Family Fortunes

Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:


MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.

She had two sons still living from her first marriage.

Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.

This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".

Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.

There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.

"Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)

Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.

The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.

Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?

I think whoever made the decision about "Warwick" being their marital home, had already decided to barely mention Middleham and probably thought that no-one in the UK (or in the States) would have a clue where Middleham was. of course they didn't do the same for Ludlow, or Grafton ...

Also it should have been Margaret being born, not Richard of Shrewsbury.

And as ill as Margaret Beauchamp looked, she wasn't due to die for another 10 years.

--- In , "davidarayner" <theblackprussian@...> wrote:
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>

And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!



________________________________
From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
Subject: Family Fortunes

 

Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:

MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.

She had two sons still living from her first marriage.

Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.

This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".

Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.

There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.

"Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)

Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.

The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.

Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?

Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> Subject: Family Fortunes
>
>  
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>
>
>
>
>
>

So did I - but as Richard no :)



________________________________
From: colyngbourne <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 10:48
Subject: Re: Family Fortunes

 

Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> Subject: Family Fortunes
>
>  
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>
>
>
>
>
>

I have to say I was in N. Yorks last Thursday, passing through to the Land of the Prince Bishops. It was a glorious day; you could see across the Dales to the Moors. Apart from the solitary fighter doing manoeuvres in the sky it could have been any day in the last six hundred years. You almost expected to meet John Sponer on his way to Middleham or James Herriot off to visit Tricky Woo.
 
And for all those who think Richard plotted to take the throne I'd ask why on earth anyone would want to swap all that for the smells, overcrowding and subterfuge of the Capital. Richard had had twenty years of watching the Crown destroy one brother and corrupt the other. Yes he might have been forced by circumstance or persuaded to take it and to thus use it to do some good, but my guess is that he was as reluctant as our current monarch's father who found himself in the same impossible position.  Just me of course.
 

________________________________
From: colyngbourne <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 10:48
Subject: Re: Family Fortunes

 

Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> Subject: Family Fortunes
>
>  
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>
>
>
>
>
>

Awesome description.

On Jul 22, 2013, at 5:28 AM, "Hilary Jones" <hjnatdat@...<mailto:hjnatdat@...>> wrote:



I have to say I was in N. Yorks last Thursday, passing through to the Land of the Prince Bishops. It was a glorious day; you could see across the Dales to the Moors. Apart from the solitary fighter doing manoeuvres in the sky it could have been any day in the last six hundred years. You almost expected to meet John Sponer on his way to Middleham or James Herriot off to visit Tricky Woo.

And for all those who think Richard plotted to take the throne I'd ask why on earth anyone would want to swap all that for the smells, overcrowding and subterfuge of the Capital. Richard had had twenty years of watching the Crown destroy one brother and corrupt the other. Yes he might have been forced by circumstance or persuaded to take it and to thus use it to do some good, but my guess is that he was as reluctant as our current monarch's father who found himself in the same impossible position. Just me of course.


________________________________
From: colyngbourne <[email protected]<mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com>>
To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 10:48
Subject: Re: Family Fortunes



Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> Subject: Family Fortunes
>
> ý
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>
>
>
>
>
>

Not just you - that's the way it seems to me too.

A J


On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I have to say I was in N. Yorks last Thursday, passing through to the Land
> of the Prince Bishops. It was a glorious day; you could see across the
> Dales to the Moors. Apart from the solitary fighter doing manoeuvres in the
> sky it could have been any day in the last six hundred years. You almost
> expected to meet John Sponer on his way to Middleham or James Herriot off
> to visit Tricky Woo.
>
> And for all those who think Richard plotted to take the throne I'd ask why
> on earth anyone would want to swap all that for the smells, overcrowding
> and subterfuge of the Capital. Richard had had twenty years of watching the
> Crown destroy one brother and corrupt the other. Yes he might have been
> forced by circumstance or persuaded to take it and to thus use it to do
> some good, but my guess is that he was as reluctant as our current
> monarch's father who found himself in the same impossible position. Just
> me of course.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: colyngbourne <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 10:48
> Subject: Re: Family Fortunes
>
>
>
>
> Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or
> David Wenham.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so
> much for him becoming the new idol!
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> > Subject: Family Fortunes
> >
> > ý
> >
> > Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie
> Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
> >
> > MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady
> St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp,
> never.
> >
> > She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
> >
> > Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond
> or Lady Stafford.
> >
> > This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
> >
> > Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in
> Wales.
> >
> > There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor
> support" in Wales.
> >
> > "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that
> one.)
> >
> > Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her
> impotent husband in 1476.
> >
> > The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her
> brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and
> turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart
> from certain unmistakable signs.
> >
> > Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>

I thought he looked consumptive...

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@...>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> Subject: Family Fortunes
>
>  
>
> Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
>
> MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
>
> She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
>
> Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
>
> This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
>
> Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
>
> There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
>
> "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
>
> Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
>
> The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
>
> Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
>
>
>
>
>
>

From my time in N.Yorks and its borders with Prince-Bishop-land over the last 30+ years, I'd echo everything you say, Hilary. No-one with a number of years living in and around those landscapes would ever choose willingly to swap that life for what would face them in London.

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> I have to say I was in N. Yorks last Thursday, passing through to the Land of the Prince Bishops. It was a glorious day; you could see across the Dales to the Moors. Apart from the solitary fighter doing manoeuvres in the sky it could have been any day in the last six hundred years. You almost expected to meet John Sponer on his way to Middleham or James Herriot off to visit Tricky Woo.
>  
> And for all those who think Richard plotted to take the throne I'd ask why on earth anyone would want to swap all that for the smells, overcrowding and subterfuge of the Capital. Richard had had twenty years of watching the Crown destroy one brother and corrupt the other. Yes he might have been forced by circumstance or persuaded to take it and to thus use it to do some good, but my guess is that he was as reluctant as our current monarch's father who found himself in the same impossible position.  Just me of course.
>  
>
> ________________________________
> From: colyngbourne <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, 22 July 2013, 10:48
> Subject: Re: Family Fortunes
>
>  
>
> Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: davidarayner <theblackprussian@>
> > To:
> > Sent: Sunday, 21 July 2013, 22:33
> > Subject: Family Fortunes
> >
> >  
> >
> > Just caught the last 10 minutes of a show called "Greatest Movie Mistakes" before this week's TWQ; it inspired me to take a few notes:
> >
> > MB's mother was not entitled to be addressed as "Lady Beauchamp". Lady St. John, Dowager Duchess of Somerset, Lady Welles, yes. Lady Beauchamp, never.
> >
> > She had two sons still living from her first marriage.
> >
> > Similarly, MB herself was not "Lady Beaufort", but Countess of Richmond or Lady Stafford.
> >
> > This persistent nonsense about wee Harry being the "Lancastrian heir".
> >
> > Ludlow was not a Marcher Lordship, and thus not by any standards in Wales.
> >
> > There was no such thing as a "Tudor Cause", and therefore no "Tudor support" in Wales.
> >
> > "Jane" Shore was actually named Elizabeth. (Hope you all spotted that one.)
> >
> > Her association with the King didn't begin until after she divorced her impotent husband in 1476.
> >
> > The Queen could see that the King "loved her" (Jane, that is) from her brief "interruption" of their affair. Since he was flat on his back and turned away from her I wonder how exactly she could make this out, apart from certain unmistakable signs.
> >
> > Richard & Anne went to live WHERE after their marriage?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

And Hugo Weaving.

~Weds

--- In , colyngbourne <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Some of us *like* Elijah Wood as Frodo :) - just not as much as Viggo or David Wenham.
>
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > And the press review says that Richard looks like Frodo Baggins - so much for him becoming the new idol!