romancing the past

There is an undeniable aura of romance around Richard III, his wife,
and his son, simply because they all died young, with most of their
promise unfulfilled and untried. And though they did not know it, they
lived on the knife-edge of a change of history, and they were the
emblem of a lost cause.

Katy

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@y...> wrote:
>
> There is an undeniable aura of romance around Richard III, his wife,
> and his son, simply because they all died young, with most of their
> promise unfulfilled and untried. And though they did not know it, they
> lived on the knife-edge of a change of history, and they were the
> emblem of a lost cause.
>
> Katy
>
Alright, alright, alright - I perhaps should never have said 'really, really loved her' - totally
drippy of me BUT if I may elaborate on why I believe there was a love between them the
thinking of my (tiny) brain is thus - all those members who neither wish to know or care
about the workings of my brain need not read any furhter- I will understand:

I have never thought they were childhood sweethearts (although I do know this condition
exists - next door neighbours, met when they were 8 years old at school, still in love 50
years on - incredible - but oops I digress again) or that it was a great love match at the
time they wed, although there could have been a fondness evolving from being cousins/
some of their childhood spent together - simply because of her age (15ish) - I dont
believe you love with great passion at such a young age. Obviously it was prudent for
Anne to marry Richard - she needed someone who packed a bit of wollop to protect her
and her inheritance but I do believe a love COULD have grown between them. I conclude
this because, as far as is known, Richard never had a mistress/es,also I understand that
Anne often accompanied him on his various travels, something she would not have done if
she hadnt particularly cared for him. Did he also make some sort of comment to
Rotherham about his sadness regarding Annes impending death I think it was Paul Murray
Kendall said something along those lines and that at a later date Rotherham distorted
things he had said (I think this was connected to the story about Richard considering
marry Elizabeth of York) Not absolutely sure on that one but hopefully someone can
enlighten me on that - I would be very interested to know.

I also feel Edward of Middleham suffered some sort of ill health as he travelled by 'chariot'
instead of horseback. Look I cant help it but I feel kind of sorry for him - sorry!

Some may think does it really matter whether they loved or not but I think it does when
you are trying to get to understand Richard and his life/reign etc - maybe I do have a
simplistic view of things - Marie puts it so much better than me.

Eileen

If you want to be romantic there's no law against it. Romance is a
necessary prelude to any relationship, but boredom and disappointment
may set in over time! Exaggeration for or against Richard has long
gone on. If we stick to the paucity of facts about him, i.e. did he
fight bravely to the last or was he hopelessly surrounded and had no
choice? History would be dry stuff indeed.

About class, this is subject to definition. One can be a high-class
slob like Henry VIII or a low class heroine like Joan of Arc.

Money doesn't mean too much; it's useful, but you will lose it and
building yourself a large tomb for when you're dead is too late and
pointless!

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@y...> wrote:
> >
> > There is an undeniable aura of romance around Richard III, his
wife,
> > and his son, simply because they all died young, with most of
their
> > promise unfulfilled and untried. And though they did not know
it, they
> > lived on the knife-edge of a change of history, and they were the
> > emblem of a lost cause.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> Alright, alright, alright - I perhaps should never have
said 'really, really loved her' - totally
> drippy of me BUT if I may elaborate on why I believe there was a
love between them the
> thinking of my (tiny) brain is thus - all those members who neither
wish to know or care
> about the workings of my brain need not read any furhter- I will
understand:
>
> I have never thought they were childhood sweethearts (although I do
know this condition
> exists - next door neighbours, met when they were 8 years old at
school, still in love 50
> years on - incredible - but oops I digress again) or that it was a
great love match at the
> time they wed, although there could have been a fondness evolving
from being cousins/
> some of their childhood spent together - simply because of her age
(15ish) - I dont
> believe you love with great passion at such a young age. Obviously
it was prudent for
> Anne to marry Richard - she needed someone who packed a bit of
wollop to protect her
> and her inheritance but I do believe a love COULD have grown
between them. I conclude
> this because, as far as is known, Richard never had a
mistress/es,also I understand that
> Anne often accompanied him on his various travels, something she
would not have done if
> she hadnt particularly cared for him. Did he also make some
sort of comment to
> Rotherham about his sadness regarding Annes impending death I
think it was Paul Murray
> Kendall said something along those lines and that at a later date
Rotherham distorted
> things he had said (I think this was connected to the story about
Richard considering
> marry Elizabeth of York) Not absolutely sure on that one but
hopefully someone can
> enlighten me on that - I would be very interested to know.
>
> I also feel Edward of Middleham suffered some sort of ill health as
he travelled by 'chariot'
> instead of horseback. Look I cant help it but I feel kind of
sorry for him - sorry!
>
> Some may think does it really matter whether they loved or not but
I think it does when
> you are trying to get to understand Richard and his life/reign etc -
maybe I do have a
> simplistic view of things - Marie puts it so much better than me.
>
> Eileen
>

It would be nice to think that Richard & Anne had as happy a marriage
as they would have wished. However, we know so little about either of
them that I don't see how we can tell. If only we knew more personal
information we might be able to deduce how they would have acted in
certain circumstances. I can only think that these two people needed
each other. Anne needed a strong husband and they did at least know
each other, which was not usually the case in marriage between people
of their class. Richard may well have seen what life was like at
court and wanted no part of it, and Anne's estates in Yorkshire were
the perfect answer. Living quietly in the north they could well have
become very attached to each other.

I am inclined to think that the daughter of the Kingmaker would not be
a wilting violet. Again, do we know anything about Warwick's feelings
for either his wife or daughters?

I also noticed some time ago how Anne's arrival in London seemed to
precipitate some sort of crisis. This made me wonder just how
involved she might have been in the events that led up to Richard's
seisure of the crown. Was she the power behind the throne? What
started me off on this train of thought was reading a couple of years
ago that Anne had donated a sum of money to a church in Cardiff. No
mention of her husband, just her as Duchess of Gloucester.