Reconciliation

Maybe this is a stupid question to ask but, as he lay dying Edward IV is
said to have engineered a reconciliation between members of his wife's
family and members of the nobility they had argued with.
Now Clarence was dead, Richard, who as far as we know did NOT have a major
problem with them anyway, was in the north, and Buckingham was on his
estates in Wales.
So who, apart from Hastings, was in London to be a part of this
reconciliation?
Is Stanley known to have fought with the Woodvilles? Did Howard?
Who was there?
Paul

--- In , "P.T.Bale"
<paultrevor@b...> wrote:
> Maybe this is a stupid question to ask but, as he lay dying Edward
IV is
> said to have engineered a reconciliation between members of his
wife's
> family and members of the nobility they had argued with.
> Now Clarence was dead, Richard, who as far as we know did NOT have
a major
> problem with them anyway, was in the north, and Buckingham was on
his
> estates in Wales.
> So who, apart from Hastings, was in London to be a part of this
> reconciliation?
> Is Stanley known to have fought with the Woodvilles? Did Howard?
> Who was there?
> Paul

I don't know if there is any other source for this than Mancini, who
only says:
"[Hastings] maintained a deadly feud with the Queen's son, whom we
said was called the Marquess. . . and although at the command and
entreaty of the King, who loved each of them, they had been
reconciled two days before he died, yet, as the events showed, there
still survived a latent jealousy."
So just the pair of them.

Marie

> I don't know if there is any other source for this than Mancini, who
> only says:
> "[Hastings] maintained a deadly feud with the Queen's son, whom we
> said was called the Marquess. . . and although at the command and
> entreaty of the King, who loved each of them, they had been
> reconciled two days before he died, yet, as the events showed, there
> still survived a latent jealousy."
> So just the pair of them.
Yes Marie, I was hoping here was more to it than Mancini. So much is made of
it I thought there had to be more involved. Just the two of them isn't very
dramatic is it?
Paul

--- In , "P.T.Bale"
<paultrevor@b...> wrote:
> > I don't know if there is any other source for this than Mancini,
who
> > only says:
> > "[Hastings] maintained a deadly feud with the Queen's son, whom we
> > said was called the Marquess. . . and although at the command and
> > entreaty of the King, who loved each of them, they had been
> > reconciled two days before he died, yet, as the events showed,
there
> > still survived a latent jealousy."
> > So just the pair of them.
> Yes Marie, I was hoping here was more to it than Mancini. So much
is made of
> it I thought there had to be more involved. Just the two of them
isn't very
> dramatic is it?
> Paul

Not very dramatic, but perhaps significant in the long run. A solemn
oath made at the behest of a dying king. . . If Richard (or his
informer Catesby) wasn't making it up, then it seems that Hastings
and Dorset were indeed managing to work together in June.

Personally, I believe there was a plot. All the evidence points that
way, and even the anti-Richard historians now seem to think there was
one, only that it was a legitimate attempt to prevent Richard
usurping Edward V's throne. However, it must have involved more than
a plan to remove Edward from Richard's control before the coronation,
but also some move against Richard himself. Otherwise nothing would
have been settled.
It is surely significant that the events of Friday 13th took place in
the Tower, where Edward was lodged. Is it possible Edward was even
present at the council meeting? That accords with Richard's claim
that he had forestalled some intended action. If Richard wanted to
move against his enemies he didn't necessarily need to do it at the
Tower - indeed, to choose that place was bound to sour future
relations with the young king.

Marie

Hi

Does anyone know what's happened to the Richard III Foundation? The discussion group seems to have disappeared and they're not answering emails. Perhaps if anyone else on this list knows something about it they could help out here???

Shelagh

> Hi
>
> Does anyone know what's happened to the Richard III Foundation? The
> discussion group seems to have disappeared and they're not answering emails.
> Perhaps if anyone else on this list knows something about it they could help
> out here???
>
> Shelagh
>
Well every list has slow periods Shelagh so maybe that's the reason. Nothing
has actually happened to the Foundation, and they are organising a study day
at Bosworth with an amazing line up of speakers next month. Richmond, Jones,
and Foss are amongst the speakers. Sounds as if the Foundation is pretty
healthy, doesn't it?
Paul

"Sounds as if the Foundation is pretty
healthy, doesn't it?"

Paul, thanks for the info. Any idea how to get them to answer emails?????

Shelagh

> Paul, thanks for the info. Any idea how to get them to answer emails?????
Register for the discussion list? Email the chair? I think both email
addresses are on the website.
Good luck
Paul