Trial "Wiki"

Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
advantages of Google are

it's free
it can be made accessible on many levels
by the owner only
by anyone with the link
it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
it can be kept private or made available generally
Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
oh and did I mention it's free?


the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves

Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
some level of control).

https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home

A J

Hi AJ:

Fantastic work!

I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it okay if I share your link with our group members?

Margie



Sent from my iPad

On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:

> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> advantages of Google are
>
> it's free
> it can be made accessible on many levels
> by the owner only
> by anyone with the link
> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> it can be kept private or made available generally
> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> oh and did I mention it's free?
>
> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>
> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> some level of control).
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>
> A J
>
>
>
>

This is excellent, A J. I only wish I had enough computer nous to be useful. I do hope this takes off. It was a brilliant idea of yours.

Sandra


From: A J Hibbard
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 5:51 PM
To: ; [email protected]
Subject: Trial "Wiki"


Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
advantages of Google are

it's free
it can be made accessible on many levels
by the owner only
by anyone with the link
it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
it can be kept private or made available generally
Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
oh and did I mention it's free?

the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves

Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
some level of control).

https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home

A J

Looking good....thank you AJ...Eileen

--- In , "SandraMachin" <sandramachin@...> wrote:
>
> This is excellent, A J. I only wish I had enough computer nous to be useful. I do hope this takes off. It was a brilliant idea of yours.
>
> Sandra
>
>
> From: A J Hibbard
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 5:51 PM
> To: ; [email protected]
> Subject: Trial "Wiki"
>
>
> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> advantages of Google are
>
> it's free
> it can be made accessible on many levels
> by the owner only
> by anyone with the link
> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> it can be kept private or made available generally
> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> oh and did I mention it's free?
>
> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>
> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> some level of control).
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>
> A J
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

that's brilliant AJ



________________________________
From: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
To: ; [email protected]
Sent: Friday, 29 March 2013, 17:51
Subject: Trial "Wiki"

 
Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
advantages of Google are

it's free
it can be made accessible on many levels
by the owner only
by anyone with the link
it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
it can be kept private or made available generally
Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
oh and did I mention it's free?

the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves

Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
some level of control).

https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home

A J

I want to add my thanks too.....a good title!

Jan.

Sent from my iPad

On 29 Mar 2013, at 18:14, "EileenB" <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:

> Looking good....thank you AJ...Eileen
>
> --- In , "SandraMachin" <sandramachin@...> wrote:
> >
> > This is excellent, A J. I only wish I had enough computer nous to be useful. I do hope this takes off. It was a brilliant idea of yours.
> >
> > Sandra
> >
> >
> > From: A J Hibbard
> > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 5:51 PM
> > To: ; [email protected]
> > Subject: Trial "Wiki"
> >
> >
> > Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> > computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> > advantages of Google are
> >
> > it's free
> > it can be made accessible on many levels
> > by the owner only
> > by anyone with the link
> > it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> > it can be kept private or made available generally
> > Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> > oh and did I mention it's free?
> >
> > the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> > permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >
> > Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> > probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> > some level of control).
> >
> > https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >
> > A J
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Yes, indeed, please do share.

Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
This is presented only as an example of what might be done...

Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who can
contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions in
their areas of expertise? etc etc

A J

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hi AJ:
>
> Fantastic work!
>
> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>
> Margie
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> > computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> > advantages of Google are
> >
> > it's free
> > it can be made accessible on many levels
> > by the owner only
> > by anyone with the link
> > it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> > it can be kept private or made available generally
> > Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> > oh and did I mention it's free?
> >
> > the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> > permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >
> > Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> > probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> > some level of control).
> >
> > https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >
> > A J
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>

The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?

Jan.

Sent from my iPad

On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:

> Yes, indeed, please do share.
>
> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
>
> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who can
> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions in
> their areas of expertise? etc etc
>
> A J
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> Hi AJ:
>>
>> Fantastic work!
>>
>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>>
>> Margie
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
>>> advantages of Google are
>>>
>>> it's free
>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
>>> by the owner only
>>> by anyone with the link
>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
>>>
>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>>>
>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
>>> some level of control).
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>>>
>>> A J
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

I am way more error than trial, but this is great news!

-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of A J Hibbard
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 2:39 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"

Yes, indeed, please do share.

Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
This is presented only as an example of what might be done...

Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who can
contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions in
their areas of expertise? etc etc

A J

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hi AJ:
>
> Fantastic work!
>
> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>
> Margie
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> > computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> > advantages of Google are
> >
> > it's free
> > it can be made accessible on many levels
> > by the owner only
> > by anyone with the link
> > it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> > it can be kept private or made available generally
> > Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> > oh and did I mention it's free?
> >
> > the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> > permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >
> > Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> > probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> > some level of control).
> >
> > https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >
> > A J
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>






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

Yahoo! Groups Links

Good idea...

--- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
>
> Jan.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > Yes, indeed, please do share.
> >
> > Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> > of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> > trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> > This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> >
> > Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> > represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> > design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> > general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who can
> > contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions in
> > their areas of expertise? etc etc
> >
> > A J
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...> wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi AJ:
> >>
> >> Fantastic work!
> >>
> >> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> >> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> >>
> >> Margie
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> >>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> >>> advantages of Google are
> >>>
> >>> it's free
> >>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> >>> by the owner only
> >>> by anyone with the link
> >>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> >>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> >>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> >>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> >>>
> >>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be viewable,
> >>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >>>
> >>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> >>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> >>> some level of control).
> >>>
> >>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >>>
> >>> A J
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

That's a great suggestion.

And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
of other people do too.

A J

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
>
> Jan.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > Yes, indeed, please do share.
> >
> > Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> > of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> > trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> > This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> >
> > Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> > represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> > design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> > general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> can
> > contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> in
> > their areas of expertise? etc etc
> >
> > A J
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >> **
>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi AJ:
> >>
> >> Fantastic work!
> >>
> >> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> >> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> >>
> >> Margie
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> >>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> >>> advantages of Google are
> >>>
> >>> it's free
> >>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> >>> by the owner only
> >>> by anyone with the link
> >>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> >>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> >>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> >>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> >>>
> >>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> viewable,
> >>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >>>
> >>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> >>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> >>> some level of control).
> >>>
> >>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >>>
> >>> A J
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?

Jan.

Sent from my iPad

On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:

> That's a great suggestion.
>
> And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> of other people do too.
>
> A J
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
>>
>> Jan.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
>>>
>>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
>>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
>>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
>>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
>>>
>>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
>>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
>>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
>>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
>> can
>>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
>> in
>>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
>>>
>>> A J
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi AJ:
>>>>
>>>> Fantastic work!
>>>>
>>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
>>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>>>>
>>>> Margie
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
>>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
>>>>> advantages of Google are
>>>>>
>>>>> it's free
>>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
>>>>> by the owner only
>>>>> by anyone with the link
>>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
>>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
>>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
>>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
>>>>>
>>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
>> viewable,
>>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
>>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
>>>>> some level of control).
>>>>>
>>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>>>>>
>>>>> A J
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

I will say one thing about J A-H's two updated books, the print is so tiny...... I get eye fatigue pretty quickly, and I don't need bifocals Y-E-T!

________________________________
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Jan Mulrenan
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 2:53 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"



Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?

Jan.

Sent from my iPad

On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:

> That's a great suggestion.
>
> And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> of other people do too.
>
> A J
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...<mailto:janmulrenan%40btinternet.com>>wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
>>
>> Jan.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
>>>
>>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
>>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
>>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
>>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
>>>
>>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
>>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
>>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
>>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
>> can
>>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
>> in
>>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
>>>
>>> A J
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...<mailto:margiedeck2%40gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi AJ:
>>>>
>>>> Fantastic work!
>>>>
>>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
>>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>>>>
>>>> Margie
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
>>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
>>>>> advantages of Google are
>>>>>
>>>>> it's free
>>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
>>>>> by the owner only
>>>>> by anyone with the link
>>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
>>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
>>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
>>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
>>>>>
>>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
>> viewable,
>>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
>>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
>>>>> some level of control).
>>>>>
>>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>>>>>
>>>>> A J
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Awesome!
I read reviews before buying and leave reviews. It's a great way to influence people's reading albeit in a very small individual level.

Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad

On Mar 29, 2013, at 3:49 PM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:

> That's a great suggestion.
>
> And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> of other people do too.
>
> A J
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
>>
>> Jan.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
>>>
>>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
>>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
>>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
>>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
>>>
>>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
>>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
>>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
>>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
>> can
>>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
>> in
>>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
>>>
>>> A J
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi AJ:
>>>>
>>>> Fantastic work!
>>>>
>>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
>>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
>>>>
>>>> Margie
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
>>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
>>>>> advantages of Google are
>>>>>
>>>>> it's free
>>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
>>>>> by the owner only
>>>>> by anyone with the link
>>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
>>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
>>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
>>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
>>>>>
>>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
>> viewable,
>>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
>>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
>>>>> some level of control).
>>>>>
>>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
>>>>>
>>>>> A J
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Pam, I bought the kindle version. But will buy the print version for the pictures.... C

Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad

On Mar 29, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Pamela Bain <pbain@...> wrote:

> I will say one thing about J A-H's two updated books, the print is so tiny...... I get eye fatigue pretty quickly, and I don't need bifocals Y-E-T!
>
> ________________________________
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Jan Mulrenan
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 2:53 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"
>
> Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
>
> Jan.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > That's a great suggestion.
> >
> > And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> > read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> > of other people do too.
> >
> > A J
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...<mailto:janmulrenan%40btinternet.com>>wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
> >>
> >> Jan.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
> >>>
> >>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> >>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> >>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> >>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> >>>
> >>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> >>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> >>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> >>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> >> can
> >>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> >> in
> >>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
> >>>
> >>> A J
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...<mailto:margiedeck2%40gmail.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> **
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi AJ:
> >>>>
> >>>> Fantastic work!
> >>>>
> >>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> >>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> >>>>
> >>>> Margie
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...<mailto:ajhibbard%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> >>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> >>>>> advantages of Google are
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it's free
> >>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> >>>>> by the owner only
> >>>>> by anyone with the link
> >>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> >>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> >>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> >>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> >> viewable,
> >>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> >>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> >>>>> some level of control).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A J
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

I've read it, and yes, the author thinks Richard committed all the crimes attributed to him, but still has interesting things to say about 15th century Northern piety

--- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
>
> Jan.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > That's a great suggestion.
> >
> > And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> > read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> > of other people do too.
> >
> > A J
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
> >>
> >> Jan.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
> >>>
> >>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> >>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> >>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> >>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> >>>
> >>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> >>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> >>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> >>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> >> can
> >>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> >> in
> >>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
> >>>
> >>> A J
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> **
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi AJ:
> >>>>
> >>>> Fantastic work!
> >>>>
> >>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> >>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> >>>>
> >>>> Margie
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> >>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> >>>>> advantages of Google are
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it's free
> >>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> >>>>> by the owner only
> >>>>> by anyone with the link
> >>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> >>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> >>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> >>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> >> viewable,
> >>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> >>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> >>>>> some level of control).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A J
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

I believe something interesting can be delved from most books even those anti-Richard such as Hicks' Anne Neville book...Eileen

--- In , "favefauve@..." <favefauve@...> wrote:
>
> I've read it, and yes, the author thinks Richard committed all the crimes attributed to him, but still has interesting things to say about 15th century Northern piety
>
> --- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
> >
> > Jan.
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> >
> > > That's a great suggestion.
> > >
> > > And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> > > read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> > > of other people do too.
> > >
> > > A J
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@>wrote:
> > >
> > >> **
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
> > >>
> > >> Jan.
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPad
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
> > >>>
> > >>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> > >>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> > >>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> > >>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> > >>>
> > >>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> > >>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> > >>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> > >>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> > >> can
> > >>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> > >> in
> > >>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
> > >>>
> > >>> A J
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> **
> > >>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi AJ:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Fantastic work!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> > >>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Margie
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Sent from my iPad
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> > >>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> > >>>>> advantages of Google are
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> it's free
> > >>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> > >>>>> by the owner only
> > >>>>> by anyone with the link
> > >>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> > >>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> > >>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> > >>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> > >> viewable,
> > >>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> > >>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> > >>>>> some level of control).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A J
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?  Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.  



________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 17:47
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"


 

I believe something interesting can be delved from most books even those anti-Richard such as Hicks' Anne Neville book...Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "favefauve@..." <favefauve@...> wrote:
>
> I've read it, and yes, the author thinks Richard committed all the crimes attributed to him, but still has interesting things to say about 15th century Northern piety
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
> >
> > Jan.
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> >
> > > That's a great suggestion.
> > >
> > > And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> > > read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> > > of other people do too.
> > >
> > > A J
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@>wrote:
> > >
> > >> **
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
> > >>
> > >> Jan.
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPad
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
> > >>>
> > >>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> > >>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> > >>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> > >>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> > >>>
> > >>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> > >>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> > >>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> > >>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> > >> can
> > >>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> > >> in
> > >>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
> > >>>
> > >>> A J
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> **
> > >>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi AJ:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Fantastic work!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> > >>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Margie
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Sent from my iPad
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> > >>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> > >>>>> advantages of Google are
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> it's free
> > >>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> > >>>>> by the owner only
> > >>>>> by anyone with the link
> > >>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> > >>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> > >>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> > >>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> > >> viewable,
> > >>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> > >>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> > >>>>> some level of control).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A J
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> [snip] I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?

Carol responds:

I haven't read it and don't want to spend money on any book ostensibly about Richard that relies on More (can't they at least use Mancini and Croyland, which, however biased and sometimes inaccurate, are at least close in time to the events described?)

But I'm wondering if the book describes religious rituals and holy days, not necessarily in the North but anywhere in England since Richard spent a great deal of time elsewhere, especially in his early years and 1483-85.

How, specifically, would he have spent Easter? I picture him spending a long morning in church and then having a lovely feast to celebrate the end of Lent, with a variety of meat and no fish in sight.

But what else would he and Anne (or whoever he was with at the time) have done to celebrate? (Now I'm picturing him walking among the daffodils in the Lake Country--Wordsworth just popped into my head.)

But, seriously, Easter was the greatest holy day of the Christian year, more important (but probably considerably less enjoyable) than Christmas. Were there pageants as at Corpus Christi?

Happy Easter, everyone. It's still Saturday here but not for long.

Carol

These two books are very good:

The Stripping of the Altars - Eamon Duffy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stripping_of_the_Altars

The Last Office - Geoffrey Moorhouse (which deals exclusively with the dissolving of the priory at Durham Cathedral but which also describes religious practice there prior to this happening)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Office-Dissolution-Monastery/dp/029785089X

--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
> Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@> wrote:
> >
> > [snip] I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I haven't read it and don't want to spend money on any book ostensibly about Richard that relies on More (can't they at least use Mancini and Croyland, which, however biased and sometimes inaccurate, are at least close in time to the events described?)
>
> But I'm wondering if the book describes religious rituals and holy days, not necessarily in the North but anywhere in England since Richard spent a great deal of time elsewhere, especially in his early years and 1483-85.
>
> How, specifically, would he have spent Easter? I picture him spending a long morning in church and then having a lovely feast to celebrate the end of Lent, with a variety of meat and no fish in sight.
>
> But what else would he and Anne (or whoever he was with at the time) have done to celebrate? (Now I'm picturing him walking among the daffodils in the Lake Country--Wordsworth just popped into my head.)
>
> But, seriously, Easter was the greatest holy day of the Christian year, more important (but probably considerably less enjoyable) than Christmas. Were there pageants as at Corpus Christi?
>
> Happy Easter, everyone. It's still Saturday here but not for long.
>
> Carol
>

colyngbourne wrote:
>
> These two books are very good:
>
> The Stripping of the Altars - Eamon Duffy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stripping_of_the_Altars
>
> The Last Office - Geoffrey Moorhouse (which deals exclusively with the dissolving of the priory at Durham Cathedral but which also describes religious practice there prior to this happening)
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Office-Dissolution-Monastery/dp/029785089X

Carol responds:

Thanks very much for the recommendations (though it makes me sad even to read the summary of the first one.

Do they say anything specific about the way that Easter was celebrated in Richard's time?

Carol

They come recommended by my Other Half - they are still on my To Read pile. My other half has said that at Easter, in Durham Cathedral (so from the second book), the paschal candle was something like 20 feet tall. Sounds ridiculous, I know - but apparently they were that big. I might bring it to the top of my reading pile now!

--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> colyngbourne wrote:
> >
> > These two books are very good:
> >
> > The Stripping of the Altars - Eamon Duffy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stripping_of_the_Altars
> >
> > The Last Office - Geoffrey Moorhouse (which deals exclusively with the dissolving of the priory at Durham Cathedral but which also describes religious practice there prior to this happening)
> > http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-Office-Dissolution-Monastery/dp/029785089X
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Thanks very much for the recommendations (though it makes me sad even to read the summary of the first one.
>
> Do they say anything specific about the way that Easter was celebrated in Richard's time?
>
> Carol
>

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?  Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.  
>

That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?

Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)

Just picked this up now and will come back to you tomorrow. Some of the events he refers to are post Isabel, and I have to say, there's nothing to suggest the two sisters didn't get along. You could say Isabel was the one snubbed when Anne was chosen to marry Edward of Lancaster and Isabel and George left out in the cold stranded in France.



________________________________
From: pansydobersby <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 31 March 2013, 21:10
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"

 

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?  Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.  
>

That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?

Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)

::raises hand and jumps up and down:: I've been doing my research and actually know the answer to what did Richard do for Easter.

I doubt he walked through daffodils during his years at Middleham: Yorkshire is notorious for hanging onto Winter and getting snow into April. Mebbe there were flowers in London? There were no pageants.

His celebration of Easter was very different after he became king: Ashdown-Hill's *Last Days of R3* has an extensive outline of what he would have gone through -- and I mean *gone through*. (Be sure to read Ashdown-Hill's account, it's a lot more detailed and poignant.

To summarize what he'd have done over Easter 1485, only a few days after Anne's death:

Friday 25 March - Anne's funeral/Requiem mass. If he attended, he had to remain out of sight.

Sunday 27 March - Richard appeared in public to take part in the Palm Sunday procession at Westminster.

Palm Sunday marked the beginning of Holy Week. Richard had to take part in other holy ceremonies throughout the week, including a miraculous royal healing ceremony (touch for the 'King's Evil' [scrofula]) exclusive to the kings of England and France.

Before conducting this healing ceremony (in either a secular or a religious building), Richard confessed, received absolution, and took Holy Communion. He sat down while each of the "afflicted" came before him.

He then rinsed his hands and then pressed them on the suppurating sores of each person while one of his chaplains intoned, "Super egros manus imponent et bene habebunt" (They will lay their hands upon the sick and they will recover": Mark 11:18).

(Wednesday writes: It's not recorded whether he wondered why, if his hands were so holy, his touch hadn't been enough to save Anne.)

Each person was given a coin after their sores got the royal touch -- likely one of the recently minted gold "angels" with the Archangel Michael on one side and the quote, "Per crucem tuam salva nos Christe Redemptor ("Christ, Redeemer, save us by your cross").

Wednesday 30 March - Richard appeared at the Priory of the Knights of St John of Jerusalem (Knights Hospitaller) in Clerkenwell to deny he had any intention of marrying his niece, Elizabeth of York.

Ashdown-Hill posits that since the Hospitallers dedicated themselves to caring for and healing the sick, it's possible that Richard's visit during Holy Week also included another "touching" ceremony at the knights' priory.

Thursday, 31 March (Maundy Thursday) - Richard likely attended the Mass of the Last Supper, probably at St. Paul's Cathedral.

After a reading from John chapter 13, and in compliance with ancient custom, Richard put on an apron and went down on his knees. He then washed the feet of thirty-two poor men in imitation of Christ, while the choir chanted a series of antiphons.

He gave each of the men the apron he had worn to wash that man's feet, along with the towel he'd used to dry them. Each man also got a gown, a hood, a pair of shoes, bread, fish, wine and a purse containing thirty-two silver pennies. (The number of poor men and the number of pennies reflected Richard's age.)

Friday 1 April - Richard was on his knees again for the penitential rite of "creeping to the cross," which was the main focus of the Good Friday liturgy. At a certain point during the liturgy, Richard prostrated himself and then, without getting up, he slowly approached the symbol of the crucifixion" in a semi-prostrate condition. [He crawled.]

After adoring the cross, Richard offered pre-prepared gold and silver "cramp rings" (made to the value of twenty-five shillings from the king's treasury) to the cross. He then redeemed the rings with coins of the same value.

In accordance with tradition, no Mass was celebrated on Good Friday. Instead, the special liturgy included the above-outlined veneration of the Cross.

Richard may have also attended "the gloomy office of Tenebrae, when the church was lit by only a single candle." If so, one of the responsorys may have resonated with him: "My eyes are dim with weeping, for the one who comforted me is far away from me. O all you people, see whether there be any sorrow like mine."

His Easters in Middleham were a bit more cheery, and Easter was the most important of three big annual feasts. Traditionally, this is what medievals did on Easter Sunday (with a lot leading up to it, and a lot following it):

* Celebrated by a (spiritual) feast in the church

* Easter morning — the Easter sepulcher was opened and the Cross and Host were carried to the altar. (Previously, on Good Friday, the Cross and Host had been buried in a special "Easter sepulchre" in the walls of the church or in a chapel, surrounded with candles, after the entire congregation had come forward to kneel and bow low ("creeping to the cross" before kissing it.)

• A feast day of exchanges between lord & tenant (like Christmas).

-- Tenants bring the lord eggs; the lord gives his manorial servants dinner.
-- In London, there was tilting at the quintain in boats on the Thames, and celebrating by the watching crowd.

* Easter Sunday was followed by a week of vacation for villeins.'

* At the end of the week was another feast for the villeins to "celebrate" going back to work.

From 1479, Richard also had two fairs to look forward to in Middleham, since he got Edward to issue a letter patent permitting them. (Source: Calendar of Patent Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office (1232- 1509), 52 vols. (London, 1891- 1916)

One fair was seven weeks after Easter (during Whitsun week, otherwise known as Beltane). To be held the Thursday plus three days afterward, during Whitsun week:

Fair at MIDDLEHAM - (Letter Patent) Thurs in Whitsun week+3 (Easter dependent), granted 3 Apr 1479, by King Edward IV to Richard, duke of Gloucester, the king's brother (CPR, 1476-85, p. 154).

The other fair (the one I want to go back in time to attend) included All Hallow's Eve and extended into All Soul's Day if the attendees stayed up past midnight on November 1. The fair was held from 28 October (Simon & Jude's Feast Day) to end of day 1 November:

Fair at MIDDLEHAM - (Letter Patent) fair day+3, Simon and Jude (28 October); gr 3 Apr 1479, by K Edw IV to Richard, duke of Gloucester, the king's brother (CPR, 1476-85, p. 154).

~Weds


--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
> But what else would he and Anne (or whoever he was with at the time) have done to celebrate? (Now I'm picturing him walking among the daffodils in the Lake Country--Wordsworth just popped into my head.)
>
> But, seriously, Easter was the greatest holy day of the Christian year, more important (but probably considerably less enjoyable) than Christmas. Were there pageants as at Corpus Christi?
>
> Happy Easter, everyone. It's still Saturday here but not for long.

It's easy to believe that this very thought did indeed run thorough Richard's mind......Eileen

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
>
> (Wednesday writes: It's not recorded whether he wondered why, if his hands were so holy, his touch hadn't been enough to save Anne.)
>

The touch for the King's Evil was specific to that disease - it didn't transfer to other illnesses.


________________________________
 EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote



 
It's easy to believe that this very thought did indeed run thorough Richard's mind......Eileen

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
>
> (Wednesday writes: It's not recorded whether he wondered why, if his hands were so holy, his touch hadn't been enough to save Anne.)
>

Interesting points here. And how annoying we will never know...:0/ Eileen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Just picked this up now and will come back to you tomorrow. Some of the events he refers to are post Isabel, and I have to say, there's nothing to suggest the two sisters didn't get along. You could say Isabel was the one snubbed when Anne was chosen to marry Edward of Lancaster and Isabel and George left out in the cold stranded in France.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: pansydobersby <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, 31 March 2013, 21:10
> Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"
>
>  
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?  Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.  
> >
>
> That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?
>
> Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)
>
>
>
>
>
>

Yes in a fairly unreasonable book (to put it mildly) Hicks is quite lucid here. For example he says that in the York House Books, fifty entries refer to Richard but not one to her. This could be construed as unusual because the intercession of great ladies was often sought and Hicks of course has to go that step further and claim that Richard was an 'egotist and no respecter of women' and that she's often not mentioned in transactions around her lands. That's not entirely true. When I looked at the Parliament Rolls, Edward does land swaps and, where appropriate, they are with Richard and Anne, not just Richard.  But it is interesting, that unlike EW or indeed Elizabeth Talbot/Mowbray, she doesn't seem to have left a stamp on anything. Though Hicks is quick to point out she spent a lot on clothes. He also draws attention to the lack of her presence on a lot of Richard's progress, but the problem is he is so in love with Rous that it's difficult to sort
out the wheat from the chaff, which is regrettable.  


________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:57
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"

 

Interesting points here. And how annoying we will never know...:0/ Eileen

--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Just picked this up now and will come back to you tomorrow. Some of the events he refers to are post Isabel, and I have to say, there's nothing to suggest the two sisters didn't get along. You could say Isabel was the one snubbed when Anne was chosen to marry Edward of Lancaster and Isabel and George left out in the cold stranded in France.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: pansydobersby <mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, 31 March 2013, 21:10
> Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"
>
>  
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?à Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't knowàbut it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales toàhave his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire. à
> >
>
> That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?
>
> Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)
>
>
>
>
>
>

Wednesday wrote:
>
> ::raises hand and jumps up and down:: I've been doing my research and actually know the answer to what did Richard do for Easter.

[snip detailed response]

Carol responds:

Thanks, Weds. I've read "Last Days of Richard III" but had forgotten the excruciating details of Richard's Holy Week as king. Puts the Pope's washing the feet of twelve juvenile delinquents (used to be twelve old men) to shame, and I don't think those twelve received new clothes. I did remember the King's Evil, but didn't associate it with Easter. I was thinking specifically of Easter Day. Do you know the specifics of the Easter feast? I don't recall whether J A-H mentioned them.

I don't suppose Richard took a week of vacation like the villeins. And a feast to celebrate going back to work? I suppose that's like Twelfth Night, the drunkest night of the year if that makes sense.

Carol

She couldnt have been ill for long periods of time if she still had an interest in clothes...Didnt she take a detour on Richard's progress to take EoM back to Middleham...maybe stayed with him for a while then and at different times. If he was indeed sickly, which I am not totally sure of, this may explain it. She must have found it tough...maybe wishing to support Richard but also wanting to be with her son whom she had had at her side from the time he was born until King Edward died and Richard had to go down to London...Eileen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
>Though Hicks is quick to point out she spent a lot on clothes. He also draws attention to the lack of her presence on a lot of Richard's progress, but the problem is he is so in love with Rous that it's difficult to sort
> out the wheat from the chaff, which is regrettable.  
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:57
> Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"
>
>  
>
> Interesting points here. And how annoying we will never know...:0/ Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Just picked this up now and will come back to you tomorrow. Some of the events he refers to are post Isabel, and I have to say, there's nothing to suggest the two sisters didn't get along. You could say Isabel was the one snubbed when Anne was chosen to marry Edward of Lancaster and Isabel and George left out in the cold stranded in France.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: pansydobersby <mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com>
> > To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, 31 March 2013, 21:10
> > Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"
> >
> >  
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't?  Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.  
> > >
> >
> > That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?
> >
> > Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

If that is the one by Jonathon Hughes I didn't get through the first chapter, I gave to a charity shop.

--- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> Yes, it might save a disappointment. I saw "The Religious Life of Richard III" & was tempted till I read the reviews on Amazon. The author takes the More line on R3's actions, so I forgot him & the book. Has anybody else read this?
>
> Jan.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:49, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> > That's a great suggestion.
> >
> > And I'd urge people to put reviews on Amazon.com & Amazon.co.uk. I know I
> > read reviews before deciding to make a purchase & I suspect a fair number
> > of other people do too.
> >
> > A J
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> The book reviews are good - maybe even 2 or 3 per book?
> >>
> >> Jan.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:39, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, indeed, please do share.
> >>>
> >>> Eventually it would be great to have someone take over the technical part
> >>> of a site like this who actually knows something. All I've learned is by
> >>> trial & error experimenting with Google (because, did I say? it's free).
> >>> This is presented only as an example of what might be done...
> >>>
> >>> Content is another matter, & I think management of content, if it
> >>> represented the Society, would have to be sorted out. What's the best
> >>> design for a site to be useful to us all, & perhaps ultimately to the
> >>> general public? Who says yeah or nay to what gets put on the site? Who
> >> can
> >>> contribute? Should outside authorities be invited to make contributions
> >> in
> >>> their areas of expertise? etc etc
> >>>
> >>> A J
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Margie Deck <margiedeck2@...>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> **
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi AJ:
> >>>>
> >>>> Fantastic work!
> >>>>
> >>>> I am president of the Northwest Chapter of the RIII Society in US. Is it
> >>>> okay if I share your link with our group members?
> >>>>
> >>>> Margie
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:51 AM, A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Okay - I've taken a few of the bits & pieces I'm accumulating on my
> >>>>> computer & consolidated them into a trial website on Google. The
> >>>>> advantages of Google are
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it's free
> >>>>> it can be made accessible on many levels
> >>>>> by the owner only
> >>>>> by anyone with the link
> >>>>> it can be set to allow additional editors (& thus function like a wiki)
> >>>>> it can be kept private or made available generally
> >>>>> Google has a great interest in backing up all the information it has
> >>>>> oh and did I mention it's free?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> the main disadvantage is that for any embedded documents to be
> >> viewable,
> >>>>> permissions also have to be managed for the documents themselves
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's the link. Please do not share it beyond these 2 groups (I will
> >>>>> probably "privatize" the site again after a few weeks, just to maintain
> >>>>> some level of control).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/gettingrichardright/home
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A J
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Hmm! That is very interesting observation!
It could be that Richard's little family were " fragile" or Richard didn't want them to come to court because Heidi not trust the people there? What does Hicks say? That Richard held them prisoners?!!

Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad

On Mar 31, 2013, at 4:10 PM, pansydobersby <[email protected]> wrote:

> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't? Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.
> >
>
> That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?
>
> Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)
>
>

No he doesn't say that - for once! He just mentions it and moves on to more important things like Richard's 'usurpation'.



________________________________
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 4 April 2013, 3:07
Subject: Re: Trial "Wiki"


 

Hmm! That is very interesting observation!
It could be that Richard's little family were " fragile" or Richard didn't want them to come to court because Heidi not trust the people there? What does Hicks say? That Richard held them prisoners?!!

Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad

On Mar 31, 2013, at 4:10 PM, pansydobersby <mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. One interesting point that Hicks makes which is subsumed amongst his other more extreme claims is that after her marriage Anne doesn't appear at events as perhaps she should. Why is mention of her omitted but that of Isabel and EW isn't? Is it because she wasn't there? And why isn't she there? Is it because she's ill, or that Richard didn't want her there? Before anyone pounces I honestly don't know but it is a valid point. And one thing which has always puzzled me is why Edward of Middleham never came south. Yes, it was usual for the Prince of Wales to have his own household but you would have thought that Richard would have wan't to display him outside Yorkshire.
> >
>
> That's intriguing. Which events does Hicks specifically refer to?
>
> Perhaps Anne didn't want to go when she knew Isabel to be present ;)
>
>

Right. But the King's Evil was the skin disease also known as scrofula.

Scrofula is the swelling of the lymph nodes in the neck that's caused by tuberculosis, so IF Anne died of TB/consumption, as is commonly speculated, he'd be touching to cure a symptom of what killed Anne.

~Weds

--- In , Pamela Furmidge <pamela.furmidge@...> wrote:
>
> The touch for the King's Evil was specific to that disease - it didn't transfer to other illnesses.
>
>
> ________________________________
>  EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote
>
>
>
>  
> It's easy to believe that this very thought did indeed run thorough Richard's mind......Eileen
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > (Wednesday writes: It's not recorded whether he wondered why, if his hands were so holy, his touch hadn't been enough to save Anne.)
> >