry! At least our "cause"is in the news. If there are no questions, there is no opportunity to explain our points.
Also, I think (I can't say that I believe) that the first impulse that draw many of us to Richard was the like of some controversy. That is what keeps the debate/conversation open.

Kaye
LML

--- In , Vickie Cook <lolettecook@...> wrote:
>
> Some people are so convinced they know what they are talking about!
>
>
> From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
> To: " " < >
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
>
> Â
> Have you read the readers' comments? Many are pro Richard but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one ...
> Â
> Â You will be saying next Richard III didn't usurp the throne. He declared his nephews (that he had been entrusted to take care of) illegitimate with no evidence, just to gain power. It is obvious he had them done away with, as they were a major threat to his legitimacy to the throne. Edward VII was a lot more benevolent with usurpers, only executing Perkin Warbeck after his persistent threats. - Bobcat, London, 24/8/2012 12:48
> Click to rate   Rating  17
> Report abuse
>
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2192914/Is-lost-grave-King-Richard-III-Archaeologists-dig-council-car-park-monarch-killed-Battle-Bosworth.html#ixzz24Uq9AD00
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kaye <mailto:kayenorfolk%40yahoo.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, 24 August 2012, 17:52
> Subject: Re: 22nd August
>
> Â
> Dear Ricardian friends,
>
> News about the dig in Leicester are now available on line in the Daily Mail site. I am very excited about the possibility of Archaeologists finding Richard's burial place and his remains.
>
> Kaye
> LML
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you Annette for keeping us informed.....Im sure Im not the only one on here who would be thrilled if Richard's remains could be located and reburied in a more appropriate place....It would be really lovely to have a place to visit and leave flowers....Eileen
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi again - I understand that the media release regarding the dig in Leicester is about to appear. It's being sent to the parent Society for uploading on to its website, and also to Joan so that she can put it on the US branch news blog. I imagine Joan will probably be quicker, but I'll leave it to her to let the forum know when it's ready to be accessed. Apologies for not being able to give you this information myself - I did promise that you'd be the first to know, but it's still under embargo so basically it's out of my hands.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: EileenB
> > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Annette...will do...honestly it is a bit rich of Channel 4 to hum and haa about whether there would be a wide enough audience of people interested in Richard lll when you take into consideration some of the dross they have on.....Eileen
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "Annette Carson" <email@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello forum members - On this of all days I'm happy to report that the archaeological project is all set to proceed in Leicester. I am being given information piece by piece, and am expecting a media release any moment now which I'll pass on immediately. Meanwhile this has just arrived from Philippa Langley ....
> > > > Regards, Annette
> > > >
> > > > Dear Friends and Ricardians
> > > >
> > > > Richard III Dig Project -- 2 Minutes of Your Time Needed!
> > > > Please join our email campaign on Friday 24 or Saturday 25 August
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to the fantastic support we received in response to our appeal, the archaeological search for Richard III's remains in Leicester is going ahead very soon. Channel 4 are prepared to film the dig on spec, but they've said 'unless something of significance is found', they don't believe there is a TV audience interested in a full-length documentary about Richard. No, we couldn't believe it either!
> > > >
> > > > What we are facing is that if nothing much is found at the dig, all the footage will be binned and there will be no TV programme. There has never been a well-informed documentary setting out the full story of the historical Richard III, and this was our one chance to tell viewers about the real Richard's life.
> > > >
> > > > We believe C4's assessment is VERY wrong, and we want to prove to them there is a MASSIVE audience for this - but we need your help to do it.
> > > >
> > > > You can help us to get Channel 4 to change their minds by Leaving a Message on their Online Form (see details below). It takes less than 2 minutes. We're organising this messaging campaign to take place on Friday 24 and Saturday 25 August.
> > > >
> > > > C4 regularly monitor these responses in order to gauge what their audience wants. If enough of us leave messages, we'll show that an audience exists that wants a TV programme about Richard III. This could help change their minds and get them to commission the documentary - no matter what is found at the dig!
> > > >
> > > > It's VERY IMPORTANT to send your message on one of the days outlined above - this is so that a concentrated campaign gets their attention. Friends overseas should please join in - C4 have to sell their programmes abroad which means you get to see it too!
> > > >
> > > > Below is the link to the Channel 4 feedback form. This is the kind of message you might like to leave:
> > > >
> > > > Can't wait to see your TV programme on Richard III and the search for his remains. Really exciting! Doesn't matter what is found at the dig, I just want to see a good documentary about this enigmatic character. Well done Channel 4 on covering this! Let me know when I can tune in to discover all about the real, historical Richard III.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/contact-us
> > > >
> > > > N.B. C4 ask for your email address and postcode. This is what they say: "We would like to publish your name and location (if available) with your comments. However, please be assured that no other personal details would be published with your comments." If you're overseas and need a UK postcode, you could choose from one of the following: DL3 OLE, DL3 8SD, NE3 4BH, NE16 4PE, NE21 5TF, KY11 9LP, EH3 6SF, RG9 2EE, TW1 9PD, DT11 8LX, EH45 8HB, WD6 2JP, DT11 8PU.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your help on behalf of the R3 dig team in Leicester.
> > > > Philippa Langley
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Maria Torres
> > > > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:38 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: 22nd August
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi All - A head's up that there won't be a note in the NY Times this year:
> > > > the Board had a discussion about costs, and, since the entry in the Times
> > > > was $442.00 last year, and will likely be the same or more this year, and
> > > > since there isn't very much, if any, outside response (even though I made
> > > > sure it was available in etherspace), the cost of the notice isn't giving
> > > > us what we, and Richard, need.
> > > >
> > > > I would have been happy to donate the notice this year, but expenses got
> > > > eaten up by two sick, little, feral kittens I took in this year. Now that
> > > > I do know, I'll see if I can set aside funds for next year, as a personal
> > > > gift to Richard and us.
> > > >
> > > > Maria
> > > > ejbronte@
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>