William Catesby Will/Oh No Not Another Traitor!!

Sadly after reading Catesby Will I have come to the conclusion he was a traitor/snake in
the grass. This has not been an easy decision for me (I have struggled to come to terms
with it I can assure you) but I find the part where he requests his wife (after land that has
been wrongfully taken be restored to the rightful owners!) to see that the "residue" be
divided at her discretion amongst their children winding up with the words 'I doute not the
King (King Weasle that is) will be good & gracious Lord to them for he is called a full
gracious prince AND I NEVER OFFENDED HYM BY MY GOOD AND FREE WILL for God I take
to my judge I have ever lovid hym' - well I find those words are quite damning. Now whilst
I fully understandthat someone facing their imminent death is going to be concernedabout
their wife and children and has very good reason under those circumstances to grovel
Catesby is quite clearly saying here that he was FORCED into taking Richard's side against
Weasle. What else can he mean?
Further on in the Will when he makes the remarks to Stanley and others 'Pray for my soule
for ye have not for my body AS I TRUSTED IN YOU' leads me to another conclusion that he
was up to his neck in it with the Stanleys and had prior knowledge before battle even
commenced that they were going to betray Richard and that very day commit regicide.
OR,maybe,is he simply having a dig at them because of THIER duplicity??
Leading on from that it seems to me that Richard, on many occasions. had a very real (&
fatal) failing/weakness to see through people and see them for what they really were. OR
was it more a case of keep your friends close but your enemies closer (as they say)?

Glad to see I am not the only one who feels about the Cat in this way
after all.
Paul

On 22 Aug 2006, at 00:05, eileen wrote:

> Sadly after reading Catesby Will I have come to the conclusion he
> was a traitor/snake in
> the grass. This has not been an easy decision for me (I have
> struggled to come to terms
> with it I can assure you) but I find the part where he requests his
> wife (after land that has
> been wrongfully taken be restored to the rightful owners!) to see
> that the "residue" be
> divided at her discretion amongst their children winding up with
> the words 'I doute not the
> King (King Weasle that is) will be good & gracious Lord to them for
> he is called a full
> gracious prince AND I NEVER OFFENDED HYM BY MY GOOD AND FREE WILL
> for God I take
> to my judge I have ever lovid hym' - well I find those words are
> quite damning. Now whilst
> I fully understandthat someone facing their imminent death is going
> to be concernedabout
> their wife and children and has very good reason under those
> circumstances to grovel
> Catesby is quite clearly saying here that he was FORCED into taking
> Richard's side against
> Weasle. What else can he mean?
> Further on in the Will when he makes the remarks to Stanley and
> others 'Pray for my soule
> for ye have not for my body AS I TRUSTED IN YOU' leads me to
> another conclusion that he
> was up to his neck in it with the Stanleys and had prior knowledge
> before battle even
> commenced that they were going to betray Richard and that very day
> commit regicide.
> OR,maybe,is he simply having a dig at them because of THIER
> duplicity??
> Leading on from that it seems to me that Richard, on many
> occasions. had a very real (&
> fatal) failing/weakness to see through people and see them for what
> they really were. OR
> was it more a case of keep your friends close but your enemies
> closer (as they say)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

"a winner is a dreamer who just won't quit"

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:

I must admit that was exactly my own view of the situation after
first studying Catesby's will, but I've found my views have modified
somewhat since. I didn't like him particularly, and I still don't
really, though for a different (ie more positive) view altogether see
Lesley Wynne Davies/ Boatright's piece on him in a recent issue of
the Bulletin.

He was trying to save his neck (and his family's livelihood). And he
did signally fail so Tudor can't can't can't have believed he'd been
on his side. There can't have been any actual treason, then. By not
offending Tudor of his free will he may have just meant he'd been
forced to join Richard at Bosworth - and that of course is how a lot
of not very brave people have always felt about going into battle,
however good the cause. So he had ever loved him? I don't suppose he
had anything personal against Tudor - he was not, like Lovell and
some of the others, a man whose relationship with Richard went back
to their young days. Here, in fact, you've got a man closely allied
to Tudor by marriage trying to make his excuses for having been
fighting on the other side.
I expect Catesby, not being very brave, chose the side that looked
most likely to win, or the master to whom he had already sworn a
sacred oath of allegiance. I don't see any proper evidence that he
did betray Richard, and in his execution plenty of evidence to the
contrary. Yes, he probably had hoped Stanley would protect him -
Stanley was an old client and his wife's uncle-by-marriage, and the
new king's stepfather.
This world is a complicated one and most times, I think, people are
scattered along the long line between sainthood and evil incarnate.

I keep coming back to the old question: if Catesby had seemed at all
sympathetic to Tudor before Bosworth, why was he singled out for
execution? My own feeling is that it was a combination of service to
Richard (not enough of itself, comparing his case with others) and
his 'unnatural' behaviour in fighting against Mrs Catesby's cousin.
It is even possible, I think, that before Bosworth he'd tried to keep
both sides happy and Tudor came to believe he'd been a mole.

If only we knew more.

Marie


>
> Sadly after reading Catesby Will I have come to the conclusion he
was a traitor/snake in
> the grass. This has not been an easy decision for me (I have
struggled to come to terms
> with it I can assure you) but I find the part where he requests his
wife (after land that has
> been wrongfully taken be restored to the rightful owners!) to see
that the "residue" be
> divided at her discretion amongst their children winding up with
the words 'I doute not the
> King (King Weasle that is) will be good & gracious Lord to them for
he is called a full
> gracious prince AND I NEVER OFFENDED HYM BY MY GOOD AND FREE WILL
for God I take
> to my judge I have ever lovid hym' - well I find those words are
quite damning. Now whilst
> I fully understandthat someone facing their imminent death is going
to be concernedabout
> their wife and children and has very good reason under those
circumstances to grovel
> Catesby is quite clearly saying here that he was FORCED into taking
Richard's side against
> Weasle. What else can he mean?
> Further on in the Will when he makes the remarks to Stanley and
others 'Pray for my soule
> for ye have not for my body AS I TRUSTED IN YOU' leads me to
another conclusion that he
> was up to his neck in it with the Stanleys and had prior knowledge
before battle even
> commenced that they were going to betray Richard and that very day
commit regicide.
> OR,maybe,is he simply having a dig at them because of THIER
duplicity??
> Leading on from that it seems to me that Richard, on many
occasions. had a very real (&
> fatal) failing/weakness to see through people and see them for what
they really were. OR
> was it more a case of keep your friends close but your enemies
closer (as they say)?
>