Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-06 16:52:07
in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
for queen anne to die.
See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
the earl of Longford
begin excerpt...
At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
northerners voiced the strongest view:
These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
Source Croyland Chronicle
The Lost Letter
As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
own hand.
Source..Sir George Buck.
The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
significant to ric iii.
see
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
what i noticed was interesting.
first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
then the calendar shows.
queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
hand of joanna.
this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
(moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
to unravel the true history of richard iii?
finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
intentions towards eliz of york.
this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
eliz of york.
gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
honourable.
it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
relatives.
also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
roslyn
to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
for queen anne to die.
See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
the earl of Longford
begin excerpt...
At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
northerners voiced the strongest view:
These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
Source Croyland Chronicle
The Lost Letter
As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
own hand.
Source..Sir George Buck.
The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
significant to ric iii.
see
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
what i noticed was interesting.
first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
then the calendar shows.
queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
hand of joanna.
this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
(moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
to unravel the true history of richard iii?
finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
intentions towards eliz of york.
this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
eliz of york.
gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
honourable.
it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
relatives.
also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
roslyn
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-06 19:36:33
Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
after her death .
fayreroze wrote:
>
> in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> for queen anne to die.
> See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> the earl of Longford
> begin excerpt...
>
> At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> northerners voiced the strongest view:
>
> These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> Source Croyland Chronicle
>
> The Lost Letter
> As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> own hand.
> Source..Sir George Buck.
>
> The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
>
> The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
>
> later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> significant to ric iii.
> see
> http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
>
> what i noticed was interesting.
>
> first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> then the calendar shows.
> queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
>
> but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> hand of joanna.
> this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
>
> are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
>
> did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
>
> given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> to unravel the true history of richard iii?
>
> finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
>
> so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> intentions towards eliz of york.
>
> this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> eliz of york.
>
> gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> honourable.
>
> it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> relatives.
>
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
>
>
promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
after her death .
fayreroze wrote:
>
> in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> for queen anne to die.
> See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> the earl of Longford
> begin excerpt...
>
> At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> northerners voiced the strongest view:
>
> These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> Source Croyland Chronicle
>
> The Lost Letter
> As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> own hand.
> Source..Sir George Buck.
>
> The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
>
> The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
>
> later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> significant to ric iii.
> see
> http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
>
> what i noticed was interesting.
>
> first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> then the calendar shows.
> queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
>
> but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> hand of joanna.
> this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
>
> are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
>
> did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
>
> given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> to unravel the true history of richard iii?
>
> finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
>
> so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> intentions towards eliz of york.
>
> this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> eliz of york.
>
> gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> honourable.
>
> it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> relatives.
>
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-06 23:24:11
not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who was in line to become the king of portugal.
so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
roslyn
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
after her death .
fayreroze wrote:
>
> in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> for queen anne to die.
> See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> the earl of Longford
> begin excerpt...
>
> At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> northerners voiced the strongest view:
>
> These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> Source Croyland Chronicle
>
> The Lost Letter
> As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> own hand.
> Source..Sir George Buck.
>
> The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
>
> The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
>
> later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> significant to ric iii.
> see
> http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
>
> what i noticed was interesting.
>
> first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> then the calendar shows.
> queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
>
> but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> hand of joanna.
> this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
>
> are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
>
> did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
>
> given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> to unravel the true history of richard iii?
>
> finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
>
> so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> intentions towards eliz of york.
>
> this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> eliz of york.
>
> gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> honourable.
>
> it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> relatives.
>
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
>
>
---------------------------------
Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who was in line to become the king of portugal.
so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
roslyn
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
after her death .
fayreroze wrote:
>
> in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> for queen anne to die.
> See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> the earl of Longford
> begin excerpt...
>
> At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> northerners voiced the strongest view:
>
> These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> Source Croyland Chronicle
>
> The Lost Letter
> As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> own hand.
> Source..Sir George Buck.
>
> The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
>
> The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
>
> later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> significant to ric iii.
> see
> http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
>
> what i noticed was interesting.
>
> first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> then the calendar shows.
> queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
>
> but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> hand of joanna.
> this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
>
> are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
>
> did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
>
> given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> to unravel the true history of richard iii?
>
> finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
>
> so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> intentions towards eliz of york.
>
> this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> eliz of york.
>
> gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> honourable.
>
> it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> relatives.
>
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
>
>
---------------------------------
Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-06 23:57:39
I'm sure there were many who might try to spread disinformation re:
marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If there
was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great lengths to
deny the rumour.
As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
little trick himself.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
>
> what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> was in line to become the king of portugal.
>
> so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
>
> it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
>
> it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
>
> roslyn
>
> roslyn
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
>
> Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> after her death .
>
> fayreroze wrote:
> >
> > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > for queen anne to die.
> > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > the earl of Longford
> > begin excerpt...
> >
> > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> >
> > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > Source Croyland Chronicle
> >
> > The Lost Letter
> > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > own hand.
> > Source..Sir George Buck.
> >
> > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> >
> > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> >
> > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > significant to ric iii.
> > see
> > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> >
> > what i noticed was interesting.
> >
> > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > then the calendar shows.
> > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> >
> > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > hand of joanna.
> > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> >
> > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> >
> > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> >
> > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> >
> > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> >
> > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > intentions towards eliz of york.
> >
> > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > eliz of york.
> >
> > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > honourable.
> >
> > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > relatives.
> >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
>
marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If there
was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great lengths to
deny the rumour.
As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
little trick himself.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
>
> what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> was in line to become the king of portugal.
>
> so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
>
> it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
>
> it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
>
> roslyn
>
> roslyn
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
>
> Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> after her death .
>
> fayreroze wrote:
> >
> > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > for queen anne to die.
> > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > the earl of Longford
> > begin excerpt...
> >
> > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> >
> > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > Source Croyland Chronicle
> >
> > The Lost Letter
> > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > own hand.
> > Source..Sir George Buck.
> >
> > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> >
> > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> >
> > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > significant to ric iii.
> > see
> > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> >
> > what i noticed was interesting.
> >
> > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > then the calendar shows.
> > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> >
> > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > hand of joanna.
> > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> >
> > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> >
> > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> >
> > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> >
> > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> >
> > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > intentions towards eliz of york.
> >
> > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > eliz of york.
> >
> > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > honourable.
> >
> > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > relatives.
> >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 00:13:33
it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7 invading and conquering richard.
has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese connection too?
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
I'm sure there were many who might try to spread disinformation re:
marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If there
was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great lengths to
deny the rumour.
As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
little trick himself.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
>
> what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> was in line to become the king of portugal.
>
> so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
>
> it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
>
> it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
>
> roslyn
>
> roslyn
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
>
> Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> after her death .
>
> fayreroze wrote:
> >
> > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > for queen anne to die.
> > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > the earl of Longford
> > begin excerpt...
> >
> > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> >
> > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > Source Croyland Chronicle
> >
> > The Lost Letter
> > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > own hand.
> > Source..Sir George Buck.
> >
> > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> >
> > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> >
> > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > significant to ric iii.
> > see
> > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> >
> > what i noticed was interesting.
> >
> > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > then the calendar shows.
> > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> >
> > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > hand of joanna.
> > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> >
> > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> >
> > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> >
> > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> >
> > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> >
> > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > intentions towards eliz of york.
> >
> > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > eliz of york.
> >
> > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > honourable.
> >
> > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > relatives.
> >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail.
has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese connection too?
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
I'm sure there were many who might try to spread disinformation re:
marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If there
was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great lengths to
deny the rumour.
As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
little trick himself.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
>
> what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> was in line to become the king of portugal.
>
> so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
>
> it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
>
> it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
>
> roslyn
>
> roslyn
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
>
> Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> after her death .
>
> fayreroze wrote:
> >
> > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > for queen anne to die.
> > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > the earl of Longford
> > begin excerpt...
> >
> > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> >
> > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > Source Croyland Chronicle
> >
> > The Lost Letter
> > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > own hand.
> > Source..Sir George Buck.
> >
> > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> >
> > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> >
> > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > significant to ric iii.
> > see
> > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> >
> > what i noticed was interesting.
> >
> > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > then the calendar shows.
> > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> >
> > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > hand of joanna.
> > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> >
> > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> >
> > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> >
> > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> >
> > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> >
> > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > intentions towards eliz of york.
> >
> > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > eliz of york.
> >
> > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > honourable.
> >
> > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > relatives.
> >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 11:08:29
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
invading and conquering richard.
>
> has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
connection too?
> roslyn
There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
hunt out the references for you if you like.
Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
out.
Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
individual than Henry Tudor.
Marie
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
disinformation re:
> marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
there
> was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
lengths to
> deny the rumour.
>
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
this
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
(Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
invading and conquering richard.
>
> has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
connection too?
> roslyn
There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
hunt out the references for you if you like.
Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
out.
Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
individual than Henry Tudor.
Marie
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
disinformation re:
> marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
there
> was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
lengths to
> deny the rumour.
>
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
this
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
(Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 13:53:42
Interesting that we are only now getting around to studying other
countries' archival accounts of issues relating to our area of interest.
While reading Norman Cantor's /*The Last Knight*/, I was struck by how
much John of Gaunt's Iberian progeny might have caused some concerns for
Yorkist and Tudor monarchs alike. Yet accounts from 'our' sources are
generally quiet on this point. Richard obviously understood the
importance of his Iberian relatives. I'm sure that others in many
circles also understood their importance.
From this snippet, I'm again extrapolating the point made recently,
that our records from Richard's time are woefully incomplete. However,
we shouldn't weep too profusely. Our own era isn't that much better when
it comes to completeness of or access to records. We're still fussing
about who killed Kennedy.
mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
> >
> > it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
> and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
> invading and conquering richard.
> >
> > has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
> portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
> from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
> connection too?
> > roslyn
>
> There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
> hunt out the references for you if you like.
> Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
> entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
> come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
> negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
> planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
> governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
> rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
>
> The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
> mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
> Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
> have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
> would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
>
> It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
> the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
> Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
> Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
> death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
> Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
> the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
> almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
> particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
> out.
>
> Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
> had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
> might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
> individual than Henry Tudor.
>
> Marie
>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> > I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
> disinformation re:
> > marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
> there
> > was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
> lengths to
> > deny the rumour.
> >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
> who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
> the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime, and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
> and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
> wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
> of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
> any such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
> through whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
> Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
> was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
> She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
> in body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
> her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
> anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
> his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
> and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
> of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
> Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
countries' archival accounts of issues relating to our area of interest.
While reading Norman Cantor's /*The Last Knight*/, I was struck by how
much John of Gaunt's Iberian progeny might have caused some concerns for
Yorkist and Tudor monarchs alike. Yet accounts from 'our' sources are
generally quiet on this point. Richard obviously understood the
importance of his Iberian relatives. I'm sure that others in many
circles also understood their importance.
From this snippet, I'm again extrapolating the point made recently,
that our records from Richard's time are woefully incomplete. However,
we shouldn't weep too profusely. Our own era isn't that much better when
it comes to completeness of or access to records. We're still fussing
about who killed Kennedy.
mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
> >
> > it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
> and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
> invading and conquering richard.
> >
> > has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
> portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
> from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
> connection too?
> > roslyn
>
> There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
> hunt out the references for you if you like.
> Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
> entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
> come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
> negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
> planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
> governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
> rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
>
> The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
> mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
> Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
> have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
> would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
>
> It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
> the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
> Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
> Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
> death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
> Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
> the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
> almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
> particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
> out.
>
> Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
> had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
> might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
> individual than Henry Tudor.
>
> Marie
>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> > I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
> disinformation re:
> > marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
> there
> > was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
> lengths to
> > deny the rumour.
> >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
> who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
> the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime, and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
> and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
> wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
> of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
> any such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
> through whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
> Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
> was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
> She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
> in body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
> her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
> anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
> his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
> and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
> of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
> Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 14:30:19
>From: Bill Barber <bbarber@...>
>Interesting that we are only now getting around to studying other
>countries' archival accounts of issues relating to our area of interest.
>While reading Norman Cantor's /*The Last Knight*/, I was struck by how
>much John of Gaunt's Iberian progeny might have caused some concerns for
>Yorkist and Tudor monarchs alike. Yet accounts from 'our' sources are
>generally quiet on this point. Richard obviously understood the
>importance of his Iberian relatives. I'm sure that others in many
>circles also understood their importance.
===============================
And Henry VII involved himself and family with the Trastamaras twice over: Catherine of Aragon for son Arthur (and afterwards as fish on a hook regarding Henry VIII); adn Catherine's sister Juana, wife of the Hapsburg Philip the Handsome. he met Juana briefly, face to face, after a sea storm flung the Flemish fleet around on its way to Spain for Philip to claim the Castilian crown in Juana's name after the death of Isabel the Catholic. Then-widowed Henry seems to have been charmed by Juana: Philip died in Spain at age 28, after antagonizing almost everyone who came near him and turing the kingdom against him (no sense of diplomacy, that boy), and from then until he himself died, Henry badgered Fernando for Juana's hand in marriage. Fernando, who had Juana confined to the castle of Tordesillas, did ask her, now and again, if the idea interested her. Juana, who kept Philip and his coffin by her side until at least the 1520s, always responded "Not so soon". Fernando would send word to Henry insisting that Juana was unstable and unwilling. Henry would answer back that he didn't care about the instability; she was certainly fertile, having had several children; and that he was of the opinion that Fernando was holding his daughter captive. In his bio of Catherine of Aragon, Garrett Mattingly mentions that Henry occasionally considered a campaign into Spain to seek out and "rescue" Juana. Fernando considered the entire matter a royal pain.
Could it be possible that Henry was considering the Plantagenet roots in Juana, partly because of the then-iffy state of marriage possibilities between Catherine and Prince Henry? Given these roots, Juana could have been a viable bolstering replacement for Elizabeth of York.
Juana was a very strong personality (undoubtedly unstable, not necessarily insane until after a particular point of being driven to extremes), and she had a touch of the skeptic about her: during that storm which landed her in England, while everyone else panicked and prayed, she dressed in her best, and climbed to the highest perch available on the pitching ship. A religious collection was taken up; when the basket came to her, she calmly fished around for the smallest coin she could find and dropped it in. No need to be concerned, she told them: she had never read about a king who drowned. The idea of daily contact between her and Margaret Beaufort boggles the mind.
Maria
elena@...
>Interesting that we are only now getting around to studying other
>countries' archival accounts of issues relating to our area of interest.
>While reading Norman Cantor's /*The Last Knight*/, I was struck by how
>much John of Gaunt's Iberian progeny might have caused some concerns for
>Yorkist and Tudor monarchs alike. Yet accounts from 'our' sources are
>generally quiet on this point. Richard obviously understood the
>importance of his Iberian relatives. I'm sure that others in many
>circles also understood their importance.
===============================
And Henry VII involved himself and family with the Trastamaras twice over: Catherine of Aragon for son Arthur (and afterwards as fish on a hook regarding Henry VIII); adn Catherine's sister Juana, wife of the Hapsburg Philip the Handsome. he met Juana briefly, face to face, after a sea storm flung the Flemish fleet around on its way to Spain for Philip to claim the Castilian crown in Juana's name after the death of Isabel the Catholic. Then-widowed Henry seems to have been charmed by Juana: Philip died in Spain at age 28, after antagonizing almost everyone who came near him and turing the kingdom against him (no sense of diplomacy, that boy), and from then until he himself died, Henry badgered Fernando for Juana's hand in marriage. Fernando, who had Juana confined to the castle of Tordesillas, did ask her, now and again, if the idea interested her. Juana, who kept Philip and his coffin by her side until at least the 1520s, always responded "Not so soon". Fernando would send word to Henry insisting that Juana was unstable and unwilling. Henry would answer back that he didn't care about the instability; she was certainly fertile, having had several children; and that he was of the opinion that Fernando was holding his daughter captive. In his bio of Catherine of Aragon, Garrett Mattingly mentions that Henry occasionally considered a campaign into Spain to seek out and "rescue" Juana. Fernando considered the entire matter a royal pain.
Could it be possible that Henry was considering the Plantagenet roots in Juana, partly because of the then-iffy state of marriage possibilities between Catherine and Prince Henry? Given these roots, Juana could have been a viable bolstering replacement for Elizabeth of York.
Juana was a very strong personality (undoubtedly unstable, not necessarily insane until after a particular point of being driven to extremes), and she had a touch of the skeptic about her: during that storm which landed her in England, while everyone else panicked and prayed, she dressed in her best, and climbed to the highest perch available on the pitching ship. A religious collection was taken up; when the basket came to her, she calmly fished around for the smallest coin she could find and dropped it in. No need to be concerned, she told them: she had never read about a king who drowned. The idea of daily contact between her and Margaret Beaufort boggles the mind.
Maria
elena@...
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 15:56:38
CORRECTION..I WROTE 1484 AS THE DATES LISTED BELOW ..THEY SHOULD BE 1485.
eliz of york and her mother, siblings and aunt catherine stafford, nee woodville were all still in sanctuary in feb/march 1484.
this means the marriage negotiations were still quite "fresh" when tudor began his invasion/conquest plans. h7 had everything to lose or gain by acting before a contract could be concluded. he had to stop richard from marrying joanna, and eliz from marrying manuel..the invasion, to me appears to be a last ditch attempt to ensure h7 would/could be king.
could we possibly find h7 tried to continue the marriage arrangements with himself being the "replacement" bridegroom for a marriage with joanna. is this why the delay in his marrying e4's daughter..also, evidence shows that h7 vowed to marry one of e4's daughters..either eliz or cecily...cecily gets missed in most modern histories...
i suppose this is because eliz is the one who did end up married to h7.
h7's councillors had to remind h7 of his boast to ensure he did marry to "one" of e4's girls.
roslyn.
fayreroze <fayreroze@...> wrote:
in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
for queen anne to die.
See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
the earl of Longford
begin excerpt...
At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
northerners voiced the strongest view:
These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
Source Croyland Chronicle
The Lost Letter
As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
own hand.
Source..Sir George Buck.
The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
significant to ric iii.
see
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
what i noticed was interesting.
first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
then the calendar shows.
queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
hand of joanna.
this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
(moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
to unravel the true history of richard iii?
finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
intentions towards eliz of york.
this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
eliz of york.
gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
honourable.
it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
relatives.
also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
roslyn
---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos
eliz of york and her mother, siblings and aunt catherine stafford, nee woodville were all still in sanctuary in feb/march 1484.
this means the marriage negotiations were still quite "fresh" when tudor began his invasion/conquest plans. h7 had everything to lose or gain by acting before a contract could be concluded. he had to stop richard from marrying joanna, and eliz from marrying manuel..the invasion, to me appears to be a last ditch attempt to ensure h7 would/could be king.
could we possibly find h7 tried to continue the marriage arrangements with himself being the "replacement" bridegroom for a marriage with joanna. is this why the delay in his marrying e4's daughter..also, evidence shows that h7 vowed to marry one of e4's daughters..either eliz or cecily...cecily gets missed in most modern histories...
i suppose this is because eliz is the one who did end up married to h7.
h7's councillors had to remind h7 of his boast to ensure he did marry to "one" of e4's girls.
roslyn.
fayreroze <fayreroze@...> wrote:
in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
for queen anne to die.
See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
the earl of Longford
begin excerpt...
At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
northerners voiced the strongest view:
These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
Source Croyland Chronicle
The Lost Letter
As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
own hand.
Source..Sir George Buck.
The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
significant to ric iii.
see
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
what i noticed was interesting.
first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
then the calendar shows.
queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
hand of joanna.
this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
(moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
to unravel the true history of richard iii?
finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
intentions towards eliz of york.
this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
eliz of york.
gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
honourable.
it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
relatives.
also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
roslyn
---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 21:30:30
thank you marie, any hints/leads or clues you may be able to provide will be greatly appreciated.
via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards, and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
roslyn
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote:
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
invading and conquering richard.
>
> has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
connection too?
> roslyn
There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
hunt out the references for you if you like.
Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
out.
Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
individual than Henry Tudor.
Marie
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
disinformation re:
> marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
there
> was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
lengths to
> deny the rumour.
>
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
this
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
(Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards, and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
roslyn
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote:
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
invading and conquering richard.
>
> has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
connection too?
> roslyn
There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
hunt out the references for you if you like.
Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
out.
Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
individual than Henry Tudor.
Marie
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
disinformation re:
> marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
there
> was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
lengths to
> deny the rumour.
>
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
this
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
(Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 21:35:49
We often figure that anything worth finding would have been found by
now. When we think this way we have to remind ourselves that Mancini
didn't show up until the 1930s. Lord only knows what's in the Vatican
archives.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> thank you marie, any hints/leads or clues you may be able to provide
> will be greatly appreciated.
>
> via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for
> that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
>
> ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese
> sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in
> portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
>
> btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards,
> and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
>
> she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
> here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
> <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm>
>
> roslyn
>
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...
> <mailto:marie%40remote.tenos.co.uk>> wrote:
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
> >
> > it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
> and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
> invading and conquering richard.
> >
> > has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
> portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
> from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
> connection too?
> > roslyn
>
> There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
> hunt out the references for you if you like.
> Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
> entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
> come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
> negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
> planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
> governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
> rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
>
> The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
> mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
> Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
> have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
> would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
>
> It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
> the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
> Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
> Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
> death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
> Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
> the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
> almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
> particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
> out.
>
> Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
> had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
> might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
> individual than Henry Tudor.
>
> Marie
>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> > I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
> disinformation re:
> > marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
> there
> > was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
> lengths to
> > deny the rumour.
> >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
> who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
> the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime, and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
> and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
> wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
> of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
> any such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
> through whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
> Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
> was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
> She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
> in body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
> her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
> anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
> his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
> and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
> of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
> Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> All new Yahoo! Mail
> ---------------------------------
> Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
>
>
>
>
now. When we think this way we have to remind ourselves that Mancini
didn't show up until the 1930s. Lord only knows what's in the Vatican
archives.
fayre rose wrote:
>
> thank you marie, any hints/leads or clues you may be able to provide
> will be greatly appreciated.
>
> via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for
> that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
>
> ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese
> sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in
> portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
>
> btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards,
> and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
>
> she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
> here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
> <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm>
>
> roslyn
>
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...
> <mailto:marie%40remote.tenos.co.uk>> wrote:
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
> >
> > it looks as if perhaps the portuguese connection is quite strong
> and may have even played a very strong role in the urgency of h7
> invading and conquering richard.
> >
> > has there been much exploration/research regarding richard and
> portugal connection and what role it may have played in the events
> from 03/1484 -08/1485? didn't perkin warbeck have a portuguese
> connection too?
> > roslyn
>
> There are a couple of good articles in past Ricardians, Roslyn. I'll
> hunt out the references for you if you like.
> Our information about the marriage negotiations in Portugal comes
> entirely from Portuguese sources, which is why it has only recently
> come to light. Of course, it was still too early for such
> negotiations to be made public at home, and the embassy may have been
> planned for some time as Richard had replaced Sir Edward Brampton as
> governor of Guernsey late in 1484 to free him up for "service to be
> rendered by him according to certain indentures" as from next Easter.
>
> The Portuguese sources state (I'm sorry, I can't remember if you
> mentioned this) that a second marriage was being negotiated between
> Elizabeth of York and Joanna's cousin Manuel Duke of Beja. This would
> have been a very clever way of making Elizabeth a good match that
> would not threaten Richard because his own to Joanna woud trump it.
>
> It was suggested by someone in one of the Ricardian Bulletins that
> the letter Buck saw might have related to Elizabeth's marriage to
> Manuel. That could not take place without Richard's marriage to
> Joanna, so it too would have made Elizabeth impatient for the Queen's
> death. Nobody in England at that time knew anything about the
> Portuguese marriage planned for Elizabeth, but Buck did know about
> the rumours that Richard wanted to marry Elizabeth himself so he is
> almost bound to have interpreted the letter in that light,
> particularly as he seems to have merely read it rather than copied it
> out.
>
> Elizabeth would actually have done just as well for herself if she
> had married Manuel as he later became King of Portugal. In fact, she
> might have been better off as he seems to have been a rather warmer
> individual than Henry Tudor.
>
> Marie
>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
> > I'm sure there were many who might try to spread
> disinformation re:
> > marriage to e of y simply to present Richard as a blackguard. If
> there
> > was such a ploy, it worked, since Richard was forced to great
> lengths to
> > deny the rumour.
> >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja
> who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as
> the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime, and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before
> and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not
> wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife
> of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny
> any such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and
> through whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619
> Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth
> was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since.
> She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts,
> in body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in
> her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know
> anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses
> his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious
> and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
> of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new
> Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> All new Yahoo! Mail
> ---------------------------------
> Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 21:48:57
She was also regent while her father Afonso "el Africano", and her brother Joao were in Africa. She refused three offers of marriage, including Richard, and drove her father and brother up a few walls. The convent was in Aveiro.
Incidentally that 1755 earthquake was the one that inspired Voltaire to write "Candide"; and the earthquake itself, as well as the senseless human response to it, are featured in his novel.
I do have a book-length bio of Joana, in Portuguese, courtesy of a lovely member of the Mediber discussion group, who picked up a copy for me during a pilgrimage to Aveiro. I have yet to do much more than look at it, but I do think I'll be able to pick out most of it once I get going. Joana is also featured in a 1950s-era bio of Joao called "The Perfect Prince".
Maria
elena@...
=====================
>thank you marie, any hints/leads or clues you may be able to provide will be greatly appreciated.
>
> via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
>
> ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
>
> btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards, and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
>
> she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
> here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
>
> roslyn
Incidentally that 1755 earthquake was the one that inspired Voltaire to write "Candide"; and the earthquake itself, as well as the senseless human response to it, are featured in his novel.
I do have a book-length bio of Joana, in Portuguese, courtesy of a lovely member of the Mediber discussion group, who picked up a copy for me during a pilgrimage to Aveiro. I have yet to do much more than look at it, but I do think I'll be able to pick out most of it once I get going. Joana is also featured in a 1950s-era bio of Joao called "The Perfect Prince".
Maria
elena@...
=====================
>thank you marie, any hints/leads or clues you may be able to provide will be greatly appreciated.
>
> via wikipedia, i've just learned the offical portuguese archives for that era were destroyed by fire in 1755 after an earthquake.
>
> ergo, it is going to be difficult to find info from portuguese sources. one can only hope there are/were chronicles written in portugal covering this time period to be able to glean some answers.
>
> btw..joana was a nun living in a dominican convent from 1475 onwards, and heir to the portuguese throne after her brother.
>
> she was/is in portugal considered a saint, tho not fully canonised.
> here's the catholic encyclopedia's write up on st. joana of portugal.
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409a.htm
>
> roslyn
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 21:52:41
--- In , Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
>
> >
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
Eileen
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
Eileen
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-07 21:53:05
--- In , "fayreroze" <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
> >
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the royal doctors at that
time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
eileen
>
>
>>
>>
>>
> >
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the royal doctors at that
time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
eileen
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-07 22:02:03
See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and Portugese.
As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for you and PP the connection.
----- Original Message -----
From: eileen
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
--- In , Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
>
> >
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
Eileen
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for you and PP the connection.
----- Original Message -----
From: eileen
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
--- In , Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
>
> >
> As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be Lancastrian
> heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the maneuvre
> would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
Eileen
> little trick himself.
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some answers.
> > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> >
> > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> >
> > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak out to
> > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> >
> > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear that
> > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> >
> > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime, and
> > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> >
> > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > after her death .
> >
> > fayreroze wrote:
> > >
> > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > for queen anne to die.
> > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > the earl of Longford
> > > begin excerpt...
> > >
> > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry Tudor
> > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > >
> > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any such
> > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen (Anne), the
> > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through whom
> > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his incestuous
> > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > >
> > > The Lost Letter
> > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and maker
> > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in body
> > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > own hand.
> > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > >
> > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > >
> > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > >
> > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with events
> > > significant to ric iii.
> > > see
> > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > >
> > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > >
> > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february 1484.
> > > then the calendar shows.
> > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > >
> > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > hand of joanna.
> > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous spring. so
> > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business sense to
> > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > >
> > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > >
> > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > >
> > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham starved
> > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > >
> > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > >
> > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > >
> > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > eliz of york.
> > >
> > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > honourable.
> > >
> > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > relatives.
> > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 00:45:14
I used the term 'Iberian' rather than 'Spanish' or 'Portuguese', since
the latter entities were not fully formed until the end of the fifteenth
century. Actually, many (e.g., the Catalonians) would argue that the
entity known as 'Spain' is still a fiction.
eileen wrote:
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
the latter entities were not fully formed until the end of the fifteenth
century. Actually, many (e.g., the Catalonians) would argue that the
entity known as 'Spain' is still a fiction.
eileen wrote:
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 01:06:19
The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
Antwerp.
Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
with all its squabbling riff-raff?
Thus ascended the Tudors.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
Antwerp.
Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
with all its squabbling riff-raff?
Thus ascended the Tudors.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 01:42:57
joanna was descended from phillipa de lancaster/philipa de lencaster in portuguese.
here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
Antwerp.
Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
with all its squabbling riff-raff?
Thus ascended the Tudors.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
Antwerp.
Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
with all its squabbling riff-raff?
Thus ascended the Tudors.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 01:59:55
Here's the posthumous portrait of John of Gaunt. He claimed the throne
of Castile in right of second wife, Costanza of Castile. Note that the
third-quarter of the device on his jupon bears the castle of Castile,
while the castle is also inset on the arms within the garter at the top
left of the portrait. Gaunt took his claim very seriously for a long
time, and I'm sure Iberian royalty always kept the relationship in the
backs of their minds, even if they didn't act on it. Actually, come to
think of it, Philip II did act on it.
http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk/Michelham-Priory/john-of-gaunt.jpg
fayre rose wrote:
>
> joanna was descended from phillipa de lancaster/philipa de lencaster
> in portuguese.
> here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
> http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster>
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@eol. ca <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
> century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
> nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
> assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
> legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
> claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
> Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
>
> My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
> Antwerp.
>
> Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
> Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
> kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
> buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
> with all its squabbling riff-raff?
>
> Thus ascended the Tudors.
>
> stephenmlark@ talktalk. net <mailto:stephenmlark%40talktalk.net> wrote:
> >
> > See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> > ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> > Portugese.
> > As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> > you and PP the connection.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: eileen
> > To: richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> > Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> > and "engagement" to Richard III
> >
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, Bill Barber
> > <bbarber@... > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> > Lancastrian
> > > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> > maneuvre
> > > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> >
> > Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
> >
> > Eileen
> >
> > > little trick himself.
> > >
> > > fayre rose wrote:
> > > >
> > > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> > answers.
> > > > http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > > >
> > > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> > out to
> > > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > > >
> > > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> > that
> > > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > > >
> > > > it leaves one wondering... i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> > and
> > > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > > >
> > > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > > after her death .
> > > >
> > > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could
> not wait
> > > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > > begin excerpt...
> > > > >
> > > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> > Tudor
> > > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > > >
> > > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> > such
> > > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration. ..the
> > > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> > (Anne), the
> > > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> > whom
> > > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> > incestuous
> > > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > > >
> > > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> > maker
> > > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> > body
> > > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft
> in her
> > > > > own hand.
> > > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > > >
> > > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > > >
> > > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > > >
> > > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> > events
> > > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > > see
> > > > > http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>
> > > > >
> > > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> > 1484.
> > > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > > >
> > > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we
> know anne
> > > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> > spring. so
> > > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> > sense to
> > > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > > >
> > > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > > >
> > > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > > >
> > > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> > starved
> > > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > > >
> > > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > > >
> > > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > > >
> > > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > > eliz of york.
> > > > >
> > > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > > honourable.
> > > > >
> > > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > > relatives.
> > > > >
> > > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> > heritage, i'm
> > > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> > Mail.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ---
> Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
>
>
>
>
of Castile in right of second wife, Costanza of Castile. Note that the
third-quarter of the device on his jupon bears the castle of Castile,
while the castle is also inset on the arms within the garter at the top
left of the portrait. Gaunt took his claim very seriously for a long
time, and I'm sure Iberian royalty always kept the relationship in the
backs of their minds, even if they didn't act on it. Actually, come to
think of it, Philip II did act on it.
http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk/Michelham-Priory/john-of-gaunt.jpg
fayre rose wrote:
>
> joanna was descended from phillipa de lancaster/philipa de lencaster
> in portuguese.
> here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
> http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster>
>
> Bill Barber <bbarber@eol. ca <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
> century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
> nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
> assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
> legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
> claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
> Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort half-siblings.
>
> My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
> Antwerp.
>
> Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
> Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
> kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
> buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
> with all its squabbling riff-raff?
>
> Thus ascended the Tudors.
>
> stephenmlark@ talktalk. net <mailto:stephenmlark%40talktalk.net> wrote:
> >
> > See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> > ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> > Portugese.
> > As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> > you and PP the connection.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: eileen
> > To: richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> > Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> > and "engagement" to Richard III
> >
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, Bill Barber
> > <bbarber@... > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> > Lancastrian
> > > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> Joanna
> > > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> > maneuvre
> > > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> this
> >
> > Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
> >
> > Eileen
> >
> > > little trick himself.
> > >
> > > fayre rose wrote:
> > > >
> > > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> > answers.
> > > > http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > <http://www.r3 org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> negotiating
> > > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > > >
> > > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> > out to
> > > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > > >
> > > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> > that
> > > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > > >
> > > > it leaves one wondering... i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> > and
> > > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> twenties.
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> Richard
> > > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> palatable.
> > > >
> > > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > > after her death .
> > > >
> > > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> written
> > > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could
> not wait
> > > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > > begin excerpt...
> > > > >
> > > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> > Tudor
> > > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> 1484
> > > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > > >
> > > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> > such
> > > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration. ..the
> > > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> > (Anne), the
> > > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> > whom
> > > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> > incestuous
> > > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > > >
> > > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> cause
> > > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> > maker
> > > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> > body
> > > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> February
> > > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> these be
> > > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> of her
> > > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft
> in her
> > > > > own hand.
> > > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > > >
> > > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> earl of
> > > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > > >
> > > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > > >
> > > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> > events
> > > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > > see
> > > > > http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>
> > > > >
> > > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> > 1484.
> > > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > > >
> > > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> for the
> > > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we
> know anne
> > > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> > spring. so
> > > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> > sense to
> > > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> engagments"
> > > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > > >
> > > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> potential
> > > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > > >
> > > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> denied or
> > > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > > >
> > > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> > starved
> > > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> records
> > > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > > >
> > > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > > >
> > > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > > >
> > > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> marriage
> > > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> including
> > > > > eliz of york.
> > > > >
> > > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> richard
> > > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> assure
> > > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > > honourable.
> > > > >
> > > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > > relatives.
> > > > >
> > > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> > heritage, i'm
> > > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> > Mail.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ---
> Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 02:20:42
Sorry, I misspoke. The inset in the shield within the garter is the full
arms of Castile and Leon. John's kid brother, Edmund of Langley, married
Princess Isabel of Castile & Leon, daughter of Pedro the Cruel, so the
Plantagenets had several ties into the Iberian Peninsula. The couple had
two sons and one daughter. This means that the Yorks had a drop of
Castilian blood, but then, all of the royals carried some of this blood
from the time of Edward I who married Eleanor of Castile. Lord only
knows what other intermarriages there were between England and the
Peninsula.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> Here's the posthumous portrait of John of Gaunt. He claimed the throne
> of Castile in right of second wife, Costanza of Castile. Note that the
> third-quarter of the device on his jupon bears the castle of Castile,
> while the castle is also inset on the arms within the garter at the top
> left of the portrait. Gaunt took his claim very seriously for a long
> time, and I'm sure Iberian royalty always kept the relationship in the
> backs of their minds, even if they didn't act on it. Actually, come to
> think of it, Philip II did act on it.
> http://www.castles- abbeys.co. uk/Michelham- Priory/john- of-gaunt.
> jpg <http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk/Michelham-Priory/john-of-gaunt.jpg>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > joanna was descended from phillipa de lancaster/philipa de lencaster
> > in portuguese.
> > here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
> > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> > <http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster>>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@eol. ca <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
> > century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
> > nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
> > assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
> > legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
> > claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
> > Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort
> half-siblings.
> >
> > My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
> > Antwerp.
> >
> > Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
> > Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
> > kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
> > buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
> > with all its squabbling riff-raff?
> >
> > Thus ascended the Tudors.
> >
> > stephenmlark@ talktalk. net <mailto:stephenmlar k%40talktalk. net>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> > > ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> > > Portugese.
> > > As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> > > you and PP the connection.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: eileen
> > > To: richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> > > and "engagement" to Richard III
> > >
> > > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, Bill Barber
> > > <bbarber@... > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> > > Lancastrian
> > > > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> > Joanna
> > > > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > > > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> > > maneuvre
> > > > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> > this
> > >
> > > Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
> > >
> > > Eileen
> > >
> > > > little trick himself.
> > > >
> > > > fayre rose wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> > > answers.
> > > > > http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>>
> > > > >
> > > > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> > negotiating
> > > > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of
> beja who
> > > > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > > > >
> > > > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> > > out to
> > > > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > > > >
> > > > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> > > that
> > > > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with
> as the
> > > > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > > > >
> > > > > it leaves one wondering... i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime,
> > > and
> > > > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> > twenties.
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > > > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> > Richard
> > > > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> > palatable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately
> before and
> > > > > after her death .
> > > > >
> > > > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> > written
> > > > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could
> > not wait
> > > > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford,
> wife of
> > > > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > > > begin excerpt...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> > > Tudor
> > > > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> > 1484
> > > > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> > > such
> > > > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration. ..the
> > > > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> > > (Anne), the
> > > > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> > > whom
> > > > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> > > incestuous
> > > > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In
> 1619 Sir
> > > > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that
> Elizabeth was
> > > > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen
> since. She
> > > > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> > cause
> > > > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> > > maker
> > > > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> > > body
> > > > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> > February
> > > > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> > these be
> > > > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> > of her
> > > > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft
> > in her
> > > > > > own hand.
> > > > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> > earl of
> > > > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> > > events
> > > > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > > > see
> > > > > > http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>
> > > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> > > 1484.
> > > > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> > for the
> > > > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we
> > know anne
> > > > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> > > spring. so
> > > > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> > > sense to
> > > > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> > engagments"
> > > > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> > potential
> > > > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> > denied or
> > > > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> > > starved
> > > > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> > records
> > > > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard
> loses his
> > > > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> > marriage
> > > > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> > including
> > > > > > eliz of york.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> > richard
> > > > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> > assure
> > > > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were
> serious and
> > > > > > honourable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > > > relatives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> > > heritage, i'm
> > > > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the
> one of
> > > > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > roslyn
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > > > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> > > Mail.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
arms of Castile and Leon. John's kid brother, Edmund of Langley, married
Princess Isabel of Castile & Leon, daughter of Pedro the Cruel, so the
Plantagenets had several ties into the Iberian Peninsula. The couple had
two sons and one daughter. This means that the Yorks had a drop of
Castilian blood, but then, all of the royals carried some of this blood
from the time of Edward I who married Eleanor of Castile. Lord only
knows what other intermarriages there were between England and the
Peninsula.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> Here's the posthumous portrait of John of Gaunt. He claimed the throne
> of Castile in right of second wife, Costanza of Castile. Note that the
> third-quarter of the device on his jupon bears the castle of Castile,
> while the castle is also inset on the arms within the garter at the top
> left of the portrait. Gaunt took his claim very seriously for a long
> time, and I'm sure Iberian royalty always kept the relationship in the
> backs of their minds, even if they didn't act on it. Actually, come to
> think of it, Philip II did act on it.
> http://www.castles- abbeys.co. uk/Michelham- Priory/john- of-gaunt.
> jpg <http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk/Michelham-Priory/john-of-gaunt.jpg>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > joanna was descended from phillipa de lancaster/philipa de lencaster
> > in portuguese.
> > here's wikipedia's webpage on philipa
> > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> > <http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Philippa_ of_Lancaster
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Lancaster>>
> >
> > Bill Barber <bbarber@eol. ca <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > The Tudors had a tremendous amount of good luck in the fifteenth
> > century. They were pretty much 'hayseeds' when compared even to minor
> > nobility. There is no way they should have claimed the throne. Even
> > assuming that the Beauforts were not encumbered concerning their
> > legitimacy and right to succeed, their Iberian relatives had a superior
> > claim to Lancastrian inheritance by dint of the fact that the issue of
> > Gaunt's first two marriages were older than their Beaufort
> half-siblings.
> >
> > My argument is that the Yorks had the strongest claim though Lionel of
> > Antwerp.
> >
> > Of course, realpolitik always trumps. Spain had its hands tied with the
> > Moors, and with the head-knocking that went with cobbling together a
> > kingdom (sorry about the mixed metaphor), and Portugal was making a good
> > buck in the spice, cloth and slave trades. Why did Portugal need England
> > with all its squabbling riff-raff?
> >
> > Thus ascended the Tudors.
> >
> > stephenmlark@ talktalk. net <mailto:stephenmlar k%40talktalk. net>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> > > ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> > > Portugese.
> > > As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> > > you and PP the connection.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: eileen
> > > To: richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> > > and "engagement" to Richard III
> > >
> > > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, Bill Barber
> > > <bbarber@... > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> > > Lancastrian
> > > > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that
> > Joanna
> > > > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > > > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> > > maneuvre
> > > > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off
> > this
> > >
> > > Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
> > >
> > > Eileen
> > >
> > > > little trick himself.
> > > >
> > > > fayre rose wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> > > answers.
> > > > > http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> > <http://www.r3. org/bosworth/ texts/legends_ princess. html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>>>
> > > > >
> > > > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also
> > negotiating
> > > > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of
> beja who
> > > > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > > > >
> > > > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> > > out to
> > > > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > > > >
> > > > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> > > that
> > > > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with
> as the
> > > > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > > > >
> > > > > it leaves one wondering... i do recall reading somewhere,
> sometime,
> > > and
> > > > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did
> intend
> > > > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their
> > twenties.
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > > roslyn
> > > > >
> > > > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber% 40eol.ca> > wrote:
> > > > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville,
> having
> > > > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on
> > Richard
> > > > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more
> > palatable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately
> before and
> > > > > after her death .
> > > > >
> > > > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had
> > written
> > > > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could
> > not wait
> > > > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford,
> wife of
> > > > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > > > begin excerpt...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> > > Tudor
> > > > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In
> > 1484
> > > > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> > > such
> > > > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration. ..the
> > > > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all
> rise
> > > > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> > > (Anne), the
> > > > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> > > whom
> > > > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> > > incestuous
> > > > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his
> plans
> > > > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In
> 1619 Sir
> > > > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that
> Elizabeth was
> > > > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen
> since. She
> > > > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly
> offices
> > > > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the
> > cause
> > > > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> > > maker
> > > > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> > > body
> > > > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of
> > February
> > > > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all
> > these be
> > > > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum
> > of her
> > > > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft
> > in her
> > > > > > own hand.
> > > > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the
> > earl of
> > > > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> > > events
> > > > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > > > see
> > > > > > http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>
> > > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> > html <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar.
> html <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> > <http://www.richardi iiworcs.co. uk/linksother/ linkscalendar. html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>>>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> > > 1484.
> > > > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask
> > for the
> > > > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we
> > know anne
> > > > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> > > spring. so
> > > > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> > > sense to
> > > > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper
> succession.
> > > > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast
> > engagments"
> > > > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this
> > potential
> > > > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it
> > denied or
> > > > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> > > starved
> > > > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese
> > records
> > > > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to
> marry
> > > > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard
> loses his
> > > > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the
> > marriage
> > > > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction,
> > including
> > > > > > eliz of york.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told
> > richard
> > > > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to
> stifle
> > > > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to
> > assure
> > > > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were
> serious and
> > > > > > honourable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > > > relatives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> > > heritage, i'm
> > > > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the
> one of
> > > > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > roslyn
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > > > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> > > Mail.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 02:22:51
--- In , Bill Barber
<bbarber@...> wrote:
>
> We often figure that anything worth finding would have been found by
> now. When we think this way we have to remind ourselves that Mancini
> didn't show up until the 1930s. Lord only knows what's in the
Vatican
> archives.
Indeed. Within the past few decades, an original manuscript of one of
Thomas More's treatises on the nature of faith has been found stuffed
inside an urn or vase at the Vatican, where it had evidently resided
for a couple of hundred years. A letter from William Montague, Earl
of Shrewsbury to the Pope, stating that he did not object to the
annullment of his marriage to Joan (Fair Maid of Kent, as she was
later called) Plantagenet on the grounds of precontract to Thomas
Holland, and why, in elaborately diplomatic circumlocution -- she was
already pregnant by Holland, and if she was still married Montague
when the child was born, and it was male (which it was) then another
man's son would be the heir of Shrewsbury, was also recently
discovered where it had been hidden or misfiled among totally
unrelated documents.
Katy
<bbarber@...> wrote:
>
> We often figure that anything worth finding would have been found by
> now. When we think this way we have to remind ourselves that Mancini
> didn't show up until the 1930s. Lord only knows what's in the
Vatican
> archives.
Indeed. Within the past few decades, an original manuscript of one of
Thomas More's treatises on the nature of faith has been found stuffed
inside an urn or vase at the Vatican, where it had evidently resided
for a couple of hundred years. A letter from William Montague, Earl
of Shrewsbury to the Pope, stating that he did not object to the
annullment of his marriage to Joan (Fair Maid of Kent, as she was
later called) Plantagenet on the grounds of precontract to Thomas
Holland, and why, in elaborately diplomatic circumlocution -- she was
already pregnant by Holland, and if she was still married Montague
when the child was born, and it was male (which it was) then another
man's son would be the heir of Shrewsbury, was also recently
discovered where it had been hidden or misfiled among totally
unrelated documents.
Katy
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 02:29:48
Here's a link to John of Gaunt's descendants:
http://www.royalist.info/execute/biog?person=6
Note that Gaunt's daughter Isabella (by Blanche of Lancaster) married
João I of Portugal. One of their progeny was Henry the Navigator.
Gaunt's daughter. Katherine (by Constanza of Castile) married Henry III
of Castile and Leon. Their great-granddaughter was Isabella of Castile.
No one questioned the legitimacy of progeny from Gaunt's first two
unions, but since Gaunt's issue by his third wife, Katheryn Swynford
were born before Gaunt and Swynford were married, they were deemed by
some to be illegitimate even though they had been legitimized both by
the Pope and Henry IV. The children of this union were given the name
'Beaufort'. Further, Henry IV's decree was proclaimed with the proviso
that the children of Gaunt and Swynford could not succeed to the
throne. There is no record that I can find which removed Henry IV's
proviso. Of course, Margaret Beaufort was the daughter of Gaunt's son,
John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset. She was also mother to Henry Tudor.
All this is to say that Henry Tudor's claim was pretty dicey. By
marrying Joanna of Portugal, Richard could trump Henry Tudor's claim
through John of Gaunt by Richard's own superior claim in rights of
Joanna. On top of this, by marrying Joanna, Richard could strongly claim
his right to the throne through three sons of Edward III. Any children
form this marriage would have a fairly unassailable claim to the throne
(if one disregards Salic law).
It's all very complicated, but suffice it to say, if Richard had pulled
off this marriage, life would have been a little tougher in regards to
Henry Tudor's claim.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
http://www.royalist.info/execute/biog?person=6
Note that Gaunt's daughter Isabella (by Blanche of Lancaster) married
João I of Portugal. One of their progeny was Henry the Navigator.
Gaunt's daughter. Katherine (by Constanza of Castile) married Henry III
of Castile and Leon. Their great-granddaughter was Isabella of Castile.
No one questioned the legitimacy of progeny from Gaunt's first two
unions, but since Gaunt's issue by his third wife, Katheryn Swynford
were born before Gaunt and Swynford were married, they were deemed by
some to be illegitimate even though they had been legitimized both by
the Pope and Henry IV. The children of this union were given the name
'Beaufort'. Further, Henry IV's decree was proclaimed with the proviso
that the children of Gaunt and Swynford could not succeed to the
throne. There is no record that I can find which removed Henry IV's
proviso. Of course, Margaret Beaufort was the daughter of Gaunt's son,
John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset. She was also mother to Henry Tudor.
All this is to say that Henry Tudor's claim was pretty dicey. By
marrying Joanna of Portugal, Richard could trump Henry Tudor's claim
through John of Gaunt by Richard's own superior claim in rights of
Joanna. On top of this, by marrying Joanna, Richard could strongly claim
his right to the throne through three sons of Edward III. Any children
form this marriage would have a fairly unassailable claim to the throne
(if one disregards Salic law).
It's all very complicated, but suffice it to say, if Richard had pulled
off this marriage, life would have been a little tougher in regards to
Henry Tudor's claim.
stephenmlark@... wrote:
>
> See J.A-H's article "The Lancastrian Claim to the Throne" a few years
> ago, showing the Tudors were insignificant compared to the Spanish and
> Portugese.
> As I heard the talk before the article, I will fish it out soon for
> you and PP the connection.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter
> and "engagement" to Richard III
>
> --- In
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Barber
> <bbarber@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > As for Joanna, Richard needed to counter Henry's claim to be
> Lancastrian
> > heir. Depending on whom one listened to, it might be argued that Joanna
> > had better claim to status of Lancastrian heir than did Henry. The
> > Portuguese marriage could have trumped Henry's claim, since the
> maneuvre
> > would unite York and Lancaster. Of course, Henry lived to pull off this
>
> Bill - what was Joanna's 'better claim to status of Lancastrian heir?
>
> Eileen
>
> > little trick himself.
> >
> > fayre rose wrote:
> > >
> > > not wanting to sit idle..i went surfing again and turned up some
> answers.
> > > http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>
> > > <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html
> <http://www.r3.org/bosworth/texts/legends_princess.html>>
> > >
> > > what is interesting at the above url, is richard was also negotiating
> > > for e of y's marriage, with joanna's cousin manuel, duke of beja who
> > > was in line to become the king of portugal.
> > >
> > > so, again it leaves me wondering..why did richard have to speak
> out to
> > > disspell rumours of his "intended" marriage to e of york?
> > >
> > > it certainly looks as if he had no intention of marrying the
> > > girl...AND joanna being about 34 years of age, it does not appear
> that
> > > he was particularily looking to a woman to sire children with as the
> > > negotiations were ongoing even at the time of ric iii's death.
> > >
> > > it leaves one wondering...i do recall reading somewhere, sometime,
> and
> > > it is probably buried in my files somewhere..that richard did intend
> > > to hand the throne back to e4's sons once they were in their twenties.
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > roslyn
> > >
> > > Bill Barber <bbarber@... <mailto:bbarber%40eol.ca>> wrote:
> > > Wow. who knows? What I could see is that Elizabeth Woodville, having
> > > promised e of y to Henry Tudor, could have cast aspersions on Richard
> > > both to discredit him and to make acceptance of Henry more palatable.
> > >
> > > Anne's death has always been interesting, as has the disparity in
> > > accounts concerning how Richard reacted both immediately before and
> > > after her death .
> > >
> > > fayreroze wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in 1619 george buck recorded excerpts from a letter eliz had written
> > > > to duke of norfolk, ric iii's friend. eliz stated she could not wait
> > > > for queen anne to die.
> > > > See page 190-191... Royal Ancedotes by Elizabeth Longford, wife of
> > > > the earl of Longford
> > > > begin excerpt...
> > > >
> > > > At the time of the October rebellion the rebels had urged Henry
> Tudor
> > > > to take to wife Edward IV's eldest daughter, something which he
> > > > eventually did to shore up his dubious claims to the crown. In 1484
> > > > Richard was forced to deny any plans to marry her himself. His
> > > > northerners voiced the strongest view:
> > > >
> > > > These men told the king, to his face that if he did not deny any
> such
> > > > purpose and did not counter it by public declaration...the
> > > > northerners, in whom he placed the greatest trust, would all rise
> > > > against, charging him with causing the death of the queen
> (Anne), the
> > > > daughter and one of the heirs of the earl of Warwick and through
> whom
> > > > he had obtained his first honour, in order to complete his
> incestuous
> > > > association with his near kinswoman, to the offense of God.
> > > > Source Croyland Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > The Lost Letter
> > > > As with other aspects of Richard's life the veracity of his plans
> > > > regarding Elizabeth of York is not easily established. In 1619 Sir
> > > > George Buck refered to a letter which indicated that Elizabeth was
> > > > herself keen on the suit. The letter has nver been seen since. She
> > > > wrote Richard's friend the duke of Norfolk:
> > > > First she thanked him for his many courtesies and friendly offices
> > > > and she prayed him as before to be the mediator for her in the cause
> > > > of the marriage to the king, who as, she wrote her only joy and
> maker
> > > > in this world, and that she was his in heart and in thoughts, in
> body
> > > > and in all. And then she intimated that the better half of February
> > > > was past, and she feared the queen would never die. And all these be
> > > > her own words, written with her own hand, and this is the sum of her
> > > > letter, whereof, I have seen the autograph or original draft in her
> > > > own hand.
> > > > Source..Sir George Buck.
> > > >
> > > > The letter, Buck said, was kept by Norfolk's descendant, the earl of
> > > > Arundel: And he keepth that princely letter in his rich and
> > > > magnificent cabinet, among precious jewels and rare monuments.
> > > >
> > > > The above excerpt is from the book, royal ancedotes.
> > > >
> > > > later, i was searching for some info and found a calendar with
> events
> > > > significant to ric iii.
> > > > see
> > > > http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>
> > > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>
> > > <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html
> <http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/linksother/linkscalendar.html>>>
> > > >
> > > > what i noticed was interesting.
> > > >
> > > > first, this letter is supposed to have been written in february
> 1484.
> > > > then the calendar shows.
> > > > queen anne nee neville died march 16th.
> > > >
> > > > but, on march 22, richard sent emissaries to portugal to ask for the
> > > > hand of joanna.
> > > > this seems to be a very short mourning period, however, we know anne
> > > > had been sick for a few months and that future succession was in
> > > > jeopardy because richard's only heir had died the previous
> spring. so
> > > > as cold and callous as this seems, it was just good business
> sense to
> > > > get on with ruling the kingdom and ensuring the proper succession.
> > > > (moreover richard's great nephew h8 indicates that "fast engagments"
> > > > after the loss of queen were not too uncommon.)
> > > >
> > > > are there any records stating who advised richard on this potential
> > > > marriage, and what were the results of the offer?
> > > >
> > > > did the rulers of portugal consider the engagement? was it denied or
> > > > delayed? who did joanna marry or did she ever marry?
> > > >
> > > > given we know a portugeuse dignitary recorded that buckingham
> starved
> > > > the princes to death..are there more clues in the portuguese records
> > > > to unravel the true history of richard iii?
> > > >
> > > > finally, the calendar shows that richard denied any plans to marry
> > > > elizabeth of york on march 31, 1484.
> > > >
> > > > so what we have is in the space of just 16 days. richard loses his
> > > > wife, asks another woman to become his wife, and denies any
> > > > intentions towards eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > this leaves me to question why richard moved so fast on the marriage
> > > > intentions. was it done to counter the woodville faction, including
> > > > eliz of york.
> > > >
> > > > gossip and rumours were certainly flowing. while we are told richard
> > > > denied his "planned" marriage to e of y because his northern
> > > > supporters would rise against him, could it be more true to stifle
> > > > the wishful thinking of woodville's ambitious daughter and to assure
> > > > the portuguese that his intentions towards joanna were serious and
> > > > honourable.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to me, richard had hands very full with his woodville
> > > > relatives.
> > > >
> > > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his
> heritage, i'm
> > > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > > >
> > > > roslyn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo!
> Mail.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 08:21:55
As Richard himself was barred from Anne during her final illness, I
wonder how anyone else would have been able to get near, and why? As
the queen was clearly dying, why would anyone want to poison her?
The waters are dirty enough already surely without throwing more mud
into them.
Paul
On 7 Dec 2006, at 21:51, eileen wrote:
> --- In , "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
>> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
>> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
>> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>>
>> roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
> the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
wonder how anyone else would have been able to get near, and why? As
the queen was clearly dying, why would anyone want to poison her?
The waters are dirty enough already surely without throwing more mud
into them.
Paul
On 7 Dec 2006, at 21:51, eileen wrote:
> --- In , "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
>> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
>> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
>> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>>
>> roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
> the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-08 09:43:12
--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "fayreroze"
<fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage,
i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
Personally I incline to the view that she died from a wasting
disease. Of course it may be that she contracted an illness and then
the doctors inadvertently rendered it fatal with too many repeat
prescriptions of their new-fangled chemical medicines. I'm not
inclined to think the Woodvilles wanted a marriage to Richard.
Elizabeth Woodville's behaviour from Easter 1484 onwards suggests to
me she had discovered that Richard hadn't been responsible for
murdering her sons. If she had any thought that even one of them
might have survived, she would not be angling for a dynastic union
between Richard and her daughter any more than she would still be
keen for Elizabeth to marry Tudor. Apart from the question of what
would happen if a surviving son ever showed up, I suspect she still
didn't like Richard too much - remember he had had her brother and
son executed. It's just that she seems to have come to prefer Richard
over Tudor - perhaps because she had come to believe Tudor
responsible for her sons' deaths, perhaps because of his vow to marry
her daughter. I think EW would have favoured the Portuguese marriage
plans.
I'm not sure Paul is right, though, when he says Richard wasn't
allowed near Anne so it would have been even harder for anyone else.
What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been taken
to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was king.
But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
from 'consumption' (probably TB).
Marie
>
>
>
> >
>
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "fayreroze"
<fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage,
i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one
of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
Personally I incline to the view that she died from a wasting
disease. Of course it may be that she contracted an illness and then
the doctors inadvertently rendered it fatal with too many repeat
prescriptions of their new-fangled chemical medicines. I'm not
inclined to think the Woodvilles wanted a marriage to Richard.
Elizabeth Woodville's behaviour from Easter 1484 onwards suggests to
me she had discovered that Richard hadn't been responsible for
murdering her sons. If she had any thought that even one of them
might have survived, she would not be angling for a dynastic union
between Richard and her daughter any more than she would still be
keen for Elizabeth to marry Tudor. Apart from the question of what
would happen if a surviving son ever showed up, I suspect she still
didn't like Richard too much - remember he had had her brother and
son executed. It's just that she seems to have come to prefer Richard
over Tudor - perhaps because she had come to believe Tudor
responsible for her sons' deaths, perhaps because of his vow to marry
her daughter. I think EW would have favoured the Portuguese marriage
plans.
I'm not sure Paul is right, though, when he says Richard wasn't
allowed near Anne so it would have been even harder for anyone else.
What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been taken
to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was king.
But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
from 'consumption' (probably TB).
Marie
>
>
>
> >
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 13:46:33
>From: Bill Barber <bbarber@...>
>Sent: Dec 7, 2006 7:43 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
>
>I used the term 'Iberian' rather than 'Spanish' or 'Portuguese', since
>the latter entities were not fully formed until the end of the fifteenth
>century. Actually, many (e.g., the Catalonians) would argue that the
>entity known as 'Spain' is still a fiction.
>
===========================
Portugal was pretty much well-defined by this period; but over "Spain-ward", the definition was still in terms of the kingdoms of Aragon; Castile-Leon and Andalucia (Valencia had close ties to Aragon). The Catalans were already standing on their own giving Juan II of Aragon (Fernando's father) huge problems. Aragon had a significantly-different system of governing than Castile, observing Salic Law for example, which made things difficult for the Catholic Kings after the death of their only son, Juan. There is also the legend of the Aragonese Oath, which was true in spirit, even if the words never materialized as such until after the "Middle Ages", whereby the king was bound to agree to the following, administered by the Justice of Aragon: "We, who are as good as you, swear to you, who are no better than we, to accept you as our King, provided you observe all our liberties and laws; but if not, not."
It was fairly common, though, to refer to "the Spains".
Maria
elena@...
>Sent: Dec 7, 2006 7:43 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
>
>I used the term 'Iberian' rather than 'Spanish' or 'Portuguese', since
>the latter entities were not fully formed until the end of the fifteenth
>century. Actually, many (e.g., the Catalonians) would argue that the
>entity known as 'Spain' is still a fiction.
>
===========================
Portugal was pretty much well-defined by this period; but over "Spain-ward", the definition was still in terms of the kingdoms of Aragon; Castile-Leon and Andalucia (Valencia had close ties to Aragon). The Catalans were already standing on their own giving Juan II of Aragon (Fernando's father) huge problems. Aragon had a significantly-different system of governing than Castile, observing Salic Law for example, which made things difficult for the Catholic Kings after the death of their only son, Juan. There is also the legend of the Aragonese Oath, which was true in spirit, even if the words never materialized as such until after the "Middle Ages", whereby the king was bound to agree to the following, administered by the Justice of Aragon: "We, who are as good as you, swear to you, who are no better than we, to accept you as our King, provided you observe all our liberties and laws; but if not, not."
It was fairly common, though, to refer to "the Spains".
Maria
elena@...
Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-08 14:30:10
was anne poisoned by the one
> of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
This reminds me of a book I once read called "Secret History" by John
C Dening. The second part of the book, by RE Collins, deals with the
death of Edward IV and questions whether it was from natural causes -
or not.
Here is part of the review
"At such a distance in time nothing can be proved, but it is an
interesting possibility to consider that the symptoms described could
tally with those of arsenic poisoning. Collins then makes an excellent
analysis of who might have wished to dispose of the king if he were
indeed poisoned. Fascinating stuff."
> of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
This reminds me of a book I once read called "Secret History" by John
C Dening. The second part of the book, by RE Collins, deals with the
death of Edward IV and questions whether it was from natural causes -
or not.
Here is part of the review
"At such a distance in time nothing can be proved, but it is an
interesting possibility to consider that the symptoms described could
tally with those of arsenic poisoning. Collins then makes an excellent
analysis of who might have wished to dispose of the king if he were
indeed poisoned. Fascinating stuff."
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 16:21:46
not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the cause of anne's death.
astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often treated according to the humours of their body.
http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html
this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of "ancient" wisdom.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/
a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/
roslyn
eileen <ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
--- In , "fayreroze" <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
> >
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the royal doctors at that
time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
eileen
>
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often treated according to the humours of their body.
http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html
this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of "ancient" wisdom.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/
a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/
roslyn
eileen <ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
--- In , "fayreroze" <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
> >
> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>
> roslyn
now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the royal doctors at that
time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
eileen
>
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 16:53:58
i think by exploring the possibility that anne was poisoned vs out and out denial may lead to some clear answers. i honestly think eliz of york has been given a free ride of the good and virtuous woman by the tudor propagandists.
it all helped paint a darker picture of richard. amazing everyone else was good, and richard was so evil. he has been blamed for the death of his brother, the killing of a king, the king's son, his nephews, and on and on.
we know buckingham was involved with geo's demise, we know buckingham was involved with the disappearance of the princes. we know e4 was offically responsible for all of the deaths except his sons...but richard wears the blame.
when one looks back at the "undoctored and scare available" records, it appears richard was a good and honourable man living in a time of deceitful alliances.
ask any archealogist and you'll learn, the bottom line is sometimes you gotta stir up the mud or wade through the dust and/or garbage dumps to get to the "really big" prize hidden below.
roslyn
Paul Trevor Bale <paultrevor@...> wrote:
As Richard himself was barred from Anne during her final illness, I
wonder how anyone else would have been able to get near, and why? As
the queen was clearly dying, why would anyone want to poison her?
The waters are dirty enough already surely without throwing more mud
into them.
Paul
On 7 Dec 2006, at 21:51, eileen wrote:
> --- In , "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
>> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
>> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
>> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>>
>> roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
> the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
---------------------------------
Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with Voice
it all helped paint a darker picture of richard. amazing everyone else was good, and richard was so evil. he has been blamed for the death of his brother, the killing of a king, the king's son, his nephews, and on and on.
we know buckingham was involved with geo's demise, we know buckingham was involved with the disappearance of the princes. we know e4 was offically responsible for all of the deaths except his sons...but richard wears the blame.
when one looks back at the "undoctored and scare available" records, it appears richard was a good and honourable man living in a time of deceitful alliances.
ask any archealogist and you'll learn, the bottom line is sometimes you gotta stir up the mud or wade through the dust and/or garbage dumps to get to the "really big" prize hidden below.
roslyn
Paul Trevor Bale <paultrevor@...> wrote:
As Richard himself was barred from Anne during her final illness, I
wonder how anyone else would have been able to get near, and why? As
the queen was clearly dying, why would anyone want to poison her?
The waters are dirty enough already surely without throwing more mud
into them.
Paul
On 7 Dec 2006, at 21:51, eileen wrote:
> --- In , "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@...> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
>> even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
>> anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
>> the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
>>
>> roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
> the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
---------------------------------
Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with Voice
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 17:20:11
The following link is some tangential, but it does tie the present
discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
France and (presumably) beyond.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> cause of anne's death.
>
> astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> treated according to the humours of their body.
> http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>
>
> this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> "ancient" wisdom.
> http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>
> a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
>
> this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>
>
> roslyn
>
> eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> <mailto:ebatesparrot%40yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
> --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
> >
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ---
> Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
>
>
>
>
discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
France and (presumably) beyond.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755
fayre rose wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> cause of anne's death.
>
> astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> treated according to the humours of their body.
> http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>
>
> this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> "ancient" wisdom.
> http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>
> a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
>
> this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>
>
> roslyn
>
> eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> <mailto:ebatesparrot%40yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
> --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, "fayreroze"
> <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > >
> > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> >
> > roslyn
>
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
>
> eileen
>
> >
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ---
> Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
>
>
>
>
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 17:20:45
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis
as to the cause of anne's death.
Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no clear
diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier version
had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
other than hearsay.
Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
not. But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St John's
as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other people,
showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came in
his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy as
man might be."
Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You might
think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
restoration of her estates. And Crowland doesn't even mention the
poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
friendly old Yorkshire?
Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
this quite clearly.
If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
didn't suspect poison.
Marie
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis
as to the cause of anne's death.
Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no clear
diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier version
had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
other than hearsay.
Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
not. But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St John's
as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other people,
showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came in
his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy as
man might be."
Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You might
think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
restoration of her estates. And Crowland doesn't even mention the
poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
friendly old Yorkshire?
Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
this quite clearly.
If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
didn't suspect poison.
Marie
Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-08 18:38:46
--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
Not really. The doctors of the time essentially treated symptoms
and had very little concept of the diseases causing the symptoms.
Similar sets of symptoms received similar treatment, and diseases
which caused different sets of symptoms as they progressed were
regarded as separate ailments, not as syndromes of a single
disease. Heart failure can cause swelling of the legs and feet; so
can kidney failure and several other diseases, but the Medieval
doctors, having no way to know the basis cause, called it dropsy and
had one -- not particularly effective -- way to treat it.
A young adult who suffered from weight loss, pallor and increasing
weakness and shortness of breath, with coughing and eventual
collapse, could have had a lung disease or could have had a
decompensating congenital heart defect, and the doctors could not
have told known the difference...the outcome was usually the same in
any event.
On the other hand, any sudden death, especially one with dramatic
symptoms, was likely to be ascribed to poison. There are stories
that John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, who died in his early thirties
after evidently having been quite healthy, was poisoned. But his
sudden fatal symptoms could just as easily have been due to a
ruptured stomach ulcer or appendicitis. One of the Medici brides
died abruptly at age 16 with severe abdominal symptoms. There was a
lot of poisoning intrigue swirling around that dynasty, but she was
in the early weeks of a difficult pregnancy and could well have died
of the rupture of an ectopic conception.
Katy
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
> now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt
the royal doctors at that
> time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
Not really. The doctors of the time essentially treated symptoms
and had very little concept of the diseases causing the symptoms.
Similar sets of symptoms received similar treatment, and diseases
which caused different sets of symptoms as they progressed were
regarded as separate ailments, not as syndromes of a single
disease. Heart failure can cause swelling of the legs and feet; so
can kidney failure and several other diseases, but the Medieval
doctors, having no way to know the basis cause, called it dropsy and
had one -- not particularly effective -- way to treat it.
A young adult who suffered from weight loss, pallor and increasing
weakness and shortness of breath, with coughing and eventual
collapse, could have had a lung disease or could have had a
decompensating congenital heart defect, and the doctors could not
have told known the difference...the outcome was usually the same in
any event.
On the other hand, any sudden death, especially one with dramatic
symptoms, was likely to be ascribed to poison. There are stories
that John Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, who died in his early thirties
after evidently having been quite healthy, was poisoned. But his
sudden fatal symptoms could just as easily have been due to a
ruptured stomach ulcer or appendicitis. One of the Medici brides
died abruptly at age 16 with severe abdominal symptoms. There was a
lot of poisoning intrigue swirling around that dynasty, but she was
in the early weeks of a difficult pregnancy and could well have died
of the rupture of an ectopic conception.
Katy
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 19:19:22
On 8 Dec 2006, at 09:43, mariewalsh2003 wrote:
> I'm not sure Paul is right, though, when he says Richard wasn't
> allowed near Anne so it would have been even harder for anyone else.
> What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
> Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been taken
> to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was king.
> But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
> from 'consumption' (probably TB).
>
> Marie
Good to know we can all rely on Marie to tell us what Crowland meant.
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
> I'm not sure Paul is right, though, when he says Richard wasn't
> allowed near Anne so it would have been even harder for anyone else.
> What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
> Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been taken
> to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was king.
> But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
> from 'consumption' (probably TB).
>
> Marie
Good to know we can all rely on Marie to tell us what Crowland meant.
"Richard Liveth Yet!"
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 19:47:11
Here's something for you, Rosyln. I just typed 'arsenic, tuberculosis'
into Google, and learned that arsenic was once believed to be a curative
for consumption. Actually, arsenic was believed to be a curative for
pretty much everything. Maybe the poor woman was consumptive; therefore,
she was treated with arsenic. I'm only half-smiling. I bet stuff like
this happened often.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> The following link is some tangential, but it does tie the present
> discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
> Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
> poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
> France and (presumably) beyond.
> http://www.bbc. co.uk/dna/ h2g2/A4350755
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> > didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> > were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> > reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> > cause of anne's death.
> >
> > astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> > treated according to the humours of their body.
> > http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> > <http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>>
> >
> > this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> > "ancient" wisdom.
> > http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> > <http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>>
> > a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> > mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
> >
> > this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> > also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> > http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusm
> aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>>
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> > <mailto:ebatesparro t%40yahoo. co.uk>> wrote:
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, "fayreroze"
> > <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> >
> > now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> > royal doctors at that
> > time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
> >
> > eileen
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
into Google, and learned that arsenic was once believed to be a curative
for consumption. Actually, arsenic was believed to be a curative for
pretty much everything. Maybe the poor woman was consumptive; therefore,
she was treated with arsenic. I'm only half-smiling. I bet stuff like
this happened often.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> The following link is some tangential, but it does tie the present
> discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
> Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
> poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
> France and (presumably) beyond.
> http://www.bbc. co.uk/dna/ h2g2/A4350755
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> > didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> > were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> > reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> > cause of anne's death.
> >
> > astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> > treated according to the humours of their body.
> > http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> > <http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>>
> >
> > this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> > "ancient" wisdom.
> > http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> > <http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>>
> > a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> > mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
> >
> > this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> > also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> > http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusm
> aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>>
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> > <mailto:ebatesparro t%40yahoo. co.uk>> wrote:
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, "fayreroze"
> > <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> >
> > now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> > royal doctors at that
> > time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
> >
> > eileen
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 20:05:35
it is believed arsenic was used to prolongue e6's life until he signed his will.
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
Here's something for you, Rosyln. I just typed 'arsenic, tuberculosis'
into Google, and learned that arsenic was once believed to be a curative
for consumption. Actually, arsenic was believed to be a curative for
pretty much everything. Maybe the poor woman was consumptive; therefore,
she was treated with arsenic. I'm only half-smiling. I bet stuff like
this happened often.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> The following link is some tangential, but it does tie the present
> discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
> Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
> poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
> France and (presumably) beyond.
> http://www.bbc. co.uk/dna/ h2g2/A4350755
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> > didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> > were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> > reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> > cause of anne's death.
> >
> > astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> > treated according to the humours of their body.
> > http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> > <http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>>
> >
> > this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> > "ancient" wisdom.
> > http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> > <http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>>
> > a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> > mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
> >
> > this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> > also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> > http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusm
> aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>>
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> > <mailto:ebatesparro t%40yahoo. co.uk>> wrote:
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, "fayreroze"
> > <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> >
> > now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> > royal doctors at that
> > time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
> >
> > eileen
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers.
roslyn
Bill Barber <bbarber@...> wrote:
Here's something for you, Rosyln. I just typed 'arsenic, tuberculosis'
into Google, and learned that arsenic was once believed to be a curative
for consumption. Actually, arsenic was believed to be a curative for
pretty much everything. Maybe the poor woman was consumptive; therefore,
she was treated with arsenic. I'm only half-smiling. I bet stuff like
this happened often.
Bill Barber wrote:
>
> The following link is some tangential, but it does tie the present
> discussion in with the discussion about Jaquetta, Duchess of Bedford.
> Note that the article speaks of the increasing fashionableness of
> poisoning in the fifteenth century as the practice moved from Italy to
> France and (presumably) beyond.
> http://www.bbc. co.uk/dna/ h2g2/A4350755
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A4350755>
>
> fayre rose wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the era
> > didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember too..there
> > were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me, stands to
> > reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis as to the
> > cause of anne's death.
> >
> > astrology was also used to diagnosis and heal. patients were often
> > treated according to the humours of their body.
> > http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> > <http://www.astrolog ycom.com/ humours.html
> <http://www.astrologycom.com/humours.html>>
> >
> > this on line book was written in 1801, but is a compilation of
> > "ancient" wisdom.
> > http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> > <http://www.sacred- texts.com/ grim/magus/
> <http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/>>
> > a skip through it will help give you an understanding of the medieval
> > mindset regarding health, and lifestyle.
> >
> > this book, first published in 1484 known as the witch's hammer will
> > also introduce you in to "how" you could tell/spot a witch, etc.
> > http://www.malleusm aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusm
> aleficarum. org/ <http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/>>
> >
> > roslyn
> >
> > eileen <ebatesparrot@ yahoo.co. uk
> > <mailto:ebatesparro t%40yahoo. co.uk>> wrote:
> > --- In richardiiisocietyfo rum@yahoogroups. com
> > <mailto:richardiiis ocietyforum% 40yahoogroups. com>, "fayreroze"
> > <fayreroze@. ..> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > >
> > > also, with the recent post on anthony woodville and his heritage, i'm
> > > even wondering more and more if e of y had something to do with
> > > anne's illness and assured demise. was anne poisoned by the one of
> > > the woodvilles is the question that comes to mind?
> > >
> > > roslyn
> >
> > now this is all interesting stuff - im wondering though - wouldnt the
> > royal doctors at that
> > time have been able to spot if someone was dying from poisoning?
> >
> > eileen
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- ---
> > Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email
> > the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-08 20:06:18
comments intersperced..see below.
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis
as to the cause of anne's death.
Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no clear
diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier version
had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
other than hearsay.
=============
who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
================
Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
not.
as i stated, i do not think richard poisoned anne, or even had her poisoned. i think it was the woodville faction.
==================
But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St John's
as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other people,
showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came in
his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy as
man might be."
====================
not fully knowing the relationship richard had with anne, which i'd like to assume was close, if not in the sense of a loving husband, then that of close relative somewhat like a brother or near cousin. richard was raised with anne. she had been part of his life for a long time. they had lost a son together, they had a personal history...the loss of such a person is definitely going to bring about sorrow.
what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6 days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days after anne's death.
most certainly richard had to do say something. especially if the rumour mill was going full tilt..and if twisted rumours were somehow combining the proposal to the portuguese princess with the english princess. i.e. richard has proposed to the king's eldest daughter, heir to his throne..but left out the country this princess was from...truths bolstered with lies of omission.
===============
Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You might
think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
restoration of her estates.
=================
again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera meetings.
and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn disbursed them to favoured others.
=======================
And Crowland doesn't even mention the
poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
i think of modern events. i can't remember the name of the fellow. he was running for president of one of the slavic nations. he believes he was poisoned, and so did his doctors, and if i correctly recall, they couldn't exactly determine the cause of his illness..only that he went from a relatively good looking healthy man to a horridly pox marked older man.
and then we have the most recent of the fellow who was poisoned with radiation. look at his before and after photos. in the medieval era, such a poisoning could be considered some sort of unknown, contagious illness.
and yes, i know they didn't have nuclear reactors..but they did have heavy metals..i.e. mercury.
so..richard spurning anne's company may have been done to protect his health vs any other reason. some h6's alchemists were wandering and mixing in with e4's court, and i'd also assume r3's and h7's.
====================
Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
ah..yes eleanor cobham, a former attendant to jacquetta. caught making and melting awax effigy of h6, using astrology to determine if her husband humphrey, uncle to the king would inherit the throne...and cobham was forced to walk the streets of london and jailed, just as jane shore did a few decades later.
witchcraft and poisonings were part of the lifestyle, as much as we would scoff at it.
they were tools used to gain political control..so yes, they appear "historically" as politics..simply because they were political..even as far back as the roman emporers who used poisonings and hexes to rid them of their enemies.
================
Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
friendly old Yorkshire?
========
again, i don't think or believe richard poisoned anne, or had any knowledge of it. i think e of york and her faction did it. the family history is there to support this supicion.
===========
Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
this quite clearly.
also if you look at the height of summer, you'll find increased deaths from heat and dehydration, only they didn't particularily call it that, back then.
i also know that tb/consumption is often the "modern" diagnosis for these politically unexpected deaths.
personally i think sometimes it was poisoning and not always intended, just mixed concoctions to "heal" actually hastened the death of the individual.
e6's life was even prolongued by chemicals until he signed his will leaving the crown to lady jane grey.
===================
If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
didn't suspect poison.
marie posted...
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc.,
end excerpt
the important part, is...
"to the very great displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by the consent and will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might then marry... Lady Elizabeth.... "
this is what richard is denying via his showing displeasure was:
that he had nothing to do with causing anne's death...it WAS NOT his consent or will that caused the death by poisoning.
it does not clearly deny nor confirm how anne died..
just simply richard states he DID NOT consent to anne's demise, nor did HE do it by poisoning...and that he DID NOT want her dead so he could marry e of york.
therefore, it is still possible anne's death was caused by poisoning, but not by richard.
roslyn
Marie
---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear diagnosis
as to the cause of anne's death.
Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no clear
diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier version
had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
other than hearsay.
=============
who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
================
Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
not.
as i stated, i do not think richard poisoned anne, or even had her poisoned. i think it was the woodville faction.
==================
But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St John's
as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other people,
showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came in
his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy as
man might be."
====================
not fully knowing the relationship richard had with anne, which i'd like to assume was close, if not in the sense of a loving husband, then that of close relative somewhat like a brother or near cousin. richard was raised with anne. she had been part of his life for a long time. they had lost a son together, they had a personal history...the loss of such a person is definitely going to bring about sorrow.
what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6 days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days after anne's death.
most certainly richard had to do say something. especially if the rumour mill was going full tilt..and if twisted rumours were somehow combining the proposal to the portuguese princess with the english princess. i.e. richard has proposed to the king's eldest daughter, heir to his throne..but left out the country this princess was from...truths bolstered with lies of omission.
===============
Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You might
think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
restoration of her estates.
=================
again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera meetings.
and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn disbursed them to favoured others.
=======================
And Crowland doesn't even mention the
poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
i think of modern events. i can't remember the name of the fellow. he was running for president of one of the slavic nations. he believes he was poisoned, and so did his doctors, and if i correctly recall, they couldn't exactly determine the cause of his illness..only that he went from a relatively good looking healthy man to a horridly pox marked older man.
and then we have the most recent of the fellow who was poisoned with radiation. look at his before and after photos. in the medieval era, such a poisoning could be considered some sort of unknown, contagious illness.
and yes, i know they didn't have nuclear reactors..but they did have heavy metals..i.e. mercury.
so..richard spurning anne's company may have been done to protect his health vs any other reason. some h6's alchemists were wandering and mixing in with e4's court, and i'd also assume r3's and h7's.
====================
Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
ah..yes eleanor cobham, a former attendant to jacquetta. caught making and melting awax effigy of h6, using astrology to determine if her husband humphrey, uncle to the king would inherit the throne...and cobham was forced to walk the streets of london and jailed, just as jane shore did a few decades later.
witchcraft and poisonings were part of the lifestyle, as much as we would scoff at it.
they were tools used to gain political control..so yes, they appear "historically" as politics..simply because they were political..even as far back as the roman emporers who used poisonings and hexes to rid them of their enemies.
================
Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
friendly old Yorkshire?
========
again, i don't think or believe richard poisoned anne, or had any knowledge of it. i think e of york and her faction did it. the family history is there to support this supicion.
===========
Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
this quite clearly.
also if you look at the height of summer, you'll find increased deaths from heat and dehydration, only they didn't particularily call it that, back then.
i also know that tb/consumption is often the "modern" diagnosis for these politically unexpected deaths.
personally i think sometimes it was poisoning and not always intended, just mixed concoctions to "heal" actually hastened the death of the individual.
e6's life was even prolongued by chemicals until he signed his will leaving the crown to lady jane grey.
===================
If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
didn't suspect poison.
marie posted...
Mercers' company recorded:
"Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the people
by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc.,
end excerpt
the important part, is...
"to the very great displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by the consent and will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might then marry... Lady Elizabeth.... "
this is what richard is denying via his showing displeasure was:
that he had nothing to do with causing anne's death...it WAS NOT his consent or will that caused the death by poisoning.
it does not clearly deny nor confirm how anne died..
just simply richard states he DID NOT consent to anne's demise, nor did HE do it by poisoning...and that he DID NOT want her dead so he could marry e of york.
therefore, it is still possible anne's death was caused by poisoning, but not by richard.
roslyn
Marie
---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 21:25:47
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..see below.
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
> stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
diagnosis
> as to the cause of anne's death.
>
> Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
clear
> diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
> obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
> begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
version
> had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
> was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
> be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> other than hearsay.
> =============
> who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time
with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner
circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to
believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try
to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable. It
made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure Anne's
death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly persuading
richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville thought
her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years for
the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had had
intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
I don't see that these rumours needed to be emanating from the
palace. The last part of Richard's speech was a command for anyone
found repeating these tales to be arrested and imprisoned until he
told the name of the person he had heard it from. Had Richatd
suspected a palace source he would have been directing his energies
towards an internal enquiry. Anyone in London who wanted such rumours
spread could have started it - the usual 'urban legend' syndrome. My
own money is on Tudor's camp.
> ================
>
> Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
> not.
> as i stated, i do not think richard poisoned anne, or even had
her poisoned. i think it was the woodville faction.
> ==================
> But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
> of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
> Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
> Mercers' company recorded:
> "Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the
people
> by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
> displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
> will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
> then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
> brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
> the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St
John's
> as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
> there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other
people,
> showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came
in
> his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
> glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy
as
> man might be."
> ====================
> not fully knowing the relationship richard had with anne, which
i'd like to assume was close, if not in the sense of a loving
husband, then that of close relative somewhat like a brother or near
cousin. richard was raised with anne. she had been part of his life
for a long time. they had lost a son together, they had a personal
history...the loss of such a person is definitely going to bring
about sorrow.
> what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6
days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death
or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days
after anne's death.
What we don't know is whether Brampton went over planning to discuss
this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some while,
since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time of
Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until he
had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only marriage
originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite sure
that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face the
need for remarriage. Diplomatic matches were not made overnight, and
for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem shocking. I
tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
acting on auto-pilot.
> most certainly richard had to do say something. especially if the
rumour mill was going full tilt..and if twisted rumours were somehow
combining the proposal to the portuguese princess with the english
princess. i.e. richard has proposed to the king's eldest daughter,
heir to his throne..but left out the country this princess was
from...truths bolstered with lies of omission.
> ===============
>
> Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You
might
> think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
> might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
> when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
> restoration of her estates.
> =================
> again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's
wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if
any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera
meetings.
> and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her
estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn
disbursed them to favoured others.
Well, it's probably not quite as simple as that. Perhaps we can pick
this up offline.
Marie
PS. Paul, sorry if I offended you. No offence intended.
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..see below.
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
> stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
diagnosis
> as to the cause of anne's death.
>
> Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
clear
> diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
> obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
> begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
version
> had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
> was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
> be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> other than hearsay.
> =============
> who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time
with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner
circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to
believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try
to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable. It
made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure Anne's
death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly persuading
richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville thought
her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years for
the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had had
intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
I don't see that these rumours needed to be emanating from the
palace. The last part of Richard's speech was a command for anyone
found repeating these tales to be arrested and imprisoned until he
told the name of the person he had heard it from. Had Richatd
suspected a palace source he would have been directing his energies
towards an internal enquiry. Anyone in London who wanted such rumours
spread could have started it - the usual 'urban legend' syndrome. My
own money is on Tudor's camp.
> ================
>
> Really there is no way of proving whether Richard poisoned Anne or
> not.
> as i stated, i do not think richard poisoned anne, or even had
her poisoned. i think it was the woodville faction.
> ==================
> But he was sufficiently upset about the rumours, and confident
> of tthe credibility of his denials, to have hired the hall of the
> Knights of St John (the biggest hall in London). This is what the
> Mercers' company recorded:
> "Where, by long saying and much simple communication among the
people
> by evil disposed persons contrived and sown to the very great
> displeasure of the King, showing how that the Queen, by consent and
> will of the King, was poisoned for and to the intent that he might
> then marry and have to wife Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his
> brother, late king of England deceased, whom God pardon, etc., for
> the which and other the King sent for and had tofor him and St
John's
> as yesterday the Mayor and Aldermen, whereas he, in the Great Hall
> there in the presence of many of his lords and of much other
people,
> showed his grief and displeasure aforesaid and said it never came
in
> his thought or mind to marry in such manner wise, nor willing nor
> glad of the death of his queen, but as sorry and in heart as heavy
as
> man might be."
> ====================
> not fully knowing the relationship richard had with anne, which
i'd like to assume was close, if not in the sense of a loving
husband, then that of close relative somewhat like a brother or near
cousin. richard was raised with anne. she had been part of his life
for a long time. they had lost a son together, they had a personal
history...the loss of such a person is definitely going to bring
about sorrow.
> what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6
days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death
or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days
after anne's death.
What we don't know is whether Brampton went over planning to discuss
this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some while,
since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time of
Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until he
had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only marriage
originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite sure
that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face the
need for remarriage. Diplomatic matches were not made overnight, and
for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem shocking. I
tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
acting on auto-pilot.
> most certainly richard had to do say something. especially if the
rumour mill was going full tilt..and if twisted rumours were somehow
combining the proposal to the portuguese princess with the english
princess. i.e. richard has proposed to the king's eldest daughter,
heir to his throne..but left out the country this princess was
from...truths bolstered with lies of omission.
> ===============
>
> Had Anne been poisoned, Richard must have had accomplices. You
might
> think, if she suspected anything of the sort, that Anne's mother
> might have added a demand for these people to be brought to justice
> when she stridently petitioned Henry's VII's parliament for the
> restoration of her estates.
> =================
> again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's
wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if
any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera
meetings.
> and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her
estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn
disbursed them to favoured others.
Well, it's probably not quite as simple as that. Perhaps we can pick
this up offline.
Marie
PS. Paul, sorry if I offended you. No offence intended.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 23:20:27
--- In , "mariewalsh2003" <marie@...> wrote:
>>>
> > And Crowland doesn't even mention the
> poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
> hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
> was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
Ah now - did he spurn her chamber or her bed? It is fully understandable if someone is
sick, especially over a longish period of time the spouse would not be able to sleep with
them. Anyone who has dealt with someone being very ill knows you cannot share a bed
with them even if you wanted to. Especially if they have a contageous disease. If it was TB
there is the awful coughing/sweating. I should have thought Anne herself would not
wanted to have shared a bed with anyone being as ill as she was. Come to think of it it is
ridiculous for Crowland to make an issue about it. I think Crowland was just being
mischievous & as always trying to paint Richard in an unfair light.
Eileen
>
> Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
> be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
> been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
> attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
> sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
> their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
> bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
> Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
> decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
> sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
>
> Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
> to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
> Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
> barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
> particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
> Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
> occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
> one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
> not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
> friendly old Yorkshire?
> Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
> winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
> this quite clearly.
>
> If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
> case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
> didn't suspect poison.
>
>
> Marie
>
>>>
> > And Crowland doesn't even mention the
> poison rumour; he only mentions that Richard was believed to have
> hastened (not caused) Anne's death by spuring her chamber. So poison
> was not the only version of the story out there - just the worst.
Ah now - did he spurn her chamber or her bed? It is fully understandable if someone is
sick, especially over a longish period of time the spouse would not be able to sleep with
them. Anyone who has dealt with someone being very ill knows you cannot share a bed
with them even if you wanted to. Especially if they have a contageous disease. If it was TB
there is the awful coughing/sweating. I should have thought Anne herself would not
wanted to have shared a bed with anyone being as ill as she was. Come to think of it it is
ridiculous for Crowland to make an issue about it. I think Crowland was just being
mischievous & as always trying to paint Richard in an unfair light.
Eileen
>
> Remember, rumours and beliefs that important people had been/ might
> be poisoned were endemic in the culture. Clarence believed Isabel had
> been poisoned and went so far as to hang one of her female
> attendants. Louis XI was paranoid about assassination attempts of all
> sorts, poison included. Anytime someone important died untimely and
> their death appeared to be in someone else's interests, the poisoning
> bogeyman reared his head. If it wasn't poison, it was witchcraft.
> Henry VI's ministers, looking for scapegoats to blame for his mental
> decline in the 1440s, for instance, hit on Eleanor Cobham. And I'm
> sure other people can think of more cases of the same sort.
>
> Of course, sometimes people WERE poisoned, that was the trouble. How
> to know who had and who hadn't been? But if I were a villainous
> Richard III, my only legitimate child had died and my wife was
> barren, I wouldn't wait 8 months to start poisoning her, and I
> particularly wouldn't choose to do it while we were in the capital.
> Why not get on with the job straight away, have her last illness
> occur far from prying eyes and amongst a population which was on
> one's side and not inclined to be suspicious? Why, in other words,
> not have the whole thing sorted the previous summer at Scarborough in
> friendly old Yorkshire?
> Most natural deaths in former days, however, took place during the
> winter months - study any register of wills or burials and you'll see
> this quite clearly.
>
> If richard had a motive to poison her, so did his enemies, just in
> case she might conceive again. But Richard's speech suggests he
> didn't suspect poison.
>
>
> Marie
>
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-08 23:52:52
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale
<paultrevor@...> wrote:
What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
> > Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been
taken
> > to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was
king.
> > But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
> > from 'consumption' (probably TB).
> >
> > Marie
>
> Good to know we can all rely on Marie to tell us what Crowland meant.
Hmmm. On my screen the words "What I think Crowland meant..." appear.
Doesn't sound to me as if Marie was saying that she *knew* what he
meant.
The purpose of this forum, after all, is the exchange of ideas and the
presentation of different points of view, in a civil and respectful
manner, is it not?
Katy
<paultrevor@...> wrote:
What I think Crowland meant is that Richard had stopped sleeping with
> > Anne on the advice of his doctors. More trouble would have been
taken
> > to protect Richard from contagion than anyone else since he was
king.
> > But still I think it's more likely that Anne died, as Buck claims,
> > from 'consumption' (probably TB).
> >
> > Marie
>
> Good to know we can all rely on Marie to tell us what Crowland meant.
Hmmm. On my screen the words "What I think Crowland meant..." appear.
Doesn't sound to me as if Marie was saying that she *knew* what he
meant.
The purpose of this forum, after all, is the exchange of ideas and the
presentation of different points of view, in a civil and respectful
manner, is it not?
Katy
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 00:08:16
--- In , "mariewalsh2003"
<marie@...> wrote:
> Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
>
> We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
> I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
It
> made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
> And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure
Anne's
> death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly
persuading
> richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville
thought
> her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
> have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years
for
> the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
> Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had
had
> intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
marriage, which would require a dispensation.
Katy
<marie@...> wrote:
> Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
>
> We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
> I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
It
> made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
> And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure
Anne's
> death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly
persuading
> richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville
thought
> her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
> have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years
for
> the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
> Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had
had
> intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
marriage, which would require a dispensation.
Katy
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 02:40:25
--- In , "mariewalsh2003"
<marie@...> wrote:
[fayrerose said] what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage
negotiations 6
> days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her
death
> or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16
days
> after anne's death.
>
]Marie said] What we don't know is whether Brampton went over
planning to discuss
> this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some
while,
> since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
> broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time
of
> Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until
he
> had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only
marriage
> originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite
sure
> that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face
the
> need for remarriage. Diplomatic matches were not made overnight,
and
> for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
> This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
> was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
> fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem
shocking. I
> tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
> acting on auto-pilot.
It must have been evident for years that Anne was not going to
produce any more children, and with his only son dead and Anne
clearly dying, I don't think Richard had any time to lose in
acquiring another queen who could give him an heir. Even if he was
too grief-stricken personally to think of this, I don't imagine his
advisers and supporters were.
There was the example of history: Richard II had no children by his
Anne, and when she died, he married a child too young for marital
relations -- he had no heir and would not for years, if ever. His
cousin Bolingbroke had been siring children since he was 14, and he
had six or seven of them including four healthy sons. I believe
that that made Bolingbroke a better prospect for a smooth succession
of the crown, and that helped him usurp the throne from the
rightful king.
Having a healthy wife and the potential for heirs might have made a
difference in where the loyalties fell, come Tudor's invasion.
Katy
<marie@...> wrote:
[fayrerose said] what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage
negotiations 6
> days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her
death
> or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16
days
> after anne's death.
>
]Marie said] What we don't know is whether Brampton went over
planning to discuss
> this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some
while,
> since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
> broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time
of
> Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until
he
> had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only
marriage
> originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite
sure
> that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face
the
> need for remarriage. Diplomatic matches were not made overnight,
and
> for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
> This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
> was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
> fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem
shocking. I
> tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
> acting on auto-pilot.
It must have been evident for years that Anne was not going to
produce any more children, and with his only son dead and Anne
clearly dying, I don't think Richard had any time to lose in
acquiring another queen who could give him an heir. Even if he was
too grief-stricken personally to think of this, I don't imagine his
advisers and supporters were.
There was the example of history: Richard II had no children by his
Anne, and when she died, he married a child too young for marital
relations -- he had no heir and would not for years, if ever. His
cousin Bolingbroke had been siring children since he was 14, and he
had six or seven of them including four healthy sons. I believe
that that made Bolingbroke a better prospect for a smooth succession
of the crown, and that helped him usurp the throne from the
rightful king.
Having a healthy wife and the potential for heirs might have made a
difference in where the loyalties fell, come Tudor's invasion.
Katy
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 03:20:36
comments intersperced..and brevity snips were appropriate. see below
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..see below.
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
> stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
diagnosis
> as to the cause of anne's death.
>
> Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
clear
> diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
> obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
> begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
version
> had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
> was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
> be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> other than hearsay.
> =============
> who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time
with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner
circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to
believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try
to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
===========
i think one needs to hold very near and dear the thought that the woodvilles were very ambitious. it was not unheard of close relatives marrying. papal dispensations could be *bought*.
====================
It
made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
how do we know woodville held hope that her sons still lived? we have richard declaring his innocency before the world in jan 1484. we have the portuguese diplomat, a secretary or something to alphonso v, writing that buckingham starved the boys to death. alphonso was joana's father.
===============
And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure Anne's
death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly persuading
richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville thought
her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
have to get the necessary papal dispensations.
yes, persauding richard to marry elizabeth was a big hurdle.
i'm left wondering if richard's intent to marry joana was sincere. or was it a ploy to back the woodville faction off of him. i.e. "sorry lady..can't marry your daughter, i'm already engaged, but i have wrought an excellent match for your child."
It took some years for
the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had had
intercourse with Arthur.
also..you need to factor in who was the pope then. h8's dad h7 had gone against a papal bull when he sent john and sabastian cabot to explore and claim england's piece of the new world.
Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
such dispensations were not unheard of..and again..how much you paid could gain you lots of favour.
===================
I don't see that these rumours needed to be emanating from the
palace. The last part of Richard's speech was a command for anyone
found repeating these tales to be arrested and imprisoned until he
told the name of the person he had heard it from. Had Richatd
suspected a palace source he would have been directing his energies
towards an internal enquiry. Anyone in London who wanted such rumours
spread could have started it - the usual 'urban legend' syndrome. My
own money is on Tudor's camp.
i've no doubt the beaufort/tudor connection played a role, just as the woodville faction played a role. these people buttered their bread on both sides.
==================
brevity snip...
> what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6
days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death
or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days
after anne's death.
What we don't know is whether Brampton went over planning to discuss
this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some while,
since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time of
Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until he
had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only marriage
originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite sure
that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face the
need for remarriage.
what we don't know is..how long had richard been planning to remarry. eliz's letter in february lets us know anne is very ill. the portuguese mission could have been well into the works beginning once it was known anne was apparently terminal. it was a matter of waiting until anne passed before signing the final approval to begin negotiations. it would have looked very bad on richard's behalf, if he had asked for joana's hand before anne died. they needed to wait for the final outcome..good or bad. to begin the contracts.
Diplomatic matches were not made overnight, and
for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem shocking. I
tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
acting on auto-pilot.
also..i think we need look at the facts.
a) joana did not want to marry. she wanted to be a nun.
b) the youngest son of peerage sons were often groomed for the church.
so..was richard actually looking to produce the heir and spare, or was he looking for a wife who held deep spiritual values. perhaps their marriage would have been one of convenience vs an actual marriage.
as i said, i read somewhere richard planned to hold the throne for e4's boys until they were in their twenties.
a marriage to joanna would have been politically astute. it blocked any other male with a claim to the throne from making a union. and the marriage would have been more of a place holder than one with intent to produce children. richard and joana could have both lived their lives in "relative" peace and prayer.
although, richard's mother cecily was 40 when she had her last child. and woodville was at or nearing 40+ when she had her last child. so, either way richard if he had survived and married joanna he would have had the bases covered.
===============================brevity snip
> again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's
wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if
any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera
meetings.
> and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her
estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn
disbursed them to favoured others.
Well, it's probably not quite as simple as that. Perhaps we can pick
this up offline.
=====
only if we do it in the new year. "tis the season" is rapidly crashing down on me.
roslyn
Marie
PS. Paul, sorry if I offended you. No offence intended.
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..see below.
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to me,
> stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
diagnosis
> as to the cause of anne's death.
>
> Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
clear
> diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for very
> obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours had
> begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
version
> had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear she
> was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would inevitably
> be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> other than hearsay.
> =============
> who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own time
with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the inner
circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want to
believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still try
to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
===========
i think one needs to hold very near and dear the thought that the woodvilles were very ambitious. it was not unheard of close relatives marrying. papal dispensations could be *bought*.
====================
It
made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
how do we know woodville held hope that her sons still lived? we have richard declaring his innocency before the world in jan 1484. we have the portuguese diplomat, a secretary or something to alphonso v, writing that buckingham starved the boys to death. alphonso was joana's father.
===============
And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure Anne's
death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly persuading
richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville thought
her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
have to get the necessary papal dispensations.
yes, persauding richard to marry elizabeth was a big hurdle.
i'm left wondering if richard's intent to marry joana was sincere. or was it a ploy to back the woodville faction off of him. i.e. "sorry lady..can't marry your daughter, i'm already engaged, but i have wrought an excellent match for your child."
It took some years for
the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had had
intercourse with Arthur.
also..you need to factor in who was the pope then. h8's dad h7 had gone against a papal bull when he sent john and sabastian cabot to explore and claim england's piece of the new world.
Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
such dispensations were not unheard of..and again..how much you paid could gain you lots of favour.
===================
I don't see that these rumours needed to be emanating from the
palace. The last part of Richard's speech was a command for anyone
found repeating these tales to be arrested and imprisoned until he
told the name of the person he had heard it from. Had Richatd
suspected a palace source he would have been directing his energies
towards an internal enquiry. Anyone in London who wanted such rumours
spread could have started it - the usual 'urban legend' syndrome. My
own money is on Tudor's camp.
i've no doubt the beaufort/tudor connection played a role, just as the woodville faction played a role. these people buttered their bread on both sides.
==================
brevity snip...
> what amazed me was the beginning of the marriage negotiations 6
days after anne's death...followed by the denial of causing her death
or the intent to marry e of york on the 31st of march, just 16 days
after anne's death.
What we don't know is whether Brampton went over planning to discuss
this or not. An embassy had apparently been planned for some while,
since before anne's illness, and we don't know which side first
broached the subject. Brampton was still in Portugal at the time of
Bosworth, so it may well be that nothing was spoken of this until he
had been in the country for a few months. Perhaps the only marriage
originally on Brampton's agenda was for Elizabeth. But I'm quite sure
that Richard's council as delicately as possible got him to face the
need for remarriage.
what we don't know is..how long had richard been planning to remarry. eliz's letter in february lets us know anne is very ill. the portuguese mission could have been well into the works beginning once it was known anne was apparently terminal. it was a matter of waiting until anne passed before signing the final approval to begin negotiations. it would have looked very bad on richard's behalf, if he had asked for joana's hand before anne died. they needed to wait for the final outcome..good or bad. to begin the contracts.
Diplomatic matches were not made overnight, and
for his own security Richard needed another heir of his body asap.
This is the only puzzling thing about the Portugese match - Joanna
was in her thirties and not the best bet for a king so in need of
fathering a legitimate family. But I agree - it does seem shocking. I
tend to wondr if richard wasn't severely depressed by now and just
acting on auto-pilot.
also..i think we need look at the facts.
a) joana did not want to marry. she wanted to be a nun.
b) the youngest son of peerage sons were often groomed for the church.
so..was richard actually looking to produce the heir and spare, or was he looking for a wife who held deep spiritual values. perhaps their marriage would have been one of convenience vs an actual marriage.
as i said, i read somewhere richard planned to hold the throne for e4's boys until they were in their twenties.
a marriage to joanna would have been politically astute. it blocked any other male with a claim to the throne from making a union. and the marriage would have been more of a place holder than one with intent to produce children. richard and joana could have both lived their lives in "relative" peace and prayer.
although, richard's mother cecily was 40 when she had her last child. and woodville was at or nearing 40+ when she had her last child. so, either way richard if he had survived and married joanna he would have had the bases covered.
===============================brevity snip
> again, i don't think richard played a role in anne's demise. h7's
wife and her family are the ones i think behind any poisoning, if
any. this is an era of parchment shredding and closed aka in camera
meetings.
> and while anne's mother did petition for the return of her
estates, she also turned many of them over to the king, who in turn
disbursed them to favoured others.
Well, it's probably not quite as simple as that. Perhaps we can pick
this up offline.
=====
only if we do it in the new year. "tis the season" is rapidly crashing down on me.
roslyn
Marie
PS. Paul, sorry if I offended you. No offence intended.
---------------------------------
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 10:40:59
--- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "mariewalsh2003"
> <marie@> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> > poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
> >
> > We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the
reasons
> > I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> > were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
> It
> > made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still
lived.
> > And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure
> Anne's
> > death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly
> persuading
> > richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville
> thought
> > her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
> > have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years
> for
> > the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
> > Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had
> had
> > intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
>
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
> Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
> have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
> because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
> imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
> brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
> surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
> notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
> been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
> heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
> legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
> marriage, which would require a dispensation.
A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
lawyer) tells us exactly that.
It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
another bride).
Marie
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "mariewalsh2003"
> <marie@> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> > poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
> >
> > We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the
reasons
> > I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> > were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
> It
> > made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still
lived.
> > And there were practical problems. Even if they could procure
> Anne's
> > death they still had two massive hurdles to face: firstly
> persuading
> > richard to go ahead with it (or perhaps Elizabeth Woodville
> thought
> > her love potions were sufficiently reliable), secondly they would
> > have to get the necessary papal dispensations. It took some years
> for
> > the future Henry VIII to get a dispensation to marry Catherine of
> > Aragon simply because there was a question over whether she had
> had
> > intercourse with Arthur. Richard was Elizabeth's uncle.
>
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
> Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
> have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
> because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
> imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
> brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
> surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
> notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
> been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
> heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
> legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
> marriage, which would require a dispensation.
A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
lawyer) tells us exactly that.
It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
another bride).
Marie
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 11:15:38
--- In , fayre rose
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..and brevity snips were appropriate. see below
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > comments intersperced..see below.
> >
> > mariewalsh2003 <marie@> wrote: --- In
> , fayre rose
> > <fayreroze@> wrote:
> > >
> > > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
the
> > era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> > too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to
me,
> > stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
> diagnosis
> > as to the cause of anne's death.
> >
> > Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
> clear
> > diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for
very
> > obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> > I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> > rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> > nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours
had
> > begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
> version
> > had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear
she
> > was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would
inevitably
> > be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> > wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> > other than hearsay.
> > =============
> > who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
> would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own
time
> with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the
inner
> circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want
to
> believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
> getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still
try
> to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
>
> Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
>
> We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
> I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
> ===========
> i think one needs to hold very near and dear the thought that the
woodvilles were very ambitious. it was not unheard of close relatives
marrying. papal dispensations could be *bought*.
There is ambition and ambition. Elizabeth Woodville had very close
family feelings - that was half her trouble. Her will is that of a
very fond mother. She had been totally unable to forgive Warwick for
the executions of her father and brother John. Why should she be any
different with Richard after the executions of another brother and
one of her own sons? I don't imagine that any ambitions she might
have retained would include Richard. The Woodvilles were a flawed
bunch, but they weren't demons.
Dispensations could not be bought as easily as all that. In fact,
even quite mild ones, where politics was involved, could be extremely
difficult to obtain as they were usually being countered by hostile
parties (often foreign powers) who were throwing their own money at
the Vatican. The French held up Charles the Bold's dispensation to
Margaret of York for a long time. Edward IV held up Clarence's
dispensation to marry Isabel. If you are right and Tudor was still
relying on the marriage to Elizabeth of York, the French would have
done the same for him.
I cited the case of Henry and Catherine of Aragon as an example of
how difficult canonically contentious dispensation could be to
obtain. Henry (perhaps loath to admit his son's inadequacy) assured
the Pope Catherine's former marriage had been consummated; Spain
assured him it had not. As a result the whole thing took a matter of
years, with the Pope writing back to Henry for verification. In the
end the dispensation had very fuddled wording, granting the
dispensation though the marriage to Arthur might just have been
consummated. I suspect that, political pressure apart, the Pope
probably tended to believe the Spanish side more than Henry as they
were almost certainly getting the information from the bride.
We shouldn't ignore the opinion of the Crowland Chronicler, a
contemporary and a canon lawyer, that this dispensation could not
have been got.
Richard needed a new heir damn fast. Elizabeth of York was not a
person he could look to marrying with any degree of haste, if ever at
all.
> ====================
> It
> made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
>
> how do we know woodville held hope that her sons still lived? we
have richard declaring his innocency before the world in jan 1484. we
have the portuguese diplomat, a secretary or something to alphonso v,
writing that buckingham starved the boys to death. alphonso was
joana's father.
We don't know. But mothers normally don't give up hope until the
bodies are found. Think of modern-day child abduction cases. Even
where it's obvious to everyone else, the parents go on keeping the
room ready for their return.
By the way, there's no evidence that Richard declared his innocence
before Parliament in January 1484 other than Hall. I don't think Hall
on his own could be classified as evidence. I have a suspicion this
claim of his arises from the corruption of two separate incidents:-
1) The accusation by the French Estates-General in January 1484 that
richard HAD murdered the Princes
2) Richard's denial in March 1485 that he had murdered his wife.
I would need to check the Portuguese source, but I'm pretty sure this
was written after Bosworth, and there were a lot of different rumours
circulating. Of more interest to me is what Nicholas Von Poppelau
picked up in England during April/ May 1484, and wrote down shortly
after his visit, to the effect that rumour in England was split
between those who thought Richard had murdered the Princes and those
who believed he was keeping them hidden away. Von Poppelau himself
favoured the latter opinion. So unless Elizabeth Woodville had some
secret proof of their murder she would have held out from marrying
Elizabeth to anyone who would use her to bolster a claim to the
English throne.
Marie
<fayreroze@...> wrote:
>
> comments intersperced..and brevity snips were appropriate. see below
>
> mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote: --- In
, fayre rose
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > comments intersperced..see below.
> >
> > mariewalsh2003 <marie@> wrote: --- In
> , fayre rose
> > <fayreroze@> wrote:
> > >
> > > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
the
> > era didn't have all the technology we have today. and remember
> > too..there were rumours richard poisoned anne. therefore, it to
me,
> > stands to reason that anne's doctor/s did not make a clear
> diagnosis
> > as to the cause of anne's death.
> >
> > Trouble is, Roslyn, it was completely usual for there to be no
> clear
> > diagnosis made, except it terms of humours etc, other than for
very
> > obvious things such as epidemics or wounding.
> > I would suggest that the rumour of poisoning were linked to the
> > rumour that Richard planned to marry Elizabeth rather than to the
> > nature of Anne's illness. Crowland suggests that these rumours
had
> > begun before it was known that she was dying, and the earlier
> version
> > had it that he planned to divorce her. As soon as it was clear
she
> > was gravely ill, of course, those same individuals would
inevitably
> > be suspecting poison. People outside the immediate royal circle
> > wouldn't have any actual details of the Queen's symptoms, anyway,
> > other than hearsay.
> > =============
> > who was in the immediate royal circle? which of these people
> would spread rumours/tell tales out of school? think of our own
time
> with bush's whitehouse. things were going on, and a few of the
inner
> circle became whistle blowers. the general population didn't want
to
> believe what they were being told. time has gone by, and we are now
> getting more and more truth about the bush admin. yet they still
try
> to play it down or even deny. it's all about spin.
>
> Yes, I see I jumped the gun in assuming your acceptance of the
> poisoning theory also carried acceptance of the usual culprit.
>
> We evidently have a different take on this matter. For the reasons
> I've already explained, I don't find the idea that the Woodvilles
> were really planning to marry Richard to Elizabeth very tenable.
> ===========
> i think one needs to hold very near and dear the thought that the
woodvilles were very ambitious. it was not unheard of close relatives
marrying. papal dispensations could be *bought*.
There is ambition and ambition. Elizabeth Woodville had very close
family feelings - that was half her trouble. Her will is that of a
very fond mother. She had been totally unable to forgive Warwick for
the executions of her father and brother John. Why should she be any
different with Richard after the executions of another brother and
one of her own sons? I don't imagine that any ambitions she might
have retained would include Richard. The Woodvilles were a flawed
bunch, but they weren't demons.
Dispensations could not be bought as easily as all that. In fact,
even quite mild ones, where politics was involved, could be extremely
difficult to obtain as they were usually being countered by hostile
parties (often foreign powers) who were throwing their own money at
the Vatican. The French held up Charles the Bold's dispensation to
Margaret of York for a long time. Edward IV held up Clarence's
dispensation to marry Isabel. If you are right and Tudor was still
relying on the marriage to Elizabeth of York, the French would have
done the same for him.
I cited the case of Henry and Catherine of Aragon as an example of
how difficult canonically contentious dispensation could be to
obtain. Henry (perhaps loath to admit his son's inadequacy) assured
the Pope Catherine's former marriage had been consummated; Spain
assured him it had not. As a result the whole thing took a matter of
years, with the Pope writing back to Henry for verification. In the
end the dispensation had very fuddled wording, granting the
dispensation though the marriage to Arthur might just have been
consummated. I suspect that, political pressure apart, the Pope
probably tended to believe the Spanish side more than Henry as they
were almost certainly getting the information from the bride.
We shouldn't ignore the opinion of the Crowland Chronicler, a
contemporary and a canon lawyer, that this dispensation could not
have been got.
Richard needed a new heir damn fast. Elizabeth of York was not a
person he could look to marrying with any degree of haste, if ever at
all.
> ====================
> It
> made no sense for a woman hoping that one of her sons still lived.
>
> how do we know woodville held hope that her sons still lived? we
have richard declaring his innocency before the world in jan 1484. we
have the portuguese diplomat, a secretary or something to alphonso v,
writing that buckingham starved the boys to death. alphonso was
joana's father.
We don't know. But mothers normally don't give up hope until the
bodies are found. Think of modern-day child abduction cases. Even
where it's obvious to everyone else, the parents go on keeping the
room ready for their return.
By the way, there's no evidence that Richard declared his innocence
before Parliament in January 1484 other than Hall. I don't think Hall
on his own could be classified as evidence. I have a suspicion this
claim of his arises from the corruption of two separate incidents:-
1) The accusation by the French Estates-General in January 1484 that
richard HAD murdered the Princes
2) Richard's denial in March 1485 that he had murdered his wife.
I would need to check the Portuguese source, but I'm pretty sure this
was written after Bosworth, and there were a lot of different rumours
circulating. Of more interest to me is what Nicholas Von Poppelau
picked up in England during April/ May 1484, and wrote down shortly
after his visit, to the effect that rumour in England was split
between those who thought Richard had murdered the Princes and those
who believed he was keeping them hidden away. Von Poppelau himself
favoured the latter opinion. So unless Elizabeth Woodville had some
secret proof of their murder she would have held out from marrying
Elizabeth to anyone who would use her to bolster a claim to the
English throne.
Marie
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 15:42:43
This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
I can give it a shot!
Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much easier!):
Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of Castile
(1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor of
Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79), the
first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-brother
Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the natural
son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de Guzman.
The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el Cruel,
and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
branches of the Castilian line.
So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband Enrique
seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline branch
and the Trastamara branch.
Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was kind
of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political marriage
with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for Maria
de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
(depending on which source you turn to).
Maria
Elena@...
mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
I can give it a shot!
Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much easier!):
Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of Castile
(1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor of
Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79), the
first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-brother
Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the natural
son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de Guzman.
The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el Cruel,
and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
branches of the Castilian line.
So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband Enrique
seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline branch
and the Trastamara branch.
Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was kind
of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political marriage
with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for Maria
de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
(depending on which source you turn to).
Maria
Elena@...
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 16:16:37
mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>>Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
>>have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
>>because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
>>imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
>>brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
>>surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
>>notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
>>been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
>>heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
>>legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
>>marriage, which would require a dispensation.
>>
>>
>
>A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
>difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
>lawyer) tells us exactly that.
>It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
>could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
>in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
>between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
>
>This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
>Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
>was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
>Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
>think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
>another bride).
>
>Marie
>
And there's always the problem that to marry Elizabeth, Richard would
have had to make her legitimate. Even if by then her brothers were dead
so no longer an issue, it would look awfully strange for him to do so.
He could easily have come against the same accusation as Henry Tudor
did, that he was marrying her to legitimise his own claim to the throne.
All in all, it makes no sense at all that Richard would have ever given
marrying Elizabeth any thought.
Gilda
>>Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
>>have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
>>because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
>>imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
>>brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
>>surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
>>notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
>>been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
>>heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
>>legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
>>marriage, which would require a dispensation.
>>
>>
>
>A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
>difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
>lawyer) tells us exactly that.
>It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
>could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
>in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
>between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
>
>This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
>Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
>was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
>Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
>think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
>another bride).
>
>Marie
>
And there's always the problem that to marry Elizabeth, Richard would
have had to make her legitimate. Even if by then her brothers were dead
so no longer an issue, it would look awfully strange for him to do so.
He could easily have come against the same accusation as Henry Tudor
did, that he was marrying her to legitimise his own claim to the throne.
All in all, it makes no sense at all that Richard would have ever given
marrying Elizabeth any thought.
Gilda
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 17:03:10
it wouldn't particularly matter what richard thought. if the woodville's wanted the marriage they would have worked very hard at securing it overtly and covertly.
therefore, richard would be motivated to marry off all of e4 and woodville's marriageable daughters post haste.
eliz 19 and cecily 15 were of breeding age, anne 9 and katherine 5 were too young to be of 'use' to secure title via marriage. but they would be good political tools to secure alliances.
even if they, the woodvilles could not secure the english throne by bloodline, there appears there were other opportunities available to them for fortuitous matches. pressure of rumours of marriage of richard to any one of these girls would ensure richard was motivated to marry them off to good matches. and if i recall, richard had promised to do that. ergo his intended betrothal to joanna begins to make more and more sense. it puts a stop to the woodville pressure and rumour mongering.
i also think looking at the woodville's family connections to the pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not, such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
roslyn
Gilda Felt <gildaevf@...> wrote:
mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>>Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
>>have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
>>because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
>>imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
>>brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
>>surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
>>notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
>>been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
>>heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
>>legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
>>marriage, which would require a dispensation.
>>
>>
>
>A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
>difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
>lawyer) tells us exactly that.
>It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
>could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
>in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
>between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
>
>This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
>Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
>was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
>Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
>think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
>another bride).
>
>Marie
>
And there's always the problem that to marry Elizabeth, Richard would
have had to make her legitimate. Even if by then her brothers were dead
so no longer an issue, it would look awfully strange for him to do so.
He could easily have come against the same accusation as Henry Tudor
did, that he was marrying her to legitimise his own claim to the throne.
All in all, it makes no sense at all that Richard would have ever given
marrying Elizabeth any thought.
Gilda
---------------------------------
The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail.
therefore, richard would be motivated to marry off all of e4 and woodville's marriageable daughters post haste.
eliz 19 and cecily 15 were of breeding age, anne 9 and katherine 5 were too young to be of 'use' to secure title via marriage. but they would be good political tools to secure alliances.
even if they, the woodvilles could not secure the english throne by bloodline, there appears there were other opportunities available to them for fortuitous matches. pressure of rumours of marriage of richard to any one of these girls would ensure richard was motivated to marry them off to good matches. and if i recall, richard had promised to do that. ergo his intended betrothal to joanna begins to make more and more sense. it puts a stop to the woodville pressure and rumour mongering.
i also think looking at the woodville's family connections to the pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not, such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
roslyn
Gilda Felt <gildaevf@...> wrote:
mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>>Is this some sort of oblique confirmation of the rumor (which may
>>have been fact) that Edward IV and Richard III were not brothers
>>because Edward was not fathered by the Duke of York? I don't
>>imagine that it would change much to the Pope if they were half-
>>brothers rather than full brothers -- they had the same mother,
>>surely -- but it might help to explain, to me at least, how the
>>notion of Richard marrying his niece-by-blood could have even have
>>been rumored. The purpose of such a marriage would be to provide
>>heirs to the throne, and for that purpose they would have to be
>>legitimate, which would require a proper, legal, recognized
>>marriage, which would require a dispensation.
>>
>>
>
>A very good point. Such a dispensation would have been extremely
>difficult, if not impossible, to obtain, and Crowland (a canon
>lawyer) tells us exactly that.
>It wouldn't make any difference to the calculation even if Richard
>could have persuaded the Pope that his brother Edward was conceived
>in adultery. The consanguinity calculations didn't differentiate
>between a common ancestor and a common pair of ancestors.
>
>This is a very solid reason for doubting that either Richard or the
>Woodvilles ever seriously considered this union. The rumour, however,
>was useful to the Tudor lobby. It WAS shocking - it blackened
>Richard's name. It gave Henry Tudor an excuse to ditch Elizabeth (I
>think it's Vergil who tells us he then started looking around for
>another bride).
>
>Marie
>
And there's always the problem that to marry Elizabeth, Richard would
have had to make her legitimate. Even if by then her brothers were dead
so no longer an issue, it would look awfully strange for him to do so.
He could easily have come against the same accusation as Henry Tudor
did, that he was marrying her to legitimise his own claim to the throne.
All in all, it makes no sense at all that Richard would have ever given
marrying Elizabeth any thought.
Gilda
---------------------------------
The best gets better. See why everyone is raving about the All-new Yahoo! Mail.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 17:08:54
--- In , Maria <ejbronte@...>
wrote:
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
>
> I can give it a shot!
>
> Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much
easier!):
> Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of
Castile
> (1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
>
> Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor
of
> Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79),
the
> first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-
brother
> Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the
natural
> son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de
Guzman.
> The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el
Cruel,
> and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
> branches of the Castilian line.
>
> So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband
Enrique
> seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline
branch
> and the Trastamara branch.
>
> Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
> Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was
kind
> of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political
marriage
> with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for
Maria
> de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
> (depending on which source you turn to).
>
> Maria
Thank you for straightening that out for me, Maria...the Iberian
royal lineages are vague to me.
But boy, doesn't that one have a lot of parallels with the English
one? Secret marriages resulting in questionable successions (Maria
de Padilla and Pedro/Katherine of Valois and Owen Tudor/Edward the
later IV and Elizabeth Woodville) and the marriage of Catherine of
Lancaster to Enrique uniting the two competing branches (Henry the
Weasel and Elizabeth of York)
Katy
wrote:
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
>
> I can give it a shot!
>
> Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much
easier!):
> Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of
Castile
> (1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
>
> Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor
of
> Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79),
the
> first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-
brother
> Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the
natural
> son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de
Guzman.
> The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el
Cruel,
> and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
> branches of the Castilian line.
>
> So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband
Enrique
> seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline
branch
> and the Trastamara branch.
>
> Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
> Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was
kind
> of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political
marriage
> with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for
Maria
> de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
> (depending on which source you turn to).
>
> Maria
Thank you for straightening that out for me, Maria...the Iberian
royal lineages are vague to me.
But boy, doesn't that one have a lot of parallels with the English
one? Secret marriages resulting in questionable successions (Maria
de Padilla and Pedro/Katherine of Valois and Owen Tudor/Edward the
later IV and Elizabeth Woodville) and the marriage of Catherine of
Lancaster to Enrique uniting the two competing branches (Henry the
Weasel and Elizabeth of York)
Katy
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 17:35:23
it's even more fun when you consider maria de padilla's descent line.
1 Maria de Padilla 1334 - 1361
.. +Pedro de Cruel de Castile
........ 2 Isabella Infanta de Castile 1361 -
............ +Edmund Langley Plantagenet 1341 -
................... 3 Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
....................... +Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
........ 2 Constance de Castile 1354 - 1393/94
............ +John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
................... 3 Catherine Plantagenet 1371 -
................... 3 John Plantagenet 1371 -
btw..maria's ancestry, which i've not confirmed, tracks back to mohammed.
roslyn
oregonkaty <[email protected]> wrote:
--- In , Maria <ejbronte@...>
wrote:
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
>
> I can give it a shot!
>
> Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much
easier!):
> Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of
Castile
> (1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
>
> Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor
of
> Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79),
the
> first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-
brother
> Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the
natural
> son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de
Guzman.
> The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el
Cruel,
> and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
> branches of the Castilian line.
>
> So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband
Enrique
> seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline
branch
> and the Trastamara branch.
>
> Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
> Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was
kind
> of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political
marriage
> with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for
Maria
> de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
> (depending on which source you turn to).
>
> Maria
Thank you for straightening that out for me, Maria...the Iberian
royal lineages are vague to me.
But boy, doesn't that one have a lot of parallels with the English
one? Secret marriages resulting in questionable successions (Maria
de Padilla and Pedro/Katherine of Valois and Owen Tudor/Edward the
later IV and Elizabeth Woodville) and the marriage of Catherine of
Lancaster to Enrique uniting the two competing branches (Henry the
Weasel and Elizabeth of York)
Katy
---------------------------------
Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
1 Maria de Padilla 1334 - 1361
.. +Pedro de Cruel de Castile
........ 2 Isabella Infanta de Castile 1361 -
............ +Edmund Langley Plantagenet 1341 -
................... 3 Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
....................... +Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
........ 2 Constance de Castile 1354 - 1393/94
............ +John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
................... 3 Catherine Plantagenet 1371 -
................... 3 John Plantagenet 1371 -
btw..maria's ancestry, which i've not confirmed, tracks back to mohammed.
roslyn
oregonkaty <[email protected]> wrote:
--- In , Maria <ejbronte@...>
wrote:
>
> This business of the papal dispensation has been niggling at my
> mind. Ir seems to me that the likelihood of a man obtaining the
> Church's permission to marry the daughter of his brother would be
> slim to none. And what would the neighbors say...er...what would
> the public think? That sort of thing simply wasn't *done* in
> England. (Though as I recall, one of John of Gaunt's daughters by
> Costanza of Spain was supposedly set up to marry her own half-
> grandfather...the illegitimate son of their common great-
> grandfather. Can you help me out, Maria?)
>
>
> I can give it a shot!
>
> Constanza and John had one daughter (which makes things much
easier!):
> Catherine of Lancaster (1372-1418). She married Enrique III of
Castile
> (1379-1406, known as "el Doliente", or "the Ailing").
>
> Enrique III was the son of Juan I (1358-90) of Castile and Leonor
of
> Portugal. Juan I was the son of Enrique II of Castile (1334-79),
the
> first Trastamara king, who got his title by killing his half-
brother
> Pedro el Cruel, who was Constanza's father. Enrique II was the
natural
> son of Pedro's father, Alfonxo XI and his mistress, Leonor de
Guzman.
> The marriage of Catherine of Lancaster, granddaughter of Pedro el
Cruel,
> and Enrique III, grandson of Pedro's usurper, united the two rival
> branches of the Castilian line.
>
> So the common root between Catherine of Lancaster and husband
Enrique
> seems to stem from Alfonso XI, who fathered both the Pedroline
branch
> and the Trastamara branch.
>
> Constanza's mother, incidentally, was Maria de Padilla, mistress of
> Pedro el Cruel. They were secretly married, but the situation was
kind
> of dicey, given that Pedro was also forced into a political
marriage
> with Blanche de Bourbon, whom he deserted almost immediately for
Maria
> de Padilla, whom he may or may not have already secretly married
> (depending on which source you turn to).
>
> Maria
Thank you for straightening that out for me, Maria...the Iberian
royal lineages are vague to me.
But boy, doesn't that one have a lot of parallels with the English
one? Secret marriages resulting in questionable successions (Maria
de Padilla and Pedro/Katherine of Valois and Owen Tudor/Edward the
later IV and Elizabeth Woodville) and the marriage of Catherine of
Lancaster to Enrique uniting the two competing branches (Henry the
Weasel and Elizabeth of York)
Katy
---------------------------------
Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
[Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "eng
2006-12-09 19:03:47
> i also think looking at the woodville's family connections to the
pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not,
such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
Could you possibly post these connections for everyone's benefit,
Roslyn? This really might put a different light on it.
Marie
pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not,
such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
Could you possibly post these connections for everyone's benefit,
Roslyn? This really might put a different light on it.
Marie
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-09 20:17:40
not at this time, i've not tracked them myself. remind me in the new year and i'll see what i can delineate, unless someone else wants to track the de luxemburg and associated families lineage to the popes in 1484 and report back to the forum.
here's a starting point to glean family names etc of the two popes and some of their associates during richard's reign.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Sixtus_IV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_VIII
here's jacquetta's plantagent ancestry and relatives.
1 Henry III Plantagenet 1209 -
........ 2 Beatrice Plantagenet 1242 -
................... 3 Marie Brittany d'Elincourt 1268 -
............................. 4 Jean de Châtillon 1295 -
........................................ 5 Maud de Châtillon 1332 -
............................................ +Guy de Lille Luxemburg St. Pol 1331 - 1371
.................................................. 6 Waleran III de Luxembourg St. Pol 1355 -
...................................................... +Maud de Holand 1348 -
............................................................. 7 Jeanne St. Pol 1381 -
................................................................. +Antoine de Burgundy Brabant
........................................................................ 8 John de Brabant 1403 -
............................................................................ +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. 7 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
................................................................. +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
........................................................................ 8 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
............................................................................ +[4] Marguerite de Baux
.................................................. 6 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
...................................................... +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
............................................................. 7 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
................................................................. +[4] Marguerite de Baux
........................................................................ 8 [7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
............................................................................ +[6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of [7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol:
............................................................................ +Richard Woodville 1405 - 1469
........................................................................ 8 Catherine de Luxembourg St. Pol 1420 - 1492
............................................................................ +Arthur III of Brittany 1393 - 1458
........................................ *2nd Husband of Maud de Châtillon:
............................................ +Charles III Valois
.................................................. 6 Isabella Valois
...................................................... +Peter de Burbon
............................................................. 7 Jeanne de Bourbon
................................................................. +Charles le Sage Valois
........................................................................ 8 Charles VI the Mad King of France Valois 1368 - 1422
............................................................................ +Isabeau of Barvaria 1371 - 1435
........................................................................ 8 Louis Valois 1371/72 -
............................................................................ +Joanna de Burbon
........ 2 Edward Longshanks Plantagenet 1239 -
................... 3 Edward II Plantagenet 1284 -
....................... +Isabella de France 1292 - 1358
............................. 4 Edward III Plantagenet 1312 -
................................. +Phillipa de Hainault 1311 -
........................................ 5 Edward Bl. Prince Plantagenet 1330 -
............................................ +Joan de Kent Plantagenet 1328 -
.................................................. 6 Richard II Plantagenet 1366/67 - 1399/00
...................................................... +Isabella Valois 1389 -
........................................ 5 Isabel Plantagenet 1332 -
............................................ +Enguerrand de Coucy VII 1343 -
.................................................. 6 Philipa de Coucy 1366 - 1411
...................................................... +Robert de Vere
........................................ 5 Mary Plantagenet 1334 -
............................................ +John of Brittany 1339 - 1399
........................................ 5 Lionel Antwerp Plantagenet 1338 -
............................................ +Elizabeth de Burgh 1332 -
.................................................. 6 Phillipa Plantagenet 1355 -
...................................................... +Edmund de Mortimer 1351/52 -
............................................................. 7 Roger de Mortimer 1374 - 1398
................................................................. +Eleanor de Holand 1373 - 1413
........................................................................ 8 [15] Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
............................................................................ +[14] Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
........................................................................ 8 [37] Edmund de Mortimer 1391 - 1424/25
............................................................................ +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................ 5 [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
............................................ +Marie de St. Hilaire 1340 -
.................................................. 6 Blanche Plantagenet 1360 -
........................................ *1st Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +[52] Blanche Plantagenet 1345 -
.................................................. 6 [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet 1366 -
...................................................... +[55] Mary de Bohun 1370 -
............................................................. 7 [56] Humphrey Plantagenet 1390 -
................................................................. +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [56] Humphrey Plantagenet:
................................................................. +[57] Eleanor Cobham 1400 - 1454
........................................................................ 8 [58] Antigone Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................................ +[59] Henry de Grey 1419 -
........................................................................ 8 [60] Arthur Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................. 7 [61] Henry V Lancaster Plantagenet 1387 -
................................................................. +[62] Catherine Valois 1401 -
........................................................................ 8 [63] Henry VI Lancaster Plantagenet 1421 - 1471
............................................................................ +[64] Margaret de Anjou 1428/29 -
............................................................. 7 [6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
................................................................. +[7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
........................................................................ 8 [65] Child Plantagenet 1432 - 1432
.................................................. *2nd Wife of [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[66] Joanna Navarre 1370 - 1437
.................................................. 6 [67] Phillipa Plantagenet 1360 -
.................................................. 6 [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1364 - 1425
...................................................... +[69] John Cornwall de Burford
............................................................. 7 [70] Constance Cornwall de Burford 1404 -
................................................................. +[71] John FitzAlan 1408 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[72] John de Hastings
.................................................. *3rd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[73] John de Holand 1350 -
............................................................. 7 [74] Constance de Holand 1387 - 1437
................................................................. +[75] Thomas Mowbray 1385 - 1405
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [74] Constance de Holand:
................................................................. +[76] John de Grey 1387 - 1439
........................................................................ 8 [77] Thomas de Grey 1412 -
............................................................................ +[78] Margaret Scrope 1422 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [77] Thomas de Grey:
............................................................................ +[79] Margaret Ferrers 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 [80] Edmund de Grey 1416 -
............................................................................ +[81] Katherine Percy 1423 -
........................................................................ 8 [82] Constance de Grey 1414 -
........................................................................ 8 [83] Alice de Grey 1415 -
............................................................. 7 [84] Alice de Holand 1392 -
................................................................. +[85] Richard de Vere 1385 - 1416/17
........................................................................ 8 [86] John de Vere 1408 -
............................................................................ +[87] Elizabeth Howard 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [88] Robert de Vere 1410 -
............................................................. 7 [89] Richard de Holand 1390 -
............................................................. 7 [38] John de Holand 1395 -
................................................................. +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [38] John de Holand:
................................................................. +[90] Anne Montagu 1390 - 1457
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
........................................................................ 8 [91] Anne de Holand
............................................................. 7 [92] Edward de Holand 1399 -
.................................................. 6 [93] John Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [94] Edward Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [95] John II Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [96] Isabel Plantagenet 1365 -
........................................ *2nd Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +Katherine Roet 1350 - 1403
.................................................. 6 John Beaufort 1371 -
...................................................... +Margaret de Holand 1385 -
............................................................. 7 John Beaufort 1404 -
................................................................. +Margaret Beauchamp 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
............................................................................ +[13] Thomas Stanley 1435 -
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +William de la Pole 1396 -
........................................................................ *3rd Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +Edmund Tudor 1431 - 1456
........................................................................ *4th Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +[11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................. *2nd Wife of John Beaufort:
................................................................. +Mistress
........................................................................ 8 Tacina Beaufort 1434 - 1469
............................................................................ +Reynold de Grey 1421 - 1493/94
.................................................. 6 Joan Beaufort 1375 - 1440
...................................................... +Ralph Neville 1364 - 1425
............................................................. 7 [41] Anne Neville 1410 - 1480
................................................................. +[40] Humphrey Stafford 1402 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................................ +[12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
........................................................................ 8 [42] Joan Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[43] William Knyvett 1440 - 1515
........................................................................ 8 [44] Humphrey de Stafford 1424 -
............................................................................ +[45] Margaret Beaufort 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 [46] Katherine de Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[47] John Talbot 1413 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [48] Elizabeth Stafford 1434 -
............................................................................ +[49] Richard Beauchamp 1432 -
............................................................. 7 Katherine Neville 1397 - 1478
................................................................. +John Mowbray 1392 -
........................................................................ 8 [51] John Mowbray 1415 - 1461
............................................................................ +[50] Eleanor Bourcheir 1417 -
........................................................................ 8 Katherine Mowbray 1420 -
............................................................................ +Thomas de Grey 1410 -
............................................................. *2nd Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +Thomas Strangeways 1389 - 1441/42
........................................................................ 8 Catherine Strangeways 1436 - 1456
............................................................................ +Henry de Grey 1435 - 1495
........................................................................ 8 Joan Strangeways 1435 - 1484/85
............................................................................ +William Willoughby 1430 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of Joan Strangeways:
............................................................................ +William de Berkeley
........................................................................ 8 Isabel Strangeways 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 Thomas Strangeways 1435 -
............................................................. *3rd Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +John Beaumont 1390 - 1460
............................................................. *4th Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +John Woodville 1445 - 1469
............................................................. 7 [17] Cecily Neville 1415 - 1495
................................................................. +[16] Richard Plantagenet 1411 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................................ +[9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [18] Henry Plantagenet 1440/41 -
........................................................................ 8 [19] Edward IV Plantagenet 1442 - 1483
............................................................................ +[20] Margaret FitzLewis 1437 - 1466
........................................................................ *Friend of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[21] Elizabeth Lambert 1450 -
........................................................................ *1st Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[22] Eleanor Talbot 1437 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[23] Elizabeth Woodville 1437 -
........................................................................ 8 [24] Edmund Plantagenet 1443 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [25] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1444 -
............................................................................ +[26] John de la Pole 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 [27] Margaret Plantagenet 1446 - 1503
............................................................................ +[28] Charles de Bourgogne Burgundy 1433 - 1476/77
........................................................................ 8 [29] William Plantagenet 1447 -
........................................................................ 8 [30] John Plantagenet 1448 -
........................................................................ 8 [31] George Plantagenet 1449 - 1477/78
............................................................................ +[32] Isabel Neville 1451 - 1476
........................................................................ 8 [33] Thomas Plantagenet 1451 -
........................................................................ 8 [34] Richard III Plantagenet 1452 - 1485
............................................................................ +[35] Anne Neville 1456 - 1484/85
........................................................................ 8 [36] Ursula Plantagenet 1455 -
............................................................. 7 Richard Neville 1400 - 1460
................................................................. +Alice Montagu 1406 - 1462
........................................................................ 8 Eleanor Neville 1438 -
............................................................................ +[13] Thomas Stanley 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 Richard Neville 1428 - 1471
............................................................................ +Anne Beauchamp 1426 -
........................................................................ 8 Joan Neville 1430 -
............................................................................ +William FitzAlan 1420 -
........................................................................ 8 Katherine Neville 1435 - 1504
............................................................................ +William Hastings 1431 - 1483
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of Katherine Neville:
............................................................................ +William Bonville 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 John Neville 1431 -
............................................................................ +Isabel Ingaldesthorpe 1435 -
.................................................. 6 Thomas Beaufort 1375 -
.................................................. 6 Henry Beaufort 1375 -
...................................................... +Alice FitzAlan 1378 - 1415
............................................................. 7 Jane Beaufort 1402 -
................................................................. +Edward Stradling 1398 - 1453
........................................................................ 8 Henry Stradling 1425 -
........................................ *3rd Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +Constance de Castile 1354 - 1393/94
.................................................. 6 Catherine Plantagenet 1371 -
.................................................. 6 John Plantagenet 1371 -
........................................ 5 Edmund Langley Plantagenet 1341 -
............................................ +Isabella Infanta de Castile 1361 -
.................................................. 6 [14] Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
...................................................... +[15] Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
............................................................. 7 [16] Richard Plantagenet 1411 - 1460
................................................................. +[17] Cecily Neville 1415 - 1495
........................................................................ 8 [10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................................ +[9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [18] Henry Plantagenet 1440/41 -
........................................................................ 8 [19] Edward IV Plantagenet 1442 - 1483
............................................................................ +[20] Margaret FitzLewis 1437 - 1466
........................................................................ *Friend of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[21] Elizabeth Lambert 1450 -
........................................................................ *1st Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[22] Eleanor Talbot 1437 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[23] Elizabeth Woodville 1437 -
........................................................................ 8 [24] Edmund Plantagenet 1443 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [25] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1444 -
............................................................................ +[26] John de la Pole 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 [27] Margaret Plantagenet 1446 - 1503
............................................................................ +[28] Charles de Bourgogne Burgundy 1433 - 1476/77
........................................................................ 8 [29] William Plantagenet 1447 -
........................................................................ 8 [30] John Plantagenet 1448 -
........................................................................ 8 [31] George Plantagenet 1449 - 1477/78
............................................................................ +[32] Isabel Neville 1451 - 1476
........................................................................ 8 [33] Thomas Plantagenet 1451 -
........................................................................ 8 [34] Richard III Plantagenet 1452 - 1485
............................................................................ +[35] Anne Neville 1456 - 1484/85
........................................................................ 8 [36] Ursula Plantagenet 1455 -
............................................................. 7 Isabella Plantagenet 1409 -
................................................................. +Henry Bourchier 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 William Bourchier 1452 - 1480
............................................................................ +Isobel de Vere 1452 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of William Bourchier:
............................................................................ +Anne Woodville 1456 - 1489
........................................................................ 8 Humphrey Bourchier - 1471
............................................................................ +Joan Stanhope
........................................ 5 Thomas Woodstock Plantagenet 1353/54 -
............................................ +Eleanor Bohun
.................................................. 6 Anne Plantagenet 1383 -
...................................................... +Edmund de Stafford 1377/78 - 1403
............................................................. 7 [8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
................................................................. +[37] Edmund de Mortimer 1391 - 1424/25
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [8] Anne Stafford:
................................................................. +[38] John de Holand 1395 -
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. 7 [40] Humphrey Stafford 1402 - 1460
................................................................. +[41] Anne Neville 1410 - 1480
........................................................................ 8 [11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................................ +[12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
........................................................................ 8 [42] Joan Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[43] William Knyvett 1440 - 1515
........................................................................ 8 [44] Humphrey de Stafford 1424 -
............................................................................ +[45] Margaret Beaufort 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 [46] Katherine de Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[47] John Talbot 1413 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [48] Elizabeth Stafford 1434 -
............................................................................ +[49] Richard Beauchamp 1432 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of Anne Plantagenet:
...................................................... +William Bourcheir
............................................................. 7 [50] Eleanor Bourcheir 1417 -
................................................................. +[51] John Mowbray 1415 - 1461
........................................................................ 8 John Mowbray 1444 - 1474/75
............................................................................ +Elizabeth Talbot 1443 - 1506
............................. *Partner of Edward III Plantagenet:
................................. +Alice Perrer Perrers
........ 2 Edmund Plantagenet 1244/45 -
............ +Blanche de Artois
................... 3 Henry Plantagenet 1281 -
....................... +Maud Chaworth 1282 -
............................. 4 Henry Plantagenet 1300 -
................................. +Isabel Beaumont 1310 -
........................................ 5 [52] Blanche Plantagenet 1345 -
............................................ +[53] John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
.................................................. 6 [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet 1366 -
...................................................... +[55] Mary de Bohun 1370 -
............................................................. 7 [56] Humphrey Plantagenet 1390 -
................................................................. +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [56] Humphrey Plantagenet:
................................................................. +[57] Eleanor Cobham 1400 - 1454
........................................................................ 8 [58] Antigone Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................................ +[59] Henry de Grey 1419 -
........................................................................ 8 [60] Arthur Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................. 7 [61] Henry V Lancaster Plantagenet 1387 -
................................................................. +[62] Catherine Valois 1401 -
........................................................................ 8 [63] Henry VI Lancaster Plantagenet 1421 - 1471
............................................................................ +[64] Margaret de Anjou 1428/29 -
............................................................. 7 [6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
................................................................. +[7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
........................................................................ 8 [65] Child Plantagenet 1432 - 1432
.................................................. *2nd Wife of [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[66] Joanna Navarre 1370 - 1437
.................................................. 6 [67] Phillipa Plantagenet 1360 -
.................................................. 6 [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1364 - 1425
...................................................... +[69] John Cornwall de Burford
............................................................. 7 [70] Constance Cornwall de Burford 1404 -
................................................................. +[71] John FitzAlan 1408 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[72] John de Hastings
.................................................. *3rd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[73] John de Holand 1350 -
............................................................. 7 [74] Constance de Holand 1387 - 1437
................................................................. +[75] Thomas Mowbray 1385 - 1405
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [74] Constance de Holand:
................................................................. +[76] John de Grey 1387 - 1439
........................................................................ 8 [77] Thomas de Grey 1412 -
............................................................................ +[78] Margaret Scrope 1422 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [77] Thomas de Grey:
............................................................................ +[79] Margaret Ferrers 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 [80] Edmund de Grey 1416 -
............................................................................ +[81] Katherine Percy 1423 -
........................................................................ 8 [82] Constance de Grey 1414 -
........................................................................ 8 [83] Alice de Grey 1415 -
............................................................. 7 [84] Alice de Holand 1392 -
................................................................. +[85] Richard de Vere 1385 - 1416/17
........................................................................ 8 [86] John de Vere 1408 -
............................................................................ +[87] Elizabeth Howard 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [88] Robert de Vere 1410 -
............................................................. 7 [89] Richard de Holand 1390 -
............................................................. 7 [38] John de Holand 1395 -
................................................................. +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [38] John de Holand:
................................................................. +[90] Anne Montagu 1390 - 1457
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
........................................................................ 8 [91] Anne de Holand
............................................................. 7 [92] Edward de Holand 1399 -
.................................................. 6 [93] John Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [94] Edward Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [95] John II Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [96] Isabel Plantagenet 1365 -
and here is de luxemburg family..note woodville's sister catherine is married to arthur of brittany d. 1456. arthur's nephew francis inherited the dukedom, and his daughter anne was designated to be the wife of e5 until his disappearence.
francis did not have a good relationship with the spider king, louis.
1 Guy de Lille Luxemburg St. Pol 1331 - 1371
.. +Maud de Châtillon 1332 -
........ 2 Waleran III de Luxembourg St. Pol 1355 -
............ +Maud de Holand 1348 -
................... 3 Jeanne St. Pol 1381 -
....................... +Antoine de Burgundy Brabant
............................. 4 John de Brabant 1403 -
................................. +Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
................... 3 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
....................... +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
............................. 4 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
................................. +[4] Marguerite de Baux
........ 2 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
............ +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
................... 3 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
....................... +[4] Marguerite de Baux
............................. 4 Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
................................. +John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
............................. *2nd Husband of Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol:
................................. +Richard Woodville 1405 - 1469
............................. 4 Catherine de Luxembourg St. Pol 1420 - 1492
................................. +Arthur III of Brittany 1393 - 1458
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne%2C_Duchess_of_Brittany
roslyn
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote:
> i also think looking at the woodville's family connections to the
pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not,
such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
Could you possibly post these connections for everyone's benefit,
Roslyn? This really might put a different light on it.
Marie
---------------------------------
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers.
here's a starting point to glean family names etc of the two popes and some of their associates during richard's reign.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Sixtus_IV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_VIII
here's jacquetta's plantagent ancestry and relatives.
1 Henry III Plantagenet 1209 -
........ 2 Beatrice Plantagenet 1242 -
................... 3 Marie Brittany d'Elincourt 1268 -
............................. 4 Jean de Châtillon 1295 -
........................................ 5 Maud de Châtillon 1332 -
............................................ +Guy de Lille Luxemburg St. Pol 1331 - 1371
.................................................. 6 Waleran III de Luxembourg St. Pol 1355 -
...................................................... +Maud de Holand 1348 -
............................................................. 7 Jeanne St. Pol 1381 -
................................................................. +Antoine de Burgundy Brabant
........................................................................ 8 John de Brabant 1403 -
............................................................................ +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. 7 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
................................................................. +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
........................................................................ 8 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
............................................................................ +[4] Marguerite de Baux
.................................................. 6 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
...................................................... +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
............................................................. 7 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
................................................................. +[4] Marguerite de Baux
........................................................................ 8 [7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
............................................................................ +[6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of [7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol:
............................................................................ +Richard Woodville 1405 - 1469
........................................................................ 8 Catherine de Luxembourg St. Pol 1420 - 1492
............................................................................ +Arthur III of Brittany 1393 - 1458
........................................ *2nd Husband of Maud de Châtillon:
............................................ +Charles III Valois
.................................................. 6 Isabella Valois
...................................................... +Peter de Burbon
............................................................. 7 Jeanne de Bourbon
................................................................. +Charles le Sage Valois
........................................................................ 8 Charles VI the Mad King of France Valois 1368 - 1422
............................................................................ +Isabeau of Barvaria 1371 - 1435
........................................................................ 8 Louis Valois 1371/72 -
............................................................................ +Joanna de Burbon
........ 2 Edward Longshanks Plantagenet 1239 -
................... 3 Edward II Plantagenet 1284 -
....................... +Isabella de France 1292 - 1358
............................. 4 Edward III Plantagenet 1312 -
................................. +Phillipa de Hainault 1311 -
........................................ 5 Edward Bl. Prince Plantagenet 1330 -
............................................ +Joan de Kent Plantagenet 1328 -
.................................................. 6 Richard II Plantagenet 1366/67 - 1399/00
...................................................... +Isabella Valois 1389 -
........................................ 5 Isabel Plantagenet 1332 -
............................................ +Enguerrand de Coucy VII 1343 -
.................................................. 6 Philipa de Coucy 1366 - 1411
...................................................... +Robert de Vere
........................................ 5 Mary Plantagenet 1334 -
............................................ +John of Brittany 1339 - 1399
........................................ 5 Lionel Antwerp Plantagenet 1338 -
............................................ +Elizabeth de Burgh 1332 -
.................................................. 6 Phillipa Plantagenet 1355 -
...................................................... +Edmund de Mortimer 1351/52 -
............................................................. 7 Roger de Mortimer 1374 - 1398
................................................................. +Eleanor de Holand 1373 - 1413
........................................................................ 8 [15] Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
............................................................................ +[14] Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
........................................................................ 8 [37] Edmund de Mortimer 1391 - 1424/25
............................................................................ +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................ 5 [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
............................................ +Marie de St. Hilaire 1340 -
.................................................. 6 Blanche Plantagenet 1360 -
........................................ *1st Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +[52] Blanche Plantagenet 1345 -
.................................................. 6 [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet 1366 -
...................................................... +[55] Mary de Bohun 1370 -
............................................................. 7 [56] Humphrey Plantagenet 1390 -
................................................................. +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [56] Humphrey Plantagenet:
................................................................. +[57] Eleanor Cobham 1400 - 1454
........................................................................ 8 [58] Antigone Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................................ +[59] Henry de Grey 1419 -
........................................................................ 8 [60] Arthur Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................. 7 [61] Henry V Lancaster Plantagenet 1387 -
................................................................. +[62] Catherine Valois 1401 -
........................................................................ 8 [63] Henry VI Lancaster Plantagenet 1421 - 1471
............................................................................ +[64] Margaret de Anjou 1428/29 -
............................................................. 7 [6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
................................................................. +[7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
........................................................................ 8 [65] Child Plantagenet 1432 - 1432
.................................................. *2nd Wife of [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[66] Joanna Navarre 1370 - 1437
.................................................. 6 [67] Phillipa Plantagenet 1360 -
.................................................. 6 [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1364 - 1425
...................................................... +[69] John Cornwall de Burford
............................................................. 7 [70] Constance Cornwall de Burford 1404 -
................................................................. +[71] John FitzAlan 1408 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[72] John de Hastings
.................................................. *3rd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[73] John de Holand 1350 -
............................................................. 7 [74] Constance de Holand 1387 - 1437
................................................................. +[75] Thomas Mowbray 1385 - 1405
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [74] Constance de Holand:
................................................................. +[76] John de Grey 1387 - 1439
........................................................................ 8 [77] Thomas de Grey 1412 -
............................................................................ +[78] Margaret Scrope 1422 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [77] Thomas de Grey:
............................................................................ +[79] Margaret Ferrers 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 [80] Edmund de Grey 1416 -
............................................................................ +[81] Katherine Percy 1423 -
........................................................................ 8 [82] Constance de Grey 1414 -
........................................................................ 8 [83] Alice de Grey 1415 -
............................................................. 7 [84] Alice de Holand 1392 -
................................................................. +[85] Richard de Vere 1385 - 1416/17
........................................................................ 8 [86] John de Vere 1408 -
............................................................................ +[87] Elizabeth Howard 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [88] Robert de Vere 1410 -
............................................................. 7 [89] Richard de Holand 1390 -
............................................................. 7 [38] John de Holand 1395 -
................................................................. +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [38] John de Holand:
................................................................. +[90] Anne Montagu 1390 - 1457
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
........................................................................ 8 [91] Anne de Holand
............................................................. 7 [92] Edward de Holand 1399 -
.................................................. 6 [93] John Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [94] Edward Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [95] John II Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [96] Isabel Plantagenet 1365 -
........................................ *2nd Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +Katherine Roet 1350 - 1403
.................................................. 6 John Beaufort 1371 -
...................................................... +Margaret de Holand 1385 -
............................................................. 7 John Beaufort 1404 -
................................................................. +Margaret Beauchamp 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
............................................................................ +[13] Thomas Stanley 1435 -
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +William de la Pole 1396 -
........................................................................ *3rd Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +Edmund Tudor 1431 - 1456
........................................................................ *4th Husband of [12] Margaret Beaufort:
............................................................................ +[11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................. *2nd Wife of John Beaufort:
................................................................. +Mistress
........................................................................ 8 Tacina Beaufort 1434 - 1469
............................................................................ +Reynold de Grey 1421 - 1493/94
.................................................. 6 Joan Beaufort 1375 - 1440
...................................................... +Ralph Neville 1364 - 1425
............................................................. 7 [41] Anne Neville 1410 - 1480
................................................................. +[40] Humphrey Stafford 1402 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................................ +[12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
........................................................................ 8 [42] Joan Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[43] William Knyvett 1440 - 1515
........................................................................ 8 [44] Humphrey de Stafford 1424 -
............................................................................ +[45] Margaret Beaufort 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 [46] Katherine de Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[47] John Talbot 1413 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [48] Elizabeth Stafford 1434 -
............................................................................ +[49] Richard Beauchamp 1432 -
............................................................. 7 Katherine Neville 1397 - 1478
................................................................. +John Mowbray 1392 -
........................................................................ 8 [51] John Mowbray 1415 - 1461
............................................................................ +[50] Eleanor Bourcheir 1417 -
........................................................................ 8 Katherine Mowbray 1420 -
............................................................................ +Thomas de Grey 1410 -
............................................................. *2nd Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +Thomas Strangeways 1389 - 1441/42
........................................................................ 8 Catherine Strangeways 1436 - 1456
............................................................................ +Henry de Grey 1435 - 1495
........................................................................ 8 Joan Strangeways 1435 - 1484/85
............................................................................ +William Willoughby 1430 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of Joan Strangeways:
............................................................................ +William de Berkeley
........................................................................ 8 Isabel Strangeways 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 Thomas Strangeways 1435 -
............................................................. *3rd Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +John Beaumont 1390 - 1460
............................................................. *4th Husband of Katherine Neville:
................................................................. +John Woodville 1445 - 1469
............................................................. 7 [17] Cecily Neville 1415 - 1495
................................................................. +[16] Richard Plantagenet 1411 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................................ +[9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [18] Henry Plantagenet 1440/41 -
........................................................................ 8 [19] Edward IV Plantagenet 1442 - 1483
............................................................................ +[20] Margaret FitzLewis 1437 - 1466
........................................................................ *Friend of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[21] Elizabeth Lambert 1450 -
........................................................................ *1st Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[22] Eleanor Talbot 1437 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[23] Elizabeth Woodville 1437 -
........................................................................ 8 [24] Edmund Plantagenet 1443 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [25] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1444 -
............................................................................ +[26] John de la Pole 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 [27] Margaret Plantagenet 1446 - 1503
............................................................................ +[28] Charles de Bourgogne Burgundy 1433 - 1476/77
........................................................................ 8 [29] William Plantagenet 1447 -
........................................................................ 8 [30] John Plantagenet 1448 -
........................................................................ 8 [31] George Plantagenet 1449 - 1477/78
............................................................................ +[32] Isabel Neville 1451 - 1476
........................................................................ 8 [33] Thomas Plantagenet 1451 -
........................................................................ 8 [34] Richard III Plantagenet 1452 - 1485
............................................................................ +[35] Anne Neville 1456 - 1484/85
........................................................................ 8 [36] Ursula Plantagenet 1455 -
............................................................. 7 Richard Neville 1400 - 1460
................................................................. +Alice Montagu 1406 - 1462
........................................................................ 8 Eleanor Neville 1438 -
............................................................................ +[13] Thomas Stanley 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 Richard Neville 1428 - 1471
............................................................................ +Anne Beauchamp 1426 -
........................................................................ 8 Joan Neville 1430 -
............................................................................ +William FitzAlan 1420 -
........................................................................ 8 Katherine Neville 1435 - 1504
............................................................................ +William Hastings 1431 - 1483
........................................................................ *2nd Husband of Katherine Neville:
............................................................................ +William Bonville 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 John Neville 1431 -
............................................................................ +Isabel Ingaldesthorpe 1435 -
.................................................. 6 Thomas Beaufort 1375 -
.................................................. 6 Henry Beaufort 1375 -
...................................................... +Alice FitzAlan 1378 - 1415
............................................................. 7 Jane Beaufort 1402 -
................................................................. +Edward Stradling 1398 - 1453
........................................................................ 8 Henry Stradling 1425 -
........................................ *3rd Wife of [53] John Gaunt Plantagenet:
............................................ +Constance de Castile 1354 - 1393/94
.................................................. 6 Catherine Plantagenet 1371 -
.................................................. 6 John Plantagenet 1371 -
........................................ 5 Edmund Langley Plantagenet 1341 -
............................................ +Isabella Infanta de Castile 1361 -
.................................................. 6 [14] Richard de Conisbrough Plantagenet 1376 - 1415
...................................................... +[15] Anne de Mortimer 1390 - 1411
............................................................. 7 [16] Richard Plantagenet 1411 - 1460
................................................................. +[17] Cecily Neville 1415 - 1495
........................................................................ 8 [10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................................ +[9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [18] Henry Plantagenet 1440/41 -
........................................................................ 8 [19] Edward IV Plantagenet 1442 - 1483
............................................................................ +[20] Margaret FitzLewis 1437 - 1466
........................................................................ *Friend of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[21] Elizabeth Lambert 1450 -
........................................................................ *1st Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[22] Eleanor Talbot 1437 - 1468
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [19] Edward IV Plantagenet:
............................................................................ +[23] Elizabeth Woodville 1437 -
........................................................................ 8 [24] Edmund Plantagenet 1443 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [25] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1444 -
............................................................................ +[26] John de la Pole 1442 -
........................................................................ 8 [27] Margaret Plantagenet 1446 - 1503
............................................................................ +[28] Charles de Bourgogne Burgundy 1433 - 1476/77
........................................................................ 8 [29] William Plantagenet 1447 -
........................................................................ 8 [30] John Plantagenet 1448 -
........................................................................ 8 [31] George Plantagenet 1449 - 1477/78
............................................................................ +[32] Isabel Neville 1451 - 1476
........................................................................ 8 [33] Thomas Plantagenet 1451 -
........................................................................ 8 [34] Richard III Plantagenet 1452 - 1485
............................................................................ +[35] Anne Neville 1456 - 1484/85
........................................................................ 8 [36] Ursula Plantagenet 1455 -
............................................................. 7 Isabella Plantagenet 1409 -
................................................................. +Henry Bourchier 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 William Bourchier 1452 - 1480
............................................................................ +Isobel de Vere 1452 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of William Bourchier:
............................................................................ +Anne Woodville 1456 - 1489
........................................................................ 8 Humphrey Bourchier - 1471
............................................................................ +Joan Stanhope
........................................ 5 Thomas Woodstock Plantagenet 1353/54 -
............................................ +Eleanor Bohun
.................................................. 6 Anne Plantagenet 1383 -
...................................................... +Edmund de Stafford 1377/78 - 1403
............................................................. 7 [8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
................................................................. +[37] Edmund de Mortimer 1391 - 1424/25
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [8] Anne Stafford:
................................................................. +[38] John de Holand 1395 -
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. 7 [40] Humphrey Stafford 1402 - 1460
................................................................. +[41] Anne Neville 1410 - 1480
........................................................................ 8 [11] Henry de Stafford 1443 - 1481
............................................................................ +[12] Margaret Beaufort 1443 - 1509
........................................................................ 8 [42] Joan Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[43] William Knyvett 1440 - 1515
........................................................................ 8 [44] Humphrey de Stafford 1424 -
............................................................................ +[45] Margaret Beaufort 1435 -
........................................................................ 8 [46] Katherine de Stafford 1440 -
............................................................................ +[47] John Talbot 1413 - 1460
........................................................................ 8 [48] Elizabeth Stafford 1434 -
............................................................................ +[49] Richard Beauchamp 1432 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of Anne Plantagenet:
...................................................... +William Bourcheir
............................................................. 7 [50] Eleanor Bourcheir 1417 -
................................................................. +[51] John Mowbray 1415 - 1461
........................................................................ 8 John Mowbray 1444 - 1474/75
............................................................................ +Elizabeth Talbot 1443 - 1506
............................. *Partner of Edward III Plantagenet:
................................. +Alice Perrer Perrers
........ 2 Edmund Plantagenet 1244/45 -
............ +Blanche de Artois
................... 3 Henry Plantagenet 1281 -
....................... +Maud Chaworth 1282 -
............................. 4 Henry Plantagenet 1300 -
................................. +Isabel Beaumont 1310 -
........................................ 5 [52] Blanche Plantagenet 1345 -
............................................ +[53] John Gaunt Plantagenet 1339/40 - 1398/99
.................................................. 6 [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet 1366 -
...................................................... +[55] Mary de Bohun 1370 -
............................................................. 7 [56] Humphrey Plantagenet 1390 -
................................................................. +[5] Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [56] Humphrey Plantagenet:
................................................................. +[57] Eleanor Cobham 1400 - 1454
........................................................................ 8 [58] Antigone Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................................ +[59] Henry de Grey 1419 -
........................................................................ 8 [60] Arthur Plantagenet 1428 -
............................................................. 7 [61] Henry V Lancaster Plantagenet 1387 -
................................................................. +[62] Catherine Valois 1401 -
........................................................................ 8 [63] Henry VI Lancaster Plantagenet 1421 - 1471
............................................................................ +[64] Margaret de Anjou 1428/29 -
............................................................. 7 [6] John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
................................................................. +[7] Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
........................................................................ 8 [65] Child Plantagenet 1432 - 1432
.................................................. *2nd Wife of [54] Henry Bolingbroke Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[66] Joanna Navarre 1370 - 1437
.................................................. 6 [67] Phillipa Plantagenet 1360 -
.................................................. 6 [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet 1364 - 1425
...................................................... +[69] John Cornwall de Burford
............................................................. 7 [70] Constance Cornwall de Burford 1404 -
................................................................. +[71] John FitzAlan 1408 -
.................................................. *2nd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[72] John de Hastings
.................................................. *3rd Husband of [68] Elizabeth Plantagenet:
...................................................... +[73] John de Holand 1350 -
............................................................. 7 [74] Constance de Holand 1387 - 1437
................................................................. +[75] Thomas Mowbray 1385 - 1405
............................................................. *2nd Husband of [74] Constance de Holand:
................................................................. +[76] John de Grey 1387 - 1439
........................................................................ 8 [77] Thomas de Grey 1412 -
............................................................................ +[78] Margaret Scrope 1422 -
........................................................................ *2nd Wife of [77] Thomas de Grey:
............................................................................ +[79] Margaret Ferrers 1404 -
........................................................................ 8 [80] Edmund de Grey 1416 -
............................................................................ +[81] Katherine Percy 1423 -
........................................................................ 8 [82] Constance de Grey 1414 -
........................................................................ 8 [83] Alice de Grey 1415 -
............................................................. 7 [84] Alice de Holand 1392 -
................................................................. +[85] Richard de Vere 1385 - 1416/17
........................................................................ 8 [86] John de Vere 1408 -
............................................................................ +[87] Elizabeth Howard 1410 -
........................................................................ 8 [88] Robert de Vere 1410 -
............................................................. 7 [89] Richard de Holand 1390 -
............................................................. 7 [38] John de Holand 1395 -
................................................................. +[8] Anne Stafford 1403 - 1432
........................................................................ 8 [39] Anne de Holand 1430 -
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
............................................................. *2nd Wife of [38] John de Holand:
................................................................. +[90] Anne Montagu 1390 - 1457
........................................................................ 8 [9] Henry de Holand 1430 -
............................................................................ +[10] Anne Plantagenet 1439 -
........................................................................ 8 [91] Anne de Holand
............................................................. 7 [92] Edward de Holand 1399 -
.................................................. 6 [93] John Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [94] Edward Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [95] John II Plantagenet 1365 -
.................................................. 6 [96] Isabel Plantagenet 1365 -
and here is de luxemburg family..note woodville's sister catherine is married to arthur of brittany d. 1456. arthur's nephew francis inherited the dukedom, and his daughter anne was designated to be the wife of e5 until his disappearence.
francis did not have a good relationship with the spider king, louis.
1 Guy de Lille Luxemburg St. Pol 1331 - 1371
.. +Maud de Châtillon 1332 -
........ 2 Waleran III de Luxembourg St. Pol 1355 -
............ +Maud de Holand 1348 -
................... 3 Jeanne St. Pol 1381 -
....................... +Antoine de Burgundy Brabant
............................. 4 John de Brabant 1403 -
................................. +Jacqueline de Wittelsbach 1401 - 1436
................... 3 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
....................... +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
............................. 4 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
................................. +[4] Marguerite de Baux
........ 2 [1] Jean St. Pol 1370 -
............ +[2] Marguérite D'Enghien 1365 -
................... 3 [3] Pierre St. Pol 1390 -
....................... +[4] Marguerite de Baux
............................. 4 Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol 1415 - 1472
................................. +John Bedford Plantagenet 1389 - 1435
............................. *2nd Husband of Jacquetta de Luxembourg St. Pol:
................................. +Richard Woodville 1405 - 1469
............................. 4 Catherine de Luxembourg St. Pol 1420 - 1492
................................. +Arthur III of Brittany 1393 - 1458
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne%2C_Duchess_of_Brittany
roslyn
mariewalsh2003 <marie@...> wrote:
> i also think looking at the woodville's family connections to the
pope of the day may be able to more fully answer as to whether or not,
such a marriage could have achieved a dispensation with "relative" ease.
Could you possibly post these connections for everyone's benefit,
Roslyn? This really might put a different light on it.
Marie
---------------------------------
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers.
Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and "engagement" to Richard III
2006-12-10 06:18:51
> <fayreroze@> wrote:
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today.
For reference, here are a couple of links to the 2005 exhumation and
study of the remains of Agnès Sorel, who would have been about the
age of Cicily Neville, but died in 1450 in suspicious circumstances:
http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/
http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1112613663615F652
MUCH too much mercury in her hair shaft -- 10,000 times a normal
amount -- but: if she was poisoned, was it accidental, benign (part
of a medical treatment of the day, for instance), or nasty?
L.P.H.,
Ann
> >
> > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
the
> era didn't have all the technology we have today.
For reference, here are a couple of links to the 2005 exhumation and
study of the remains of Agnès Sorel, who would have been about the
age of Cicily Neville, but died in 1450 in suspicious circumstances:
http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/
http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?
set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1112613663615F652
MUCH too much mercury in her hair shaft -- 10,000 times a normal
amount -- but: if she was poisoned, was it accidental, benign (part
of a medical treatment of the day, for instance), or nasty?
L.P.H.,
Ann
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Elizabeth of York's letter and
2006-12-10 13:16:16
Agnes was a hottie.
Ann Sharp wrote:
>
> > <fayreroze@> wrote:
> > >
> > > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
> the
> > era didn't have all the technology we have today.
>
> For reference, here are a couple of links to the 2005 exhumation and
> study of the remains of Agnès Sorel, who would have been about the
> age of Cicily Neville, but died in 1450 in suspicious circumstances:
>
> http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/
> <http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/>
> http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf
> <http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf>
> http://www.iol.co.za/index.php? <http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?>
> set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1112613663615F652
>
> MUCH too much mercury in her hair shaft -- 10,000 times a normal
> amount -- but: if she was poisoned, was it accidental, benign (part
> of a medical treatment of the day, for instance), or nasty?
>
> L.P.H.,
>
> Ann
>
>
Ann Sharp wrote:
>
> > <fayreroze@> wrote:
> > >
> > > not necessarily. some poisons mimic illnesses. the doctors of
> the
> > era didn't have all the technology we have today.
>
> For reference, here are a couple of links to the 2005 exhumation and
> study of the remains of Agnès Sorel, who would have been about the
> age of Cicily Neville, but died in 1450 in suspicious circumstances:
>
> http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/
> <http://www.esrf.eu/news/pressreleases/sorel/>
> http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf
> <http://www.esrf.eu/files/Newsletter/NL41.pdf>
> http://www.iol.co.za/index.php? <http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?>
> set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1112613663615F652
>
> MUCH too much mercury in her hair shaft -- 10,000 times a normal
> amount -- but: if she was poisoned, was it accidental, benign (part
> of a medical treatment of the day, for instance), or nasty?
>
> L.P.H.,
>
> Ann
>
>
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.