Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 11:08:18
Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
"There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out
again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it
was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas
More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the
killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave
and complain."
Don't forget this is fiction...
Paul
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
"There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out
again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it
was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas
More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the
killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave
and complain."
Don't forget this is fiction...
Paul
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 14:02:15
Gawd Paul I thought you meant me! No seriously, Mantel is good and showed last week she knows her stuff. Yet another area for investigation. And so it goes on ......
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 11:08
Subject: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
"There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out
again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it
was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas
More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the
killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave
and complain."
Don't forget this is fiction...
Paul
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: RichardIIISociety forum <>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 11:08
Subject: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
"There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out
again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it
was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas
More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the
killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave
and complain."
Don't forget this is fiction...
Paul
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 15:41:43
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
Carol responds:
John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Carol
>
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
Carol responds:
John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Carol
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 15:47:28
I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 15:49:38
That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
Carol responds:
John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Carol
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
Carol responds:
John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Carol
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 15:52:39
But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
________________________________
From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
--- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:00:37
Oh gawd...yes your right. You do remember Hilary that Dening has Richard admitting to the boys being murdered during his watch as it were. Although he says everything was controlled by the Church and one particular churchman....Eileen
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> Â
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> Â
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:02:51
Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's nothing horrid...like torture scenes etc., I would be surprised if there was not...after all it is the Tudor era...
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> Â
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> Â
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:09:22
I loved both of Hilary Mantel's books, which actually surprised me.
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of EileenB
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:03 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's nothing horrid...like torture scenes etc., I would be surprised if there was not...after all it is the Tudor era...
--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...<mailto:hjnatdat@...>> wrote:
>
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...<mailto:cherryripe.eileenb@...>>
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> Â
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of EileenB
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:03 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's nothing horrid...like torture scenes etc., I would be surprised if there was not...after all it is the Tudor era...
--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...<mailto:hjnatdat@...>> wrote:
>
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...<mailto:cherryripe.eileenb@...>>
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> Â
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:10:09
From: EileenB
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from
> reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it
> would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story.
> However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful
> for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular
> author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard
> was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
It's such a shame that Rosemary Sutcliff never "did" Richard - especially as
the brief piece about him in The Rider of the White Horse is so loving.
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from
> reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it
> would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story.
> However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful
> for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular
> author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard
> was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
It's such a shame that Rosemary Sutcliff never "did" Richard - especially as
the brief piece about him in The Rider of the White Horse is so loving.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:42:30
And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have cared
about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
remaining remains & inter them properly?
A J
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@...> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
remaining remains & inter them properly?
A J
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@...> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:45:45
Have you read the book AJ...? Secret History...Not everyone's cup of tea I know but I found it of great interest...eileen
--- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have cared
> about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> remaining remains & inter them properly?
>
> A J
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
--- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have cared
> about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> remaining remains & inter them properly?
>
> A J
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:50:43
Yes - I was being ironic. Actually it's a bit of Dening I'm really sceptical about (though we should of course be sceptical about it all):)
________________________________
From: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 16:42
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have cared
about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
remaining remains & inter them properly?
A J
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@...> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
________________________________
From: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 16:42
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have cared
about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
remaining remains & inter them properly?
A J
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> ________________________________
> From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@...> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the
> Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance
> of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's
> watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died
> at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he
> bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:55:55
Yep, but I understood it was somewhat out of bounds to discuss on this
group.
I have mixed feelings about it. (A) I'd like to believe that we can "talk"
to the dead (B) My rational brain doesn't think that it's likely, however,
& we certainly have to rate the quality of any information so received as
very low. and (C) I was reminded of Clever Hans. Clever Hans was a horse
who lived late 19th century or maybe early 20th century & did arithmetic
calculations. He was very convincing & became the subject of investigation
as a result. What was going on was (at least from this horseman's point of
view) even more interesting - if no one in the audience knew the answer to
a problem, the horse just kept pawing until he stopped in frustration. So
clearly Clever Hans was very clever - just not in the way people were led
to believe. The medium in *Secret History* seemed much more thorough on
material his client already knew. All of which leads me to ask whether a
similar series of visits with a medium, with people now focussed on
fleshing out the possibility that Richard sent his nephews away, would such
a medium give us different words from Richard's mouth?
A J
Who will be kept plenty busy with contemporary sources for years to come.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:45 AM, EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...
> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Have you read the book AJ...? Secret History...Not everyone's cup of tea I
> know but I found it of great interest...eileen
>
>
> --- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have
> cared
> > about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> > forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> > remaining remains & inter them properly?
> >
> > A J
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> >
> > > **
>
> > >
> > >
> > > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of
> the
> > > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
> disappearance
> > > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on
> Howard's
> > > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury
> died
> > > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because
> he
> > > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
group.
I have mixed feelings about it. (A) I'd like to believe that we can "talk"
to the dead (B) My rational brain doesn't think that it's likely, however,
& we certainly have to rate the quality of any information so received as
very low. and (C) I was reminded of Clever Hans. Clever Hans was a horse
who lived late 19th century or maybe early 20th century & did arithmetic
calculations. He was very convincing & became the subject of investigation
as a result. What was going on was (at least from this horseman's point of
view) even more interesting - if no one in the audience knew the answer to
a problem, the horse just kept pawing until he stopped in frustration. So
clearly Clever Hans was very clever - just not in the way people were led
to believe. The medium in *Secret History* seemed much more thorough on
material his client already knew. All of which leads me to ask whether a
similar series of visits with a medium, with people now focussed on
fleshing out the possibility that Richard sent his nephews away, would such
a medium give us different words from Richard's mouth?
A J
Who will be kept plenty busy with contemporary sources for years to come.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:45 AM, EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...
> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Have you read the book AJ...? Secret History...Not everyone's cup of tea I
> know but I found it of great interest...eileen
>
>
> --- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have
> cared
> > about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> > forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> > remaining remains & inter them properly?
> >
> > A J
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
> >
> > > **
>
> > >
> > >
> > > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of
> the
> > > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
> disappearance
> > > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on
> Howard's
> > > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury
> died
> > > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> > >
> > > Carol responds:
> > >
> > > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because
> he
> > > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> > >
> > > Carol
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 16:58:05
From: EileenB
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I
> keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's
> nothing horrid...
Try starting with Fludd, which is set in the 1950s-ish - it's a *lovely*
book, and although it's a bit sinister in places there's nothing very
upsetting in it.
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I
> keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's
> nothing horrid...
Try starting with Fludd, which is set in the 1950s-ish - it's a *lovely*
book, and although it's a bit sinister in places there's nothing very
upsetting in it.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 17:03:30
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
Carol responds:
Here's the best discussion I can find of the Norfolk-and-the-sacks-of-lime theory (from "Yorkist Lord: John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, c. 1425-1485" by Anne Crawford). I'm not sure I agree with her that John Howard had no claim to the title Duke of Norfolk (Richard certainly thought that he did), but the rest of the discussion shows how the theory started (with a casual remark about "sinister connotations" by someone named Payne Collier and a later, more elaborate theory developed by a biographer of Norfolk named Melvin J. Tucker in 1964. Crawford demolishes the theory that Norfolk had anything to do with the deaths of the "Princes" (but does think that Richard had them murdered later by someone else):
http://books.google.com/books?id=RzPF_dPtprQC&pg=RA1-PT116&dq=Duke+of+Norfolk+%22sacks+of+lime%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XSGmUa28GI3PiwLFm4DQAw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg
TinyUrl: http://tinyurl.com/puxy8q6
If we ignore the idea that Richard was a "dealer of death" and a usurper and simply look at the reasons why it's highly improbable that Norfolk had any hand in the supposed murder of the "Princes," Crawford makes a compelling argument for Norfolk's innocence. (Too bad she doesn't do the same for Richard.)
Carol
>
> That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
Carol responds:
Here's the best discussion I can find of the Norfolk-and-the-sacks-of-lime theory (from "Yorkist Lord: John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, c. 1425-1485" by Anne Crawford). I'm not sure I agree with her that John Howard had no claim to the title Duke of Norfolk (Richard certainly thought that he did), but the rest of the discussion shows how the theory started (with a casual remark about "sinister connotations" by someone named Payne Collier and a later, more elaborate theory developed by a biographer of Norfolk named Melvin J. Tucker in 1964. Crawford demolishes the theory that Norfolk had anything to do with the deaths of the "Princes" (but does think that Richard had them murdered later by someone else):
http://books.google.com/books?id=RzPF_dPtprQC&pg=RA1-PT116&dq=Duke+of+Norfolk+%22sacks+of+lime%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XSGmUa28GI3PiwLFm4DQAw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg
TinyUrl: http://tinyurl.com/puxy8q6
If we ignore the idea that Richard was a "dealer of death" and a usurper and simply look at the reasons why it's highly improbable that Norfolk had any hand in the supposed murder of the "Princes," Crawford makes a compelling argument for Norfolk's innocence. (Too bad she doesn't do the same for Richard.)
Carol
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 17:18:06
I will give it a look up on Amazon.....eileen
--- In , "Claire M Jordan" <whitehound@...> wrote:
>
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> > Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I
> > keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's
> > nothing horrid...
>
> Try starting with Fludd, which is set in the 1950s-ish - it's a *lovely*
> book, and although it's a bit sinister in places there's nothing very
> upsetting in it.
>
--- In , "Claire M Jordan" <whitehound@...> wrote:
>
> From: EileenB
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> > Maybe one of these days I will get around to reading one of her books...I
> > keep meaning to but never actually get around to it...I hope there's
> > nothing horrid...
>
> Try starting with Fludd, which is set in the 1950s-ish - it's a *lovely*
> book, and although it's a bit sinister in places there's nothing very
> upsetting in it.
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 17:18:35
Interesting post Carol...thank you eileen
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Here's the best discussion I can find of the Norfolk-and-the-sacks-of-lime theory (from "Yorkist Lord: John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, c. 1425-1485" by Anne Crawford). I'm not sure I agree with her that John Howard had no claim to the title Duke of Norfolk (Richard certainly thought that he did), but the rest of the discussion shows how the theory started (with a casual remark about "sinister connotations" by someone named Payne Collier and a later, more elaborate theory developed by a biographer of Norfolk named Melvin J. Tucker in 1964. Crawford demolishes the theory that Norfolk had anything to do with the deaths of the "Princes" (but does think that Richard had them murdered later by someone else):
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=RzPF_dPtprQC&pg=RA1-PT116&dq=Duke+of+Norfolk+%22sacks+of+lime%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XSGmUa28GI3PiwLFm4DQAw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg
>
> TinyUrl: http://tinyurl.com/puxy8q6
>
> If we ignore the idea that Richard was a "dealer of death" and a usurper and simply look at the reasons why it's highly improbable that Norfolk had any hand in the supposed murder of the "Princes," Crawford makes a compelling argument for Norfolk's innocence. (Too bad she doesn't do the same for Richard.)
>
> Carol
>
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Here's the best discussion I can find of the Norfolk-and-the-sacks-of-lime theory (from "Yorkist Lord: John Howard, Duke of Norfolk, c. 1425-1485" by Anne Crawford). I'm not sure I agree with her that John Howard had no claim to the title Duke of Norfolk (Richard certainly thought that he did), but the rest of the discussion shows how the theory started (with a casual remark about "sinister connotations" by someone named Payne Collier and a later, more elaborate theory developed by a biographer of Norfolk named Melvin J. Tucker in 1964. Crawford demolishes the theory that Norfolk had anything to do with the deaths of the "Princes" (but does think that Richard had them murdered later by someone else):
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=RzPF_dPtprQC&pg=RA1-PT116&dq=Duke+of+Norfolk+%22sacks+of+lime%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XSGmUa28GI3PiwLFm4DQAw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg
>
> TinyUrl: http://tinyurl.com/puxy8q6
>
> If we ignore the idea that Richard was a "dealer of death" and a usurper and simply look at the reasons why it's highly improbable that Norfolk had any hand in the supposed murder of the "Princes," Crawford makes a compelling argument for Norfolk's innocence. (Too bad she doesn't do the same for Richard.)
>
> Carol
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 17:30:31
Yes...I agree AJ...not the place to have a such a discussion...I will say though that I am very opened minded about this book. ....Very thought provoking....Eileen
--- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> Yep, but I understood it was somewhat out of bounds to discuss on this
> group.
>
> I have mixed feelings about it. (A) I'd like to believe that we can "talk"
> to the dead (B) My rational brain doesn't think that it's likely, however,
> & we certainly have to rate the quality of any information so received as
> very low. and (C) I was reminded of Clever Hans. Clever Hans was a horse
> who lived late 19th century or maybe early 20th century & did arithmetic
> calculations. He was very convincing & became the subject of investigation
> as a result. What was going on was (at least from this horseman's point of
> view) even more interesting - if no one in the audience knew the answer to
> a problem, the horse just kept pawing until he stopped in frustration. So
> clearly Clever Hans was very clever - just not in the way people were led
> to believe. The medium in *Secret History* seemed much more thorough on
> material his client already knew. All of which leads me to ask whether a
> similar series of visits with a medium, with people now focussed on
> fleshing out the possibility that Richard sent his nephews away, would such
> a medium give us different words from Richard's mouth?
>
> A J
>
> Who will be kept plenty busy with contemporary sources for years to come.
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:45 AM, EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...
> > wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Have you read the book AJ...? Secret History...Not everyone's cup of tea I
> > know but I found it of great interest...eileen
> >
> >
> > --- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have
> > cared
> > > about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> > > forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> > > remaining remains & inter them properly?
> > >
> > > A J
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@>
> >
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > > > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > > > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of
> > the
> > > > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
> > disappearance
> > > > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > > > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on
> > Howard's
> > > > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > > > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury
> > died
> > > > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> > > >
> > > > Carol responds:
> > > >
> > > > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > > > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because
> > he
> > > > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > > > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > > > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> > > >
> > > > Carol
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
--- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> Yep, but I understood it was somewhat out of bounds to discuss on this
> group.
>
> I have mixed feelings about it. (A) I'd like to believe that we can "talk"
> to the dead (B) My rational brain doesn't think that it's likely, however,
> & we certainly have to rate the quality of any information so received as
> very low. and (C) I was reminded of Clever Hans. Clever Hans was a horse
> who lived late 19th century or maybe early 20th century & did arithmetic
> calculations. He was very convincing & became the subject of investigation
> as a result. What was going on was (at least from this horseman's point of
> view) even more interesting - if no one in the audience knew the answer to
> a problem, the horse just kept pawing until he stopped in frustration. So
> clearly Clever Hans was very clever - just not in the way people were led
> to believe. The medium in *Secret History* seemed much more thorough on
> material his client already knew. All of which leads me to ask whether a
> similar series of visits with a medium, with people now focussed on
> fleshing out the possibility that Richard sent his nephews away, would such
> a medium give us different words from Richard's mouth?
>
> A J
>
> Who will be kept plenty busy with contemporary sources for years to come.
>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:45 AM, EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...
> > wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Have you read the book AJ...? Secret History...Not everyone's cup of tea I
> > know but I found it of great interest...eileen
> >
> >
> > --- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > And what bothers me about that scenario is that Richard seems to have
> > cared
> > > about the proper disposition of bodies. If he discovered that burial in a
> > > forest was what had happened, wouldn't he have wanted to recover any
> > > remaining remains & inter them properly?
> > >
> > > A J
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's it, lime in Epping Forest comes up in Dening.
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@>
> >
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:41
> > > > Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> > > > <paul.bale@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > > > > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of
> > the
> > > > Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the
> > disappearance
> > > > of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The
> > > > Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on
> > Howard's
> > > > watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was
> > > > Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury
> > died
> > > > at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > > > > Don't forget this is fiction...
> > > >
> > > > Carol responds:
> > > >
> > > > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he
> > > > received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because
> > he
> > > > bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly
> > > > disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth
> > > > considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
> > > >
> > > > Carol
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 19:33:10
Paul wrote:
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
/open joke
Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
/end joke
In frustration,
Weds
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
/open joke
Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
/end joke
In frustration,
Weds
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 19:43:21
From: wednesday_mc
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for
> questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point
> I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
Maybe it's like the Kennedy assasination - except probably with no actual
assassination having taken place in this case - and More and Vergil and all
the little traditionalists are obsessive conspiracy theorists.
> /end joke
Personally not really sure whether joking or not... maybe exaggerating a
little, but not a lot.
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for
> questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point
> I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
Maybe it's like the Kennedy assasination - except probably with no actual
assassination having taken place in this case - and More and Vergil and all
the little traditionalists are obsessive conspiracy theorists.
> /end joke
Personally not really sure whether joking or not... maybe exaggerating a
little, but not a lot.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 20:12:03
I thought you said "Richard ordered two doubles" and was wondering gin or whisky?
________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 19:33
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Paul wrote:
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
/open joke
Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
/end joke
In frustration,
Weds
________________________________
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 19:33
Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
Paul wrote:
> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> Don't forget this is fiction...
/open joke
Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
/end joke
In frustration,
Weds
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-29 20:41:31
Do you think he enjoyed a game of darts as well? Or would he have been a bar billiards bloke?
From: liz williams
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:12 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
I thought you said "Richard ordered two doubles" and was wondering gin or whisky?
From: liz williams
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:12 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
I thought you said "Richard ordered two doubles" and was wondering gin or whisky?
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 00:01:48
From: SandraMachin
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Do you think he enjoyed a game of darts as well? Or would he have been a
> bar billiards bloke?
My head says darts, because of its quasi-military aspect - but my heart says
billiards.
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Do you think he enjoyed a game of darts as well? Or would he have been a
> bar billiards bloke?
My head says darts, because of its quasi-military aspect - but my heart says
billiards.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 00:12:59
With his history? Double vodka martinis.
~Weds
--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> I thought you said "Richard ordered two doubles" and was wondering gin or whisky?
> Â
> Â
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 19:33
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> Â
> Paul wrote:
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> /open joke
>
> Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
>
> We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
>
> Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
>
> The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
>
> /end joke
>
> In frustration,
> Weds
>
>
>
>
>
>
~Weds
--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> I thought you said "Richard ordered two doubles" and was wondering gin or whisky?
> Â
> Â
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 19:33
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> Â
> Paul wrote:
> > Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
> > "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
> > Don't forget this is fiction...
>
> /open joke
>
> Well, that's it then. I've had it. What we need are individual diaries/journals of everyone from Richard to Howard to Buckingham to Brackenbury to Tyrell to Beaufort who *might* have been involved in the "disappearance" of the two little darlings.
>
> We want said diaries to have been stored in one airtight, bug-proof trunk and discovered perfectly preserved in an attic at Gipping. They all need to be on parchment, not paper, so they don't dissolve within hours of their being discovered.
>
> Barring that, we need a time machine and to drag everyone back for questioning, and a truth serum to make them talk. Because at this point I'm starting to think that nothing is true, it's all fiction.
>
> The only thing I think *might* be true is that Richard ordered two doublets when he was in York on his progress.
>
> /end joke
>
> In frustration,
> Weds
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 09:29:37
On 29/05/2013 15:41, justcarol67 wrote:
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>> Don't forget this is fiction...
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
Yes Carol, note my last sentence - this is fiction!
Paul
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>> Don't forget this is fiction...
> Carol responds:
>
> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>
> Carol
>
>
Yes Carol, note my last sentence - this is fiction!
Paul
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 09:32:49
On 29/05/2013 15:52, Hilary Jones wrote:
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <cherryripe.eileenb@...>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 10:55:27
Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 9:32
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
On 29/05/2013 15:52, Hilary Jones wrote:
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <mailto:cherryripe.eileenb%40googlemail.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 9:32
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
On 29/05/2013 15:52, Hilary Jones wrote:
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <mailto:cherryripe.eileenb%40googlemail.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 17:07:45
From: Hilary Jones
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that
> Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
Good for you - you stick to your guns, girl. No amount of royalties is
worth selling your soul or becoming a literary tart.
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that
> Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
Good for you - you stick to your guns, girl. No amount of royalties is
worth selling your soul or becoming a literary tart.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 17:09:12
As an addicted reader, I would rather read cereal boxes than PG!
On May 30, 2013, at 4:55 AM, "Hilary Jones" <hjnatdat@...<mailto:hjnatdat@...>> wrote:
Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...<mailto:paul.bale%40sky.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 9:32
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
On 29/05/2013 15:52, Hilary Jones wrote:
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <mailto:cherryripe.eileenb%40googlemail.com<http://40googlemail.com>>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
On May 30, 2013, at 4:55 AM, "Hilary Jones" <hjnatdat@...<mailto:hjnatdat@...>> wrote:
Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
________________________________
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...<mailto:paul.bale%40sky.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 9:32
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
On 29/05/2013 15:52, Hilary Jones wrote:
> But she is clever enough to write as though it really is seen through Cromwell's eyes; so it's his bitterness, ambition etc. She/ 'he' does a great job on the Sainted Thomas though.
>
>
Oh and how! More is a very unpleasant man in her book. She has some
wonderful swipes at the Catholic church too, via Cromwell of course.
Writes so well, damn her! So jealous at her prose, which is so difficult
to write in comparison to a screenplay.
Paul
> ________________________________
> From: EileenB <mailto:cherryripe.eileenb%40googlemail.com<http://40googlemail.com>>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2013, 15:47
> Subject: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
>
>
> I havent read any of Hilary Mantals books yet but I understand from reviews etc., that they are excellent. I once posted on here I thought it would be smashing if Hilary could write a book on Richard and his story. However, since reading this little excerpt I wonder if I should be careful for what I wish for.....especially with Hilary Mantal being such a popular author...it could do a lot of damage if she took the stance that Richard was indeed responsible for the boys deaths...? Eileen
>
> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- In mailto:%40yahoogroups.com<http://40yahoogroups.com>, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
>>> Interesting little passage in Wolf Hall...
>>> "There are people in London who say that John Howard, grandfather of the Norfolk that is now, was more than a little concerned in the disappearance of the children who went into the Tower and never ca,e out again. The Londoners say - and he reckons the Londoners know - that it was on Howard's watch that the princes were last seen; though Thomas More thinks it was Constable Brackenbury who handed the keys to the killers. Brackenbury died at Bosworth; he can't come out of his grave and complain."
>>> Don't forget this is fiction...
>> Carol responds:
>>
>> John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
>>
>> Carol
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 17:10:16
Carol earlier:
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Paul responded:
> Yes Carol, note my last sentence - this is fiction!
> Paul
Carol again:
Yes, Paul. I was agreeing with you and showing and talking about where Hilary Mantel's idea came from, explored in more detail in a later post.
Carol
> >
> > John Howard has been proposed as the killer of the boys because he received one of the younger boy's titles, Duke of Norfolk, and because he bought two sacks of lime at around the time the boys supposedly disappeared. The case against him is so flimsy that it isn't even worth considering even if we believe that *someone* murdered the boys.
Paul responded:
> Yes Carol, note my last sentence - this is fiction!
> Paul
Carol again:
Yes, Paul. I was agreeing with you and showing and talking about where Hilary Mantel's idea came from, explored in more detail in a later post.
Carol
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 20:19:58
What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after reading PG!"
The problem is she is totally ubiquitous so it's not surprising people buy her books. Go into Waterstones and look for historical novels and you will find scores of books by PG, a couple by Elizabeth Chadwick and other authors and - in my local Waterstones - ONE copy of "Lionheart" by SKP and none of her other books. They did have some but they have obviously sold and not been replaced. Oh I wish I ran that shop, I'd soon chuck PG out and get some proper books in!
________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 11:45
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
From: Hilary Jones
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that
> Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
Good for you - you stick to your guns, girl. No amount of royalties is
worth selling your soul or becoming a literary tart.
The problem is she is totally ubiquitous so it's not surprising people buy her books. Go into Waterstones and look for historical novels and you will find scores of books by PG, a couple by Elizabeth Chadwick and other authors and - in my local Waterstones - ONE copy of "Lionheart" by SKP and none of her other books. They did have some but they have obviously sold and not been replaced. Oh I wish I ran that shop, I'd soon chuck PG out and get some proper books in!
________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 11:45
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
From: Hilary Jones
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> Absolutely. Yet I was told by a 'literary adviser' to emulate PG; that
> Mantel is a 'minority taste'. I'd rather starve than emulate PG
Good for you - you stick to your guns, girl. No amount of royalties is
worth selling your soul or becoming a literary tart.
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 20:56:37
From: liz williams
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> reading PG!"
Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> reading PG!"
Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-30 21:01:20
If Susan Gregory is a good writer, then I doubt it.
________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
From: liz williams
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> reading PG!"
Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
________________________________
From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
From: liz williams
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
> What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> reading PG!"
Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-31 04:20:43
BTW, Amazon just sent me a "new historical fiction alert"----- PG's White Princess...Okay, carry on.
Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad
On May 30, 2013, at 4:01 PM, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
> If Susan Gregory is a good writer, then I doubt it.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> From: liz williams
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> > What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> > read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> > Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> > anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> > said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> > reading PG!"
>
> Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
>
>
>
>
Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad
On May 30, 2013, at 4:01 PM, liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
> If Susan Gregory is a good writer, then I doubt it.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Claire M Jordan <whitehound@...>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> From: liz williams
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> > What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> > read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> > Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> > anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> > said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> > reading PG!"
>
> Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
>
>
>
>
Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
2013-05-31 13:31:41
Well it is fiction, but I certainly wouldn't call it historical
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 31 May 2013, 4:20
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
BTW, Amazon just sent me a "new historical fiction alert"----- PG's White Princess...Okay, carry on.
Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad
On May 30, 2013, at 4:01 PM, liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com> wrote:
> If Susan Gregory is a good writer, then I doubt it.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Claire M Jordan <mailto:whitehound%40madasafish.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> From: liz williams
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> > What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> > read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> > Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> > anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> > said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> > reading PG!"
>
> Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
>
>
>
>
From: Ishita Bandyo <bandyoi@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Friday, 31 May 2013, 4:20
Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
BTW, Amazon just sent me a "new historical fiction alert"----- PG's White Princess...Okay, carry on.
Ishita Bandyo
Sent from my iPad
On May 30, 2013, at 4:01 PM, liz williams <mailto:ferrymansdaughter%40btinternet.com> wrote:
> If Susan Gregory is a good writer, then I doubt it.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Claire M Jordan <mailto:whitehound%40madasafish.com>
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 20:53
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
>
> From: liz williams
> To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: Again The Tower Hilary's idea!
>
> > What amazes me is the number of apparently intelligent people who not only
> > read but like her books. I know a couple of people (one Canadian, one New
> > Zealander) who have read some. Kelly, the NZ said to me "I don't know
> > anything about English history and wanted to learn". Fair enough, but I
> > said to her "but you still won't know anything about English history after
> > reading PG!"
>
> Is she related to the rather good historical mystery writer Susan Gregory?
>
>
>
>
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.