York council house book

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398



Sharon

Sharon wrote:"Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest. http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398"

Carol responds:Probably not, but I hope that many people read the article. I have only three minor complaints about it. It should have said defeated by the forces of Henry Tudor, later crowned Henry VII" rather than "defeated by Henry VII" as if Henry were already king during the battle; it should have said "Richard Duke of Gloucester" rather than "Richard of Gloucester" as if he were some noble's illegitimate son rather than an important noble in his own right, and it should have mentioned that the York Records are available in printed version (obviously not the original manuscript) in any large library and can even be bought online. It's not as if the manuscript were the only copy of this important information or historians were previously unaware of it.Still, compared with most of what we read in the media about Richard, this article can do no harm and may help readers to understand why Richard has his defenders, at least those in York.One more quibble: Readers may be misled by the words "his murder" in relation to Richard's death in battle and may think, at least for a second, that the words refer to his "murder" of someone else.Carol

Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend.  There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem - maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..
A J
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
 

Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book
 

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

I had some yesterday, I think, but not as many as usual.

On Oct 26, 2013, at 2:59 PM, "A J Hibbard" <ajhibbard@...> wrote:


The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend. There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem
- maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..

A J


On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
From: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)
To: <>
ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book


Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

I thought we had just all gone to sleep......................
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: emails
Sent:
Sat, Oct 26, 2013 8:38:54 PM

 

I had some yesterday, I think, but not as many as usual.

On Oct 26, 2013, at 2:59 PM, "A J Hibbard" <ajhibbard@...> wrote:

 

The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend.  There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem
- maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..

A J


On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
 
Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
From: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)
To: <>
ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book

 

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

Thanks. They are back now. Really wierdSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
Sender:
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:59:49 -0500To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: Re: York council house book
The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend.  There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem - maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..
A J
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
 

Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book
 

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

Yahoo was down and the site was inaccessible. It kept telling me that I needed to log in or that my password was invalid. When I did get to the site, there were no posts. No one posted or e-mailed because nothing could get through.Carol ---In , <> wrote:
Thanks. They are back now. Really wierdSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
Sender:
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:59:49 -0500To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: Re: York council house book
The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend. There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem - maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..
A J
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:

Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

Thanks for that, Carol. I've missed you all. Welcome.back.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Sat, Oct 26, 2013 10:32:18 PM

 
Yahoo was down and the site was inaccessible. It kept telling me that I needed to log in or that my password was invalid. When I did get to the site, there were no posts. No one posted or e-mailed because nothing could get through.Carol ---In , <> wrote:
Thanks. They are back now. Really wierdSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
Sender:
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:59:49 -0500To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: Re: York council house book
 
The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend.  There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem - maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..
A J
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
 

Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book
 

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

So we may have hundreds tomorrow. On another site, High School friends, one fellow was off for two years, and last week he received over 2,000 emails from our group.

On Oct 26, 2013, at 5:32 PM, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:


Yahoo was down and the site was inaccessible. It kept telling me that I needed to log in or that my password was invalid. When I did get to the site, there were no posts. No one posted or e-mailed because nothing could get through.



Carol



---In , <> wrote:

Thanks. They are back now. Really wierd
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
From: A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...>
Sender:
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 14:59:49 -0500
To: <>
ReplyTo:
Subject: Re: York council house book

The last I have are from Oct 24 & 25. If you didn't get those, I'm sorry to say I don't have anything to recommend. There was a suggestion earlier to someone else having a similar problem - maybe logging in again helped? If it weren't so difficult now to search
for previous messages, I'd suggest looking back a month or so to see if you can find that suggestion..

A J


On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 2:49 PM, <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
From: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)
To: <>
ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book


Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

I noticed it my inbox was strangely empty (and boring!) the last few days but I too assumed everyone just somehow decided to go away for a bit..... I did log out of and back into Yahoo as suggested. And I see that Asian demon mask is still there. Apparently there isn't a single scrap of English art, architecture, or tapestry surviving from the 15th century that Yahoo could find to use, eh?Well, I suppose we will have to see what will happen tomorrow.Anne ---In , <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
Help. I am not getting any emails. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: "43118@..." <43118@...>
Sender:
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:00:27 +0100 (BST)To: <>ReplyTo:
Subject: York council house book

Interesting artifact, but still won't have much sway on where Richard will
eventually rest.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/new-chapter-on-richard-iii-s-life-in-york-1-6160398

Sharon

Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone

Very little at present
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
c.nelson1@... <c.nelson1@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: York council house book
Sent:
Thu, Oct 31, 2013 6:52:04 PM

Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphone------------------------------------Yahoo Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional<*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//join (Yahoo! ID required)<*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected]<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Zero on my email.


From: [mailto:]
On Behalf Of Jessie Skinner
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 2:38 PM
To: @yahoogroups com; c.nelson1@...
Subject: Re: Re: York council house book


Very little at present
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: c.nelson1@... <c.nelson1@...>;

To: <>;

Subject: Re: York council house book
Sent: Thu, Oct 31, 2013 6:52:04 PM

Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. Coral
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone

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

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]

[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Snap. I haven't checked the webpage though so not sure if it's just quiet
Liz From: Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> To: "@yahoogroups com" <>; "c.nelson1@..." <c.nelson1@...> Sent: Thursday, 31 October 2013, 19:38 Subject: Re: Re: York council house book

Very little at present
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
c.nelson1@... <c.nelson1@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: York council house book
Sent:
Thu, Oct 31, 2013 6:52:04 PM

Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. CoralSent from my BlackBerry® smartphone------------------------------------Yahoo Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional<*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//join (Yahoo! ID required)<*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected]<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

I've had nothing all day except yours! Not many yesterday either.

Sharon

----- Original Message -----
From: <c.nelson1@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: York council house book


> Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. Coral
> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Bizarre. I can't access the webpage from work (where I am now) but will check when I get home.
Liz From: Sharon Feely <43118@...> To: Sent: Thursday, 31 October 2013, 19:15 Subject: Re: Re: York council house book I've had nothing all day except yours! Not many yesterday either.Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: <c.nelson1@...>To: <>Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:52 PMSubject: Re: York council house book> Is there anyone else not receiving post. Regards. Coral> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone>> ------------------------------------>> Yahoo Groups Links>>>> ------------------------------------Yahoo Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//<*> Your email settings: Individual Email |
Traditional<*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group//join (Yahoo! ID required)<*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected]<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

There just haven't been any posts.Until there
is an urgent subject worth discussing, I prefer it that way;)
----- Original Message -----
From:
liz williams
To:
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2013 3:33
PM
Subject: Re:
Re: York council house book


Bizarre. I can't access the webpage from work (where I am
now) but will check when I get home.
Liz

From:
Sharon Feely <43118@...>To:
Sent: Thursday, 31 October
2013, 19:15Subject: Re:
Re: York council house book
I've had nothing all day except yours! Not many
yesterday either.Sharon----- Original Message ----- From:
<c.nelson1@...>To: <>Sent:
Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:52 PMSubject: Re:
York council house book> Is there anyone else not receiving
post. Regards. Coral> Sent from my BlackBerry®
smartphone>>
------------------------------------>> Yahoo Groups
Links>>>>
------------------------------------Yahoo Groups
Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//<*>
Your email settings: Individual Email |
Traditional<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//join
(Yahoo! ID required)<*> To change settings via
email: [email protected]
[email protected]<*>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]<*>
Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in Arizona.)Carol

OK, let's see if we can get something going here. Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
RE: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Fri, Nov 1, 2013 7:56:34 PM

 
Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
  Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in Arizona.)Carol

Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge (posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and he avoids discussing it altogether. Interesting though, that Henry changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment. Does that indicate that he himself just wasn't sure? He'd already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way. And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn't sure. H. On Saturday, 2 November 2013, 12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
OK, let's see if we can get something going here. Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
RE: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Fri, Nov 1, 2013 7:56:34 PM

Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still
November 1 in Arizona.)Carol

As we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster Abbey, if his remains could be found maybe it would be possible to identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work already done on Richard III?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: RE: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Sat, Nov 2, 2013 1:12:43 PM

 
Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge (posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and he avoids discussing it altogether.  Interesting though, that Henry changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment. Does that indicate that he himself just wasn't sure? He'd already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way. And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn't sure. H.  On Saturday, 2 November 2013, 12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
 
OK, let's see if we can get something going here. Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
RE: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Fri, Nov 1, 2013 7:56:34 PM

 
Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
  Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still
November 1 in Arizona.)Carol

ÿ
I have heard that Austin Friars' churchyard was
severely damaged during the Blitz.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Jessie
Skinner
To: @yahoogroups
com ; hjnatdat@...
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 1:44
PM
Subject: Re: RE: RE: [Richard III Society
Forum] Re: York council house book


As we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster
Abbey, if his remains could be found maybe it would be possible to
identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work
already done on Richard III?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>; To:
<>;
Subject: Re: RE: RE:
Re: York council house book Sent: Sat, Nov 2, 2013 1:12:43 PM


Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge
(posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution
victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later
John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and
he avoids discussing it altogether. Interesting though, that Henry
changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment.
Does that indicate that he himself just wasn&apos;t sure?
He&apos;d already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way.
And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn&apos;t sure.
H.

On Saturday, 2 November 2013,
12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
OK, let&apos;s see if we can get something going here.
Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the
remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: justcarol67@...
<justcarol67@...>; To:
<>; Subject: RE:
RE: Re: York council house book Sent: Fri, Nov
1, 2013 7:56:34 PM
Pamela Bain wrote:

Zero on my email.

Carol
responds:

The
forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no
one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a
brilliant new topic that we can&apos;t resist responding to.
How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century
England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November
1--at least, it&apos;s still November 1 in Arizona.)

Carol

Jessie wrote:As
we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster
Abbey, if his {Perkin Warbeck's] remains could be found maybe it would be possible to
identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work
already done on Richard III?Carol responds:I know that this topic has been discussed before
on this forum, but as it's currently set up, it's next to impossible to
find those posts. One thing that I don't recall being mentioned is that,
whether we're talking of Perkin Warbeck, the Urnchins (urchins in the
urn), or Richard of Eastwell, a Y chromosome matching Richard's would
only establish that they were Plantagenets--and that's assuming that
Edward IV was legitimate and shared the same chromosome. But,
theoretically, Perkin Warbeck could have been an illegitimate son of
George of Clarence (there's some ambiguous correspondence indicating
such a child in Margaret of York's court) and Richard of Eastwell, if he
was a Plantagenet, could be either Richard III's illegitimate son
(though keeping him secret would be out of character for Richard) or
Richard ex Duke of York, it would be essential to confirm the identity
by checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That
ought to be easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among
many others. That would be important for the Urn children, too, if their
Y chromosome didn't match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both
lack a Y chromosome and turn out to be girls . . .Carol

So there is still quite a bit of scope for at least some degree of research even if it is only to exclude people. It was reading John Ashdown Hill's work on Eleanor Talbot and the skeletons found under Jarrold's printing works in Norwich which set me thinking.
Thank you all for your recommendations for books to read about this period. I have read Royal Blood, Eleanor the Secret Queen, The Kings Grave, Richard III by David Baldwin and the one I enjoyed the most of all the biography by Paul Murray Kendal, which I thought quite superb. I have just started the Sunne in Splendour for a little change of tone.
Still a great deal more study to do, but I feel I am at least starting to understand some of the complex issues involved.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Perkin Warbeck's remains Was: York council house book
Sent:
Sat, Nov 2, 2013 3:12:02 PM

 
Jessie wrote:As
we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster
Abbey, if his {Perkin Warbeck's] remains could be found maybe it would be possible to
identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work
already done on Richard III?Carol responds:I know that this topic has been discussed before
on this forum, but as it's currently set up, it's next to impossible to
find those posts. One thing that I don't recall being mentioned is that,
whether we're talking of Perkin Warbeck, the Urnchins (urchins in the
urn), or Richard of Eastwell, a Y chromosome matching Richard's would
only establish that they were Plantagenets--and that's assuming that
Edward IV was legitimate and shared the same chromosome. But,
theoretically, Perkin Warbeck could have been an illegitimate son of
George of Clarence (there's some ambiguous correspondence indicating
such a child in Margaret of York's court) and Richard of Eastwell, if he
was a Plantagenet, could be either Richard III's illegitimate son
(though keeping him secret would be out of character for Richard) or
Richard ex Duke of York, it would be essential to confirm the identity
by checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That
ought to be easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among
many others. That would be important for the Urn children, too, if their
Y chromosome didn't match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both
lack a Y chromosome and turn out to be girls . . .Carol

Carol wrote: >. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? Richard got permission from Edward IV to hold a fair at Middleham from October 30 through November 1. So what would that entail? As for the lack of posts, I think most people have gone over to Facebook.~Weds

Foods of all kinds
Cloth or clothing
Church services
Grave tending
Plays
Was it too early for mourning jewelry, I think so?
Was it too late for some of the more pagan celebrations?

I really don't do RIII on Facebook. I like our email a lot better. We can get more information, and it just us, not the entire world, or everyone on our individual FB accounts.


On Nov 2, 2013, at 12:41 PM, "wednesday.mac@..." <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

Carol wrote:




>. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day?






Richard got permission from Edward IV to hold a fair at Middleham from October 30 through November 1. So what would that entail?






As for the lack of posts, I think most people have gone over to Facebook.




~Weds

I agree, Facebook can be a bit of a pain.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Sat, Nov 2, 2013 5:58:17 PM

 

Foods of all kinds
Cloth or clothing
Church services
Grave tending
Plays
Was it too early for mourning jewelry, I think so?
Was it too late for some of the more pagan celebrations?

I really don't do RIII on Facebook. I like our email a lot better. We can get more information, and it just us, not the entire world, or everyone on our individual FB accounts.


On Nov 2, 2013, at 12:41 PM, "wednesday.mac@..." <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

 
Carol wrote:




>. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day?






Richard got permission from Edward IV to hold a fair at Middleham from October 30 through November 1. So what would that entail?






As for the lack of posts, I think most people have gone over to Facebook.




~Weds

I'm interested in November 2nd as well - it's All Souls Day (also my birthday) - I've seen it celebrated around the world (tending graves in the Philippines, skull candies and treats in Mexico), but haven't read a lot about how it was celebrated in medieval England. All Saints Day is a Holy Day of Obligation in the US today, unless it falls on a Saturday or a Monday, when it's waived. Church days in the Middle Ages were very strick, though - I just don't remember reading any specifics about how it was celebrated, especially in England.

From: Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...>To: "@yahoogroups com" <>; "hjnatdat@..." <hjnatdat@...> Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2013 9:44 AMSubject: Re: RE: RE: Re: York council house book
As we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster Abbey, if his remains could be found maybe it would be possible to identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work already done on Richard III?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>; To: <>; Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: York council house book Sent: Sat, Nov 2, 2013 1:12:43 PM
Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge (posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and he avoids discussing it altogether. Interesting though, that Henry changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment. Does that indicate that he himself just wasn&apos;t sure? He&apos;d already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way. And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn&apos;t sure. H.
On Saturday, 2 November 2013, 12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
OK, let&apos;s see if we can get something going here. Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... <justcarol67@...>; To: <>; Subject: RE: RE: Re: York council house book Sent: Fri, Nov 1, 2013 7:56:34 PM
Pamela Bain wrote:
Zero on my email.

Carol responds:
The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can&apos;t resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it&apos;s still November 1 in Arizona.)
Carol

Carol wrote:

<<it would be essential to confirm the identity by checking it
against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That ought to be easy enough
as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among many others. That would be
important for the Urn children, too, if their Y chromosome didn't match
Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both lack a Y chromosome and turn out
to be girls . . .>>

This reminds me of a documentary I recently saw about Dr. Crippen,
another name that lives on as a synonym for infamous murder--in his case, his wife. He was convicted and executed based on what
was then viewed as a hi-tech scientific examination of the purported remains (torso
only) of his wife. However, the
documentary reported that 100 years later those remains were subjected to a
mitochondrial DNA test (against a living collateral descendant of the wife) and
a gender test. The test results were
that (1) the remains were not the wife and (2) were actually male. So that longstanding certain sure verdict has at least
been called into question, and I can't help finding it an interesting parallel
with the bones in the urn.

(As for how the torso got there, the documentary speculates that it was
planted by police detectives under intense pressure to solve the high-profile
case.)

But the documentary was made a couple of years ago, so when I searched
for more recent follow-up information I shouldn't have been surprised at what I
found: that the validity of the tests has been challenged, that there will be
no reopening of the case, no posthumous pardon, no repatriation/reinternment of Crippen's
remains (requested by his 21st-century American relatives--another
eerie parallel), and basically a refusal to at least consider the possibility
that we may have had it wrong for the last century. That was a bit disheartening to me, for it suggests that if
the bones in the urn are tested and turn out to be Little and Large Roman
Sisters, there may still be stern resistance to accepting the results.

Then again, the results identifying Richard's remains seem to have been
mostly accepted--so there is hope!

Cathy

ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Friars%2C_London
Although "Perkin" is not mentioned, Edward of
Buckingham (x.1521) is. "Perkin" could lay under the rebuilt Dutch Church, the
road or the offices on the other side.
----- Original Message -----
From:
cattivoid
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 4:23
AM
Subject: RE:
Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book


Carol wrote:

<<it would be essential to confirm the identity by
checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That ought to be
easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among many others. That
would be important for the Urn children, too, if their Y chromosome didn't
match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both lack a Y chromosome and
turn out to be girls . . .>>


This reminds me of a documentary I recently saw about Dr.
Crippen, another name that lives on as a synonym for infamous murder--in
his case, his wife. He was convicted and
executed based on what was then viewed as a hi-tech scientific examination of
the purported remains (torso only) of his wife. However,
the documentary reported that 100 years later those remains were subjected to
a mitochondrial DNA test (against a living collateral descendant of the wife)
and a gender test. The test results were that (1) the
remains were not the wife and (2) were actually male. So
that longstanding certain sure verdict has at least been called into
question, and I can't help finding it an interesting parallel with the bones
in the urn.

(As for how the torso got there, the documentary speculates
that it was planted by police detectives under intense pressure to solve the
high-profile case.)

But the documentary was made a couple of years ago, so when
I searched for more recent follow-up information I shouldn't have been
surprised at what I found: that the validity of the tests has been challenged,
that there will be no reopening of the case, no posthumous pardon, no
repatriation/reinternment of Crippen's remains (requested by his 21st-century
American relatives--another eerie parallel), and basically a refusal to at
least consider the possibility that we may have had it wrong for the last
century. That was a bit disheartening to me, for it
suggests that if the bones in the urn are tested and turn out to be Little and
Large Roman Sisters, there may still be stern resistance to accepting the
results.

Then again, the results identifying Richard's remains seem
to have been mostly accepted--so there is hope!

Cathy

Problem is that as he was executed as common criminal his bones would be mixed with all the rest. That's if you could dig of course. HPS Stephen, do we know whether any bones survive at Bisham (where the Warwicks are)? I know it was dissolved but what happened to the corpses? Wouldn't help with this but might help tie up the Clarence thing given that Warwick junior was buried there and it might tell us something about the latter.
On Sunday, 3 November 2013, 10:59, Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Friars%2C_London
Although "Perkin" is not mentioned, Edward of
Buckingham (x.1521) is. "Perkin" could lay under the rebuilt Dutch Church, the
road or the offices on the other side.
----- Original Message -----
From:
cattivoid
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 4:23
AM
Subject: RE:
Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Carol wrote:
<<it would be essential to confirm the identity by
checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That ought to be
easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among many others. That
would be important for the Urn children, too, if their Y chromosome didn't
match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both lack a Y chromosome and
turn out to be girls . . .>>

This reminds me of a documentary I recently saw about Dr.
Crippen, another name that lives on as a synonym for infamous murder--in
his case, his wife. He was convicted and
executed based on what was then viewed as a hi-tech scientific examination of
the purported remains (torso only) of his wife. However,
the documentary reported that 100 years later those remains were subjected to
a mitochondrial DNA test (against a living collateral descendant of the wife)
and a gender test. The test results were that (1) the
remains were not the wife and (2) were actually male. So
that longstanding certain sure verdict has at least been called into
question, and I can't help finding it an interesting parallel with the bones
in the urn.
(As for how the torso got there, the documentary speculates
that it was planted by police detectives under intense pressure to solve the
high-profile case.)
But the documentary was made a couple of years ago, so when
I searched for more recent follow-up information I shouldn't have been
surprised at what I found: that the validity of the tests has been challenged,
that there will be no reopening of the case, no posthumous pardon, no
repatriation/reinternment of Crippen's remains (requested by his 21st-century
American relatives--another eerie parallel), and basically a refusal to at
least consider the possibility that we may have had it wrong for the last
century. That was a bit disheartening to me, for it
suggests that if the bones in the urn are tested and turn out to be Little and
Large Roman Sisters, there may still be stern resistance to accepting the
results.
Then again, the results identifying Richard's remains seem
to have been mostly accepted--so there is hope!
Cathy

There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway. I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.Sheffe On Friday, November 1, 2013 2:56 PM, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:
Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in
Arizona.)Carol

I am only able to correspond with you all through my Kindle. Yahoo on my laptop Is just about unusable.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Sheffe <shethra77@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Sun, Nov 3, 2013 6:54:18 PM

 
There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway.  I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.Sheffe On Friday, November 1, 2013 2:56 PM, "justcarol67@..."
<justcarol67@...> wrote:
 
Pamela Bain wrote:Zero on my email.
  Carol responds:The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in
Arizona.)Carol

Would that be a really big mass grave with assorted bones? Or would it be possible to recover whole skeletons?
Forgive my ignorance on these matters.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: RE: Perkin Warbeck's remains Was: York council house book
Sent:
Sun, Nov 3, 2013 4:44:15 PM

 
Problem is that as he was executed as common criminal his bones would be mixed with all the rest. That's if you could dig of course. HPS Stephen, do we know whether any bones survive at Bisham (where the Warwicks are)? I know it was dissolved but what happened to the corpses? Wouldn't help with this but might help tie up the Clarence thing given that Warwick junior was buried there and it might tell us something about the latter.
On Sunday, 3 November 2013, 10:59, Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
 
ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Friars%2C_London
Although "Perkin" is not mentioned, Edward of
Buckingham (x.1521) is. "Perkin" could lay under the rebuilt Dutch Church, the
road or the offices on the other side.
----- Original Message -----
From:
cattivoid
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 4:23
AM
Subject: RE:
Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book
 
Carol wrote:
 
<<it would be essential to confirm the identity by
checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That ought to be
easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among many others. That
would be important for the Urn children, too, if their Y chromosome didn't
match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both lack a Y chromosome and
turn out to be girls . . .>>
 

This reminds me of a documentary I recently saw about Dr.
Crippen, another name that lives on as a synonym for infamous murder--in
his case, his wife.  He was convicted and
executed based on what was then viewed as a hi-tech scientific examination of
the purported remains (torso only) of his wife.  However,
the documentary reported that 100 years later those remains were subjected to
a mitochondrial DNA test (against a living collateral descendant of the wife)
and a gender test.  The test results were that (1) the
remains were not the wife and (2) were actually male.  So
that longstanding certain sure verdict has at least been called into
question, and I can't help finding it an interesting parallel with the bones
in the urn.  
 
(As for how the torso got there, the documentary speculates
that it was planted by police detectives under intense pressure to solve the
high-profile case.)
 
But the documentary was made a couple of years ago, so when
I searched for more recent follow-up information I shouldn't have been
surprised at what I found: that the validity of the tests has been challenged,
that there will be no reopening of the case, no posthumous pardon, no
repatriation/reinternment of Crippen's remains (requested by his 21st-century
American relatives--another eerie parallel), and basically a refusal to at
least consider the possibility that we may have had it wrong for the last
century.  That was a bit disheartening to me, for it
suggests that if the bones in the urn are tested and turn out to be Little and
Large Roman Sisters, there may still be stern resistance to accepting the
results.
 
Then again, the results identifying Richard's remains seem
to have been mostly accepted--so there is hope!
 
Cathy

I get mine just fine, on my iPad and on my computer at work. I don't understand why, when everyone I know on three Chat Groups are just as mad as you are. It makes nonsense, and I wish they would keep monkeying around with Yahoo and Facebook.

On Nov 3, 2013, at 12:54 PM, "Sheffe" <shethra77@...> wrote:


There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway. I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.

Sheffe



On Friday, November 1, 2013 2:56 PM, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:
Pamela Bain wrote:

Zero on my email.

Carol responds:

The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How
would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in Arizona.)

Carol

I've tried two different browsers, perhaps Safari would work better with it?
Jess
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Sun, Nov 3, 2013 7:11:51 PM

 

I get mine just fine, on my iPad and on my computer at work. I don't understand why, when everyone I know on three Chat Groups are just as mad as you are. It makes nonsense, and I wish they would keep monkeying around with Yahoo and Facebook. 

On Nov 3, 2013, at 12:54 PM, "Sheffe" <shethra77@...> wrote:

 

There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway.  I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.

Sheffe



On Friday, November 1, 2013 2:56 PM, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:
 
Pamela Bain wrote:

Zero on my email.
 

Carol responds:

The forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a brilliant new topic that we can't resist responding to. How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century England? How
would Richard be celebrating this day? (November 1--at least, it's still November 1 in Arizona.)

Carol

Given that there were quite a number of people executed at Tyburn in any given period my guess is that they would all be jumbled together, a bit like Mozart. No coffin like in St Peter ad Vincula, but then we know someone else who didn't have a coffin. BTW on one of the Anne Boleyn websites there's a very good account of the exhumation of Anne and Margaret Pole (described as tall) during the nineteenth century when they were doing the floor there. On Sunday, 3 November 2013, 19:03, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
Would that be a really big mass grave with assorted bones? Or would it be possible to recover whole skeletons?
Forgive my ignorance on these matters.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: RE: Perkin Warbeck's remains Was: York council house book
Sent:
Sun, Nov 3, 2013 4:44:15 PM

Problem is that as he was executed as common criminal his bones would be mixed with all the rest. That's if you could dig of course. HPS Stephen, do we know whether any bones survive at Bisham (where the Warwicks are)? I know it was dissolved but what happened to the corpses? Wouldn't help with this but might help tie up the Clarence thing given that Warwick junior was buried there and it might tell us something about the latter.
On Sunday, 3 November 2013, 10:59, Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:
ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Friars%2C_London
Although "Perkin" is not mentioned, Edward of
Buckingham (x.1521) is. "Perkin" could lay under the rebuilt Dutch Church, the
road or the offices on the other side.
----- Original Message -----
From:
cattivoid
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 4:23
AM
Subject: RE:
Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Carol wrote:
<<it would be essential to confirm the identity by
checking it against Elizabeth Woodville's mitochondrial DNA. That ought to be
easy enough as it would match Mary Queen of Scots', among many others. That
would be important for the Urn children, too, if their Y chromosome didn't
match Richard's. On the other hand, if one or both lack a Y chromosome and
turn out to be girls . . .>>

This reminds me of a documentary I recently saw about Dr.
Crippen, another name that lives on as a synonym for infamous murder--in
his case, his wife. He was convicted and
executed based on what was then viewed as a hi-tech scientific examination of
the purported remains (torso only) of his wife. However,
the documentary reported that 100 years later those remains were subjected to
a mitochondrial DNA test (against a living collateral descendant of the wife)
and a gender test. The test results were that (1) the
remains were not the wife and (2) were actually male. So
that longstanding certain sure verdict has at least been called into
question, and I can't help finding it an interesting parallel with the bones
in the urn.
(As for how the torso got there, the documentary speculates
that it was planted by police detectives under intense pressure to solve the
high-profile case.)
But the documentary was made a couple of years ago, so when
I searched for more recent follow-up information I shouldn't have been
surprised at what I found: that the validity of the tests has been challenged,
that there will be no reopening of the case, no posthumous pardon, no
repatriation/reinternment of Crippen's remains (requested by his 21st-century
American relatives--another eerie parallel), and basically a refusal to at
least consider the possibility that we may have had it wrong for the last
century. That was a bit disheartening to me, for it
suggests that if the bones in the urn are tested and turn out to be Little and
Large Roman Sisters, there may still be stern resistance to accepting the
results.
Then again, the results identifying Richard's remains seem
to have been mostly accepted--so there is hope!
Cathy

I asked JAH, when he came to give a talk to our Branch on his DNA research, and he confirmed what you are saying Stephen. If I remember correctly he was certain that we didn't know where his body is now. ---In , <> wrote:ÿ
I have heard that Austin Friars' churchyard was
severely damaged during the Blitz.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Jessie
Skinner
To: @yahoogroups
com ; hjnatdat@...
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 1:44
PM
Subject: Re: RE: RE: [Richard III Society
Forum] Re: York council house book



As we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster
Abbey, if his remains could be found maybe it would be possible to
identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work
already done on Richard III?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>; To:
<>;
Subject: Re: RE: RE:
Re: York council house book Sent: Sat, Nov 2, 2013 1:12:43 PM

Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge
(posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution
victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later
John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and
he avoids discussing it altogether. Interesting though, that Henry
changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment.
Does that indicate that he himself just wasn&apos;t sure?
He&apos;d already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way.
And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn&apos;t sure.
H.

On Saturday, 2 November 2013,
12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
OK, let&apos;s see if we can get something going here.
Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the
remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: justcarol67@...
<justcarol67@...>; To:
<>; Subject: RE:
RE: Re: York council house book Sent: Fri, Nov
1, 2013 7:56:34 PM
Pamela Bain wrote:

Zero on my email.

Carol
responds:

The
forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no
one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a
brilliant new topic that we can&apos;t resist responding to.
How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century
England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November
1--at least, it&apos;s still November 1 in Arizona.)

Carol

What a shame. However, the work that JAH and others have done in identifying
Richard III's body should still have benefits for further research, perhaps in area's not even yet considered. The limits of this technology are developing at quite a rapid rate
Jess
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From:
maryfriend@... <maryfriend@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
RE: Re: RE: RE: Re: York council house book
Sent:
Mon, Nov 4, 2013 7:51:42 PM

 
I asked JAH, when he came to give a talk to our Branch on his DNA research, and he confirmed what you are saying Stephen. If I remember correctly he was certain that we didn't know where his body is now. ---In , <> wrote:ÿ
I have heard that Austin Friars' churchyard was
severely damaged during the Blitz.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Jessie
Skinner
To: @yahoogroups
com ; hjnatdat@...
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 1:44
PM
Subject: Re: RE: RE: [Richard III Society
Forum] Re: York council house book
 


As we haven't at present access to the "Prince's" urn in Westminster
Abbey, if his remains could be found maybe it would be possible to
identity him and prove whether he was Richard of York from he DNA work
already done on Richard III?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>; To:
<>;
Subject: Re: RE: RE:
Re: York council house book Sent: Sat, Nov 2, 2013 1:12:43 PM

 
Reading Wroe, his head was stuck on London bridge
(posthumously lopped off) and he was buried with other execution
victims in the church of the Austin Friars, where, a century later
John Stow could find no record of him. I looked at Arthurson as well and
he avoids discussing it altogether.  Interesting though, that Henry
changed the verdict to just hanging at virtually the last moment.
Does that indicate that he himself just wasn&apos;t sure?
He&apos;d already killed one annointed king in a very unseemly way.
And both authors seem to think the crowd just wasn&apos;t sure.
H. 

On Saturday, 2 November 2013,
12:40, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
 
OK, let&apos;s see if we can get something going here.
Thinking DNA testing, does anyone know the whereabouts of the
remains of Perkin Warbeck?
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: justcarol67@...
<justcarol67@...>; To:
<>; Subject: RE:
RE: Re: York council house book Sent: Fri, Nov
1, 2013 7:56:34 PM
 
Pamela Bain wrote:

Zero on my email.

Carol
responds:

The
forum is working (no out-of-the-ordinary Yahoo glitches), but no
one is posting for some reason. Quick, someone, think of a
brilliant new topic that we can&apos;t resist responding to.
How about All Hallows (All Saints) Day in fifteenth-century
England? How would Richard be celebrating this day? (November
1--at least, it&apos;s still November 1 in Arizona.)

Carol

Stephen wrote:ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.Carol responds:Oops. I forgot about James V. But there are still plenty of female descendants of EW, as well as EW herself if her DNA has been preserved. And it would be at least as easy to trace that female line to a modern woman as it was to trace Cecily Neville's.Carol

Sheffe wrote:There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway. I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.Carol responds:Totally OT, but I just received an e-mail message saying that Yahoo is "optimized" to work with Firefox and advising an update to Firefox 25. I obstinately cling to Seamonkey, which is really Netscape with a new name. Anyone out there using Firefox? If so, does it help even a little?Carol (who had to adjust the font in this post or it would have looked like this!)

ÿ
From Elizabeth Woodville, only Elizabeth of York is
of interest as Cecilia's issue is only traceable for a century and a
quarter.
Of her useful daughters, Mary gives us Jane and her
sisters (culs de sac) whilst Margaret may have a female line somewhere. Jane's
body may be secure somewhere
Otherwise, we need to look at EW's sisters. When I have time ..........
----- Original Message -----
From:
justcarol67@...
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:40
PM
Subject: RE: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] RE: Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Stephen wrote:ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.Carol
responds:Oops. I forgot about James V. But there are still plenty of
female descendants of EW, as well as EW herself if her DNA has been preserved.
And it would be at least as easy to trace that female line to a modern woman
as it was to trace Cecily Neville's.Carol

Dear Carol,In unfortunate answer to your query, I'm finding Foxfire as annoying as Yahoo...with the additional, er, feature that I find myself closing down ALL tabs, when I really just intend to go back to a preceding screen. This effectively KOs my copy & paste attempts. If you - or any one of our group - finds a truly *good* and reliable solution, I'm listening. Judy G. T.Loyaulte me lie On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 9:47 AM, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:
Sheffe wrote:There might be some kind of glitch through Yahoo anyway. I've been with Yahoo for 13 years, 10 of them paid, and they have just screwed it all up so badly that I'm changing email providers. Can hardly read my email anymore, or answer.Carol responds:Totally OT, but I just received an e-mail message saying that Yahoo is "optimized" to work with Firefox and advising an update to Firefox 25. I obstinately cling to Seamonkey, which is really Netscape with a new name. Anyone out there using
Firefox? If so, does it help even a little?Carol (who had to adjust the font in this post or it would have looked like this!)

ÿ
Genealogics on Elizabeth Woodville's female line
(1596 at best):
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00001713&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Through the Fitzalans and Pole-Hastings line,
we can hit 1903 with her sisters:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00015403&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Jacquetta's sisters had no line beyond 1504:http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00007732&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Leo's sources could be faulty but the line
looks extinct as Hon. Charlotte Eliza Petre outlived both her
children.
----- Original Message -----
From:
justcarol67@...
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:40
PM
Subject: RE: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] RE: Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Stephen wrote:ÿ
Mary of Scotland could not be of use for
mtDNA because her descent was: Woodville - Elizabeth of York - Margaret
"Tudor" - James V - Mary. James V was male.Carol
responds:Oops. I forgot about James V. But there are still plenty of
female descendants of EW, as well as EW herself if her DNA has been preserved.
And it would be at least as easy to trace that female line to a modern woman
as it was to trace Cecily Neville's.Carol

Stephen Lark wrote:ÿ
Genealogics on Elizabeth Woodville's female line
(1596 at best):
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00001713&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Through the Fitzalans and Pole-Hastings line,
we can hit 1903 with her sisters:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00015403&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Jacquetta's sisters had no line beyond 1504:http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00007732&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Leo's sources could be faulty but the line
looks extinct as Hon. Charlotte Eliza Petre outlived both her
children. Hi, Stephen. Thanks for checking. I guess that takes us back to EW or
Elizabeth of York or her sisters (or Jacquetta, if anyone knows where
she is buried). But what about the locks of hair known to belong to Mary
Tudor (EoY's daughter and Henry VIII's sister, not Queen Mary I,
who would have Catherine of Aragon's mtDNA)? I believe that J A-H found
one of the locks unusable (impossible to retrieve from its casing), but
isn't there another one? I'm relying wholly on memory here, so I could
be mistaken.Thanks to Terence and others for pointing out my slip with Mary Queen of Scots. As I said earlier, I forgot about James V.Carol

ÿ
So EW's grandmother probably has no mtDNA
descendants left.
I have viewed Mary "Tudor"'s hair in Bury St.
Edmunds, with JA-H. I think that is the one he analysed.
----- Original Message -----
From:
justcarol67@...
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:37
PM
Subject: RE: Re: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] RE: Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Stephen Lark wrote:
ÿ
Genealogics on Elizabeth Woodville's female line
(1596 at best):
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00001713&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Through the Fitzalans and Pole-Hastings
line, we can hit 1903 with her sisters:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00015403&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Jacquetta's sisters had no line beyond
1504:http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00007732&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Leo's sources could be faulty but the line
looks extinct as Hon. Charlotte Eliza Petre outlived both her children.
Hi, Stephen. Thanks for checking. I guess that takes us back to
EW or Elizabeth of York or her sisters (or Jacquetta, if anyone knows where
she is buried). But what about the locks of hair known to belong to Mary Tudor
(EoY's daughter and Henry VIII's sister, not Queen Mary I, who would have
Catherine of Aragon's mtDNA)? I believe that J A-H found one of the locks
unusable (impossible to retrieve from its casing), but isn't there another
one? I'm relying wholly on memory here, so I could be mistaken.Thanks
to Terence and others for pointing out my slip with Mary Queen of Scots. As I
said earlier, I forgot about James V.Carol

The hair does nothing for you without the root. That's where the DNA resides. ---In , <stephenmlark@...> wrote:ÿ
So EW's grandmother probably has no mtDNA
descendants left.
I have viewed Mary "Tudor"'s hair in Bury St.
Edmunds, with JA-H. I think that is the one he analysed.
----- Original Message -----
From:
justcarol67@...
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:37
PM
Subject: RE: Re: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] RE: Perkin Warbeck&#39;s remains Was: York council house book

Stephen Lark wrote:
ÿ
Genealogics on Elizabeth Woodville's female line
(1596 at best):
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00001713&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Through the Fitzalans and Pole-Hastings
line, we can hit 1903 with her sisters:
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00015403&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Jacquetta's sisters had no line beyond
1504:http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00007732&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=6
Leo's sources could be faulty but the line
looks extinct as Hon. Charlotte Eliza Petre outlived both her children.
Hi, Stephen. Thanks for checking. I guess that takes us back to
EW or Elizabeth of York or her sisters (or Jacquetta, if anyone knows where
she is buried). But what about the locks of hair known to belong to Mary Tudor
(EoY's daughter and Henry VIII's sister, not Queen Mary I, who would have
Catherine of Aragon's mtDNA)? I believe that J A-H found one of the locks
unusable (impossible to retrieve from its casing), but isn't there another
one? I'm relying wholly on memory here, so I could be mistaken.Thanks
to Terence and others for pointing out my slip with Mary Queen of Scots. As I
said earlier, I forgot about James V.Carol