Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Anne Mowbray

Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
----- Original Message -----
From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray



There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.

________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray



Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> Subject: Anne Mowbray
>
>
> Â
>
> Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks Stephen. So we're back to Edward having to put aside EW and getting a punch on the nose?



________________________________
From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 13:52
Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray

 

Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
----- Original Message -----
From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray

There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.

________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray

Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> Subject: Anne Mowbray
>
>
> Â
>
> Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
>
>
>
>
>
>

Also having to find another wife quickly to have an heir.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Stephen. So we're back to Edward having to put aside EW and getting a punch on the nose?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 13:52
> Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
>
>  
>
> Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hilary Jones
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
>
> There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.
>
> ________________________________
> From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
> Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray
>
> Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> > Subject: Anne Mowbray
> >
> >
> > Â
> >
> > Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> > Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Yep. He'd already upset France and Spain over that.



________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 16:24
Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray

 

Also having to find another wife quickly to have an heir.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Stephen. So we're back to Edward having to put aside EW and getting a punch on the nose?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 13:52
> Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
>
>  
>
> Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hilary Jones
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
>
> There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.
>
> ________________________________
> From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
> Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray
>
> Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> > Subject: Anne Mowbray
> >
> >
> > Ã
> >
> > Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> > Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

This isn't spam I was commenting on what Hilary had said

--- In , "ricard1an" <maryfriend@...> wrote:
>
> Also having to find another wife quickly to have an heir.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Stephen. So we're back to Edward having to put aside EW and getting a punch on the nose?
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 13:52
> > Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> >  
> >
> > Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Hilary Jones
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
> > Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> > There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: ricard1an <maryfriend@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
> > Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> > Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.
> >
> > --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> > > Subject: Anne Mowbray
> > >
> > >
> > > Â
> > >
> > > Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> > > Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Don't know where the spam thing came from; it suddenly appeared. There's still the odd bit of malware appearing on here. I wonder if it's crept in there?



________________________________
From: ricard1an <maryfriend@...>
To:
Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 23:09
Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray

 

This isn't spam I was commenting on what Hilary had said

--- In , "ricard1an" <maryfriend@...> wrote:
>
> Also having to find another wife quickly to have an heir.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Stephen. So we're back to Edward having to put aside EW and getting a punch on the nose?
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, 15 March 2013, 13:52
> > Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> >  
> >
> > Oops - that's exactly the question I put to JA-H over a decade ago and he pointed out that, because the second marriage was in secret, EW had become Edward's mistress and could never legally marry him. Their children, even born after 1468 or a second ceremony, would remain illegitimate.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Hilary Jones
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:24 AM
> > Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> > There's also a bit in one of the books which has Anne Warwick attending her sister Margaret Talbot's funeral as a reconciliation in 1468 and Eleanor and Elizabeth being there (could Be JAH). This was used to imply that the Warwicks and potentially Clarence could have known about the pre-contract at the time of the Warwick rebellion. Of course it would have been no good them using it because it would have given Edward the opportunity to legitimise any future children. And of course Catesby was lawyer to the Butlers, to Hastings and eventually also to Clarence and I think it's JAH who said he could have had a hand in drawing up some of these compensations.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: ricard1an <maryfriend@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 23:10
> > Subject: Re: Anne Mowbray
> >
> > Years ago when JAH coming to our Branch to talk about Eleanor, before his book was published, I went to look at the DNB in the local library to see if there was any info on Eleanor. I don't think there was very much on Eleanor quite a bit about her father. One thing that struck me at the time was that apparently the Talbots were Lancastrians and they had the Earldom of Shrewsbury taken off them but Edward gave it back to Eleanor's brother, I think his name was Humphrey, in 1468. Eleanor died in 1468 so maybe the theory about paying the family off is true. Eleanor had died and none of them had talked so he gave him the Earldom back for keeping silent. Then he kept her sister quiet with the marriage to young Richard. In JAH's book I think there something about Eleanor's Mother and a dispute with Edward, can't remember exactly, so maybe they were all under his thumb. I must admit I changed my opinion of Edward quite a bit after reading JAH's book.
> >
> > --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the Leslau theory too, which Baldwin actually quotes. Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray was an intelligent forceful woman very protective of her sister and her sister's memory. John Mowbray Duke of Norfolk died quite suddenly and quite young (the circumstances of his death were not unlike that of Edward, hale and hearty one day, dead the next). JAH and Leslau hint that he was paid off for his silence and that the marriage was part of the deal, albeit they did not know Anne would die so young and her lands would transfer so quickly to the Crown. Too late tonight to say more now, but I'm pretty sure that if there was a pre-contract Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray knew.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thursday, 14 March 2013, 20:58
> > > Subject: Anne Mowbray
> > >
> > >
> > > Ã
> > >
> > > Liz..Ive started a new topic because hopefully this could lead to a discussion about poor Anne.
> > > Ive often wondered what Anne's mother thought about her marrying the youngest 'Prince' Richard. Anne's mother Elizabeth Talbot was the Duchess of Norfolk and sister to Eleanor Talbot/Butler. Dr JA-H in his book Eleanor The Secret Queen....excellent book...suggests that Elizabeth, who was close to EB and protected her would have known about the secret wedding with Edward. If this was the case would she have been aware that Edward's children by EW were illegitimate. Surely she would not have wanted this for her daughter. Did she know and have to keep shut up about it. I wonder....another mystery Eileen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>