Re : RE: RE: Re : RE: Re: Re: [Richard III Society Forum] RE: RE: Ri

Sorry David, I don't mean to sound harsh but you have really not helped at all. You simply keep restating that Stillington was the person who tried to get Henry removed from Brittany, and alluding vaguely to primary sources that you do not appear to have studied yourself. I do read French, and so do some others on this forum. If you can quote original Breton sources (with proper citation) we shall be so much clearer. Or are we simply talking about Breton secondary sources, which may again be drawing on the English tradition that I have traced back to Hall? I'll look up the Ricardian article when I get a chance, but I'm actually busy trying to do other things, so if you could get to the bottom of it yourself and provide us with clarification it would be wonderful.

Marie.

David wrote:

"There is absolutely no chance that the 1475 and 1476 embassies could be being confused. There are Breton sources - there was a steady stream of embassies from both England and France. The date is given as November 1476.
There is no doubt that the embassy took place, the only question is which bishop led it.
One source possible is actually in the Ricardian 2003 - For My Lord of Richmond a Pourpoint and a Palfrey: brief remarks on the financial evidence for Henry Tudor's exile in Brittany 283-93.
The Saint Malo story (the passive version) is confirmed in 'A propos du droit d'asile Malouin: Tentative d'enlèvement d'Henri Tudor' - or Concerning the Saint Malo law/right of sanctuary: the attempted abduction of Henry Tudor. Published by the historic and archaeology society of Saint Malo.

The 'champion' of Henry, who also commanded the fleet that tried to land him in 1483 was Jean du Quelennec, Viscount du Faou, Admiral of Brittany and respected councillor of the Duke from the old noble tradition. And the treasurer sent to retrieve HT was of course Pierre Landais."

Marie replies,

You seem to be assuming these Breton "sources" (early 20thC articles) will give Breton primary sources for HT's narrow escape from Edward's ambassadors in Saint-Malo. The impression I have gained from my reading, however, is that whilst we have primary sources for the comings and goings of ambassadors, our only "primary" source in Polydore Vergil for the story that a set of English ambassadors not long after Picquigny got Duke Francis' permission to take HT back to England, and that he only escaped by taking sanctuary Saint-Malo and enlisting the support of Jean de Quennelec ('John Chenlay'); Landais' retrieval of HT also comes from Vergil. Many recent books actually date the embassy to late 1475, and the very recent ones that I have read make no mention of Stillington's involvement.

For sources, you are perhaps relying on the list given at the back of 'The Making of the Tudor Dynasty'. That list, however, covers the entire chapter on Henry's Breton exile and it is impossible to know what information is given in any one of those sources without looking them up. Scofield, for instance, gives details of embassies, none of which includes Stillington (whom she just doesn't mention), and adds that although there is no contemporary evidence for Vergil's story it is probably reliable because Vergil had been in a position to speak to Henry VII; Vergil's you will recall, did not give the ambassadors' names or date the embassy at all clearly. Any attempt that has been made to link the Saint-Malo escapade to any particular embassy, therefore, must be purely guesswork.

I've previously tried and failed to source the Saint-Malo article online, similarly with the Allanic ('Le Prisonnier de la Tour d'Elven'). From the title, it sounds as though the Societe Malouin is actually concerned with Vergil's statement that HT had 'got himself' into a sanctuary at Saint-Malo by reason of the ambassadors' negligence. As you probably know, by this period not all churches had sanctuary rights. In England, at any rate, only those endorsed by a papal charter were respected. So perhaps this article is concerned with nothing more than establishing whether Saint-Malo had such a sanctuary in the 1470s, and if so which church it belonged to (I imagine it would have been the cathedral).

I have now looked up the Michael Jones article from the 2003 Ricardian, He writes:

"An intriguing reference relating to a period when Henry was apparently still in Quelennec's company may be connected with one of the most celebrated but mysterious incidences relating to his time in Brittany. This has been dated variously, but current opinion favours a point after the treaty of Picquigny (September 1475), most probably in 1476....." (p. 288)

His footnote states "This story originates with Polydore Vergil...." (p. 289, n. 24).

I'll report back on embassies, as promised earlier.

Marie

David wrote:

"There is absolutely no chance that the 1475 and 1476 embassies could be being confused. There are Breton sources - there was a steady stream of embassies from both England and France. The date is given as November 1476.
There is no doubt that the embassy took place, the only question is which bishop led it.
One source possible is actually in the Ricardian 2003 - For My Lord of Richmond a Pourpoint and a Palfrey: brief remarks on the financial evidence for Henry Tudor's exile in Brittany 283-93.
The Saint Malo story (the passive version) is confirmed in 'A propos du droit d'asile Malouin: Tentative d'enlèvement d'Henri Tudor' - or Concerning the Saint Malo law/right of sanctuary: the attempted abduction of Henry Tudor. Published by the historic and archaeology society of Saint Malo.

The 'champion' of Henry, who also commanded the fleet that tried to land him in 1483 was Jean du Quelennec, Viscount du Faou, Admiral of Brittany and respected councillor of the Duke from the old noble tradition. And the treasurer sent to retrieve HT was of course Pierre Landais."

Marie replies,

You seem to be assuming these Breton "sources" (early 20thC articles) will give Breton primary sources for HT's narrow escape from Edward's ambassadors in Saint-Malo. The impression I have gained from my reading, however, is that whilst we have primary sources for the comings and goings of ambassadors, our only "primary" source in Polydore Vergil for the story that a set of English ambassadors not long after Picquigny got Duke Francis' permission to take HT back to England, and that he only escaped by taking sanctuary Saint-Malo and enlisting the support of Jean de Quennelec ('John Chenlay'); Landais' retrieval of HT also comes from Vergil. Many recent books actually date the embassy to late 1475, and the very recent ones that I have read make no mention of Stillington's involvement.

For sources, you are perhaps relying on the list given at the back of 'The Making of the Tudor Dynasty'. That list, however, covers the entire chapter on Henry's Breton exile and it is impossible to know what information is given in any one of those sources without looking them up. Scofield, for instance, gives details of embassies, none of which includes Stillington (whom she just doesn't mention), and adds that although there is no contemporary evidence for Vergil's story it is probably reliable because Vergil had been in a position to speak to Henry VII; Vergil's you will recall, did not give the ambassadors' names or date the embassy at all clearly. Any attempt that has been made to link the Saint-Malo escapade to any particular embassy, therefore, must be purely guesswork.

I've previously tried and failed to source the Saint-Malo article online, similarly with the Allanic ('Le Prisonnier de la Tour d'Elven'). From the title, it sounds as though the Societe Malouin  is actually concerned with Vergil's statement that HT had 'got himself' into a sanctuary at Saint-Malo by reason of the ambassadors' negligence. As you probably know, by this period not all churches had sanctuary rights. In England, at any rate, only those endorsed by a papal charter were respected. So perhaps this article is concerned with nothing more than establishing whether Saint-Malo had such a sanctuary in the 1470s, and if so which church it belonged to (I imagine it would have been the cathedral).

I have now looked up the Michael Jones article from the 2003 Ricardian, He writes:

"An intriguing reference relating to a period when Henry was apparently still in Quelennec's company may be connected with one of the most celebrated but mysterious incidences relating to his time in Brittany. This has been dated variously, but current opinion favours a point after the treaty of Picquigny (September 1475), most probably in 1476....." (p. 288)

His footnote states "This story originates with Polydore Vergil...." (p. 289, n. 24).

I'll report back on embassies, as promised earlier.

Marie

David wrote:

"Marie,
You and other members of the forum may be interested to know that the contents of the French National Library are being digitized."

Thanks very much indeed, David. I will definitely check that out. [We could do with the National Archives over here doing the same thing (as many of the county archives are doing). The AALT website is great but it is never going to digitise classes of documents that don't have a legal angle to them TNA needs to do the rest for itself.]

By the way, I've just this afternoon received Stillington's register but it may be early next week before I get a chance to collate what information I can gather on the 1475-77 Anglo-Breton diplomacy. Thanks to you as well, Hilary, for the pointer to Stillington's role in negotiations with the French - I'll look into that.

By the by, David, do you have a volume & page ref for that item you mentioned on the Breton embassy in Campbell's 'Materials for the Reign of Henry VII'? I've got both volumes so could look it up to find out the source.

Marie

Hilary, I also have my doubts about Stillington's pardon - it wasn't before Clarence's execution, which actually you could have understood because it might indicate that Edward had discovered that Stillington had told Clarence about the precontract. In fact, he was arrested the month *after* Clarence's execution, and pardoned three months after that.

Also, I see from the Foedera Syllabus that Stillington's French embassy was 1477 rather than 1476, although still within Vergil's timeframe. I think it was almost certainly to negotiate with French ambassadors coming to England (as his commission definitely was in 1479) but I'll check it out properly.

And of course it is for France, not Brittany - Stillington was appointed to negotiate with French ambassadors fairly regularly but I have not found one instance of a commission for him to negotiate with the Bretons, either at home or in Brittany. Also in 1477 he was one of 12 commissioners, whereas Hall tells us that "Dr. Stillington" was heading an embassy to Brittany of just three persons - that number fits Oliver King's embassy to Brittany, and the one that followed it, but neither of those involved Stillington.....

Marie

Hi Hilary,

I've also been guilty. Have looked again at Hall and see that I had misread him first time round - it is Quellenec ("Chesnay") who goes to plead with Duke Francis, not HT himself. So the only difference between Vergil and hall is on Vergil giving the number of the ambassadors and the name of their head man - which doesn't tally so far as I can yet see with any known embassy. Apologies, everybody.

I've checked out Stillington's 1477 appointment to treat with the French, and this was indeed to treat *in England* with ambassadors sent over to these shores by King Louis. The same is true of his earlier commission (Jan 1467) to treat with the ambassadors of the Duke of Burgundy. In other words, during this whole period there is no evidence that Stillington was ever sent abroad. He rarely managed a couple of days' ride with the Great Seal, and had to hand it over every time the King made any journey. He was totally incapacited from September 1472 until the following spring, and was by 1476 probably in his late sixties. So if, by the "Dr. Stillington" sent to Brittany to get hold of Henry Tudor, Hall meant the Bishop of Bath, his claim is virtually incredible.

Williamson's vision of Stillington whispering to Clarence at Farleigh Hungerford is fantasy (do we even know Clarence spent a lot of time there?); apart from anything else, since Stillington was almost never in his diocese in order to visit him there. I think the notion that he was the eldest legitimate son of York would have been enough to send Clarence barking all on its own.

Ankarette's side of the Twynyho family seem to be very closely linked with the pro-Woodville crowd, and threw in their lot with Buckingham's Rebellion in 1483. I'd be interested in your material on the Hawkestones, Hilary. Perhaps we could communicate by email on the Twynyho thing? Also, do you have any information on Ankarette's half brother Thomas Burdon?

Got to go now.

Marie

Thanks Hilary. Best email to use is marie.barnfield@.... And I can give you what I have on the Twynyhos.

I think Martha is one of these phantom children - ie no real source for her existence - but I can't recall offhand exactly where I read that.

Not had time this weekend to look at the embassies to Brittany. Hopefully by end of tomorrow.

Marie

David/Marie I have to chip in here and apologise. Foedera has Oliver King as the person negotiating with Francis in 1476 and also as Edward's sort of ambassador on matters French. Stillington does also appear in 1476 and 1477, but as an ambassador (amongst others) negotiating with the French on various matters including mercantile (which makes sense given his legal expertise). Does this mean he ever left these shores, I don't know?Incidentally just reading Willikinson on the princes who takes it at face value (because of Commines and Chapuys) that Stillington witnessed the Butler marriage. Amazing how conclusions are drawn from the stangest translation of evidence.Will look with great interest at Gallica.   H.

On Thursday, 5 December 2013, 15:56, Durose David <daviddurose2000@...> wrote:
  Marie,
You and other members of the forum may be interested to know that the contents of the French National Library are being digitized.

The web site is called Gallica

I have found the Breton article on there and it is part of a general story of the sanctuary rights of a Minihi, it follows the same narrative as Vergil but gives no sources or dates.

Incidentally, I have found another mention of Stillington's being in London on 28th November 1476 - still that intriguing gap between that and the previous mention in Wells in early October.

Kind Regards
David


From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>;
To: <>;
Subject: RE: Re : RE: RE: Re : RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: Richard
Sent: Wed, Dec 4, 2013 12:33:04 PM

  David wrote:"There is absolutely no chance that the 1475 and 1476 embassies could be being confused. There are Breton sources - there was a steady stream of embassies from both England and France. The date is given as November 1476.
There is no doubt that the embassy took place, the only question is which bishop led it.
One source possible is actually in the Ricardian 2003 - For My Lord of Richmond a Pourpoint and a Palfrey: brief remarks on the financial evidence for Henry Tudor's exile in Brittany 283-93.
The Saint Malo story (the passive version) is confirmed in 'A propos du droit d'asile Malouin: Tentative d'enlèvement d'Henri Tudor' - or Concerning the Saint Malo law/right of sanctuary: the attempted abduction of Henry Tudor. Published by the historic and archaeology society of Saint Malo.The 'champion' of Henry, who also commanded the fleet that tried to land him in 1483 was Jean du Quelennec, Viscount du Faou, Admiral of Brittany and respected councillor of the Duke from the old noble tradition. And the treasurer sent to retrieve HT was of course Pierre Landais." Marie replies,You seem to be assuming these Breton "sources" (early 20thC articles) will give Breton primary sources for HT's narrow escape from Edward's ambassadors in Saint-Malo. The impression I have gained from my reading, however, is that whilst we have primary sources for the comings and goings of ambassadors, our only "primary" source in Polydore Vergil for the story that a set of English ambassadors not long after Picquigny got Duke Francis' permission to take HT back to England, and that he only escaped by taking sanctuary Saint-Malo and enlisting the support of Jean de Quennelec ('John Chenlay'); Landais' retrieval of HT also comes from Vergil. Many recent books actually date the embassy to late 1475, and the very recent ones that I have read make no mention of Stillington's involvement. For sources, you are perhaps relying on the list given at the back of 'The Making of the Tudor Dynasty'. That list, however, covers the entire chapter on Henry's Breton exile and it is impossible to know what information is given in any one of those sources without looking them up. Scofield, for instance, gives details of embassies, none of which includes Stillington (whom she just doesn't mention), and adds that although there is no contemporary evidence for Vergil's story it is probably reliable because Vergil had been in a position to speak to Henry VII; Vergil's you will recall, did not give the ambassadors' names or date the embassy at all clearly. Any attempt that has been made to link the Saint-Malo escapade to any particular embassy, therefore, must be purely guesswork. I've previously tried and failed to source the Saint-Malo article online, similarly with the Allanic ('Le Prisonnier de la Tour d'Elven'). From the title, it sounds as though the Societe Malouin  is actually concerned with Vergil's statement that HT had 'got himself' into a sanctuary at Saint-Malo by reason of the ambassadors' negligence. As you probably know, by this period not all churches had sanctuary rights. In England, at any rate, only those endorsed by a papal charter were respected. So perhaps this article is concerned with nothing more than establishing whether Saint-Malo had such a sanctuary in the 1470s, and if so which church it belonged to (I imagine it would have been the cathedral). I have now looked up the Michael Jones article from the 2003 Ricardian, He writes:"An intriguing reference relating to a period when Henry was apparently still in Quelennec's company may be connected with one of the most celebrated but mysterious incidences relating to his time in Brittany. This has been dated variously, but current opinion favours a point after the treaty of Picquigny (September 1475), most probably in 1476....." (p. 288)His footnote states "This story originates with Polydore Vergil...." (p. 289, n. 24).I'll report back on embassies, as promised earlier. Marie