Help!

Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in this
subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it in
depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting on
in years (67), and having limited resources, I`m
curtailed with lack of real research material.
Most of it comes from the internet. The local
library is very helpful, and through them by phone
I recently obtained a copy of the Stallworth/Stonor
letter, but there is only so much they can do. I`d
be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum could
supply me with internet links to The Great Chronicle
of London and the The Usurpation of Richard III by
Dominic Mancini.

The former is available to buy, if one can afford it,
I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas and
Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in £s?

The latter is available on line through JSTOR, but I
don`t have student access to it.

I`m sure there are others in equally restricted
circumstances, so any help in this matter could
also help them.

Thanks,
Alan

====================

I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the C. A.
J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he reissued
in 1969, is still under copyright.

Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
"interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a member
of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from the
Society library. You might consider joining, as you
get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
discount for pensioners.

At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
volume in question would be about 450 pounds.

--- alanth252 <alanth252@...> wrote:

> Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in this
> subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it in
> depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting on
> in years (67), and having limited resources, I`m
> curtailed with lack of real research material.
> Most of it comes from the internet. The local
> library is very helpful, and through them by phone
> I recently obtained a copy of the Stallworth/Stonor
> letter, but there is only so much they can do. I`d
> be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum could
> supply me with internet links to The Great Chronicle
>
> of London and the The Usurpation of Richard III by
> Dominic Mancini.
>
> The former is available to buy, if one can afford
> it,
> I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas
> and
> Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in
> £s?
>
> The latter is available on line through JSTOR, but I
>
> don`t have student access to it.
>
> I`m sure there are others in equally restricted
> circumstances, so any help in this matter could
> also help them.
>
> Thanks,
> Alan
>
> ====================
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks for your reply Laura.

"I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the C. A.
J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he reissued
in 1969, is still under copyright."

Yes I was afraid of that.

"Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
"interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a member
of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from the
Society library. You might consider joining, as you
get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
discount for pensioners."

We do have an inter-library service in the UK, but I
live in Belfast and the books I`m looking for would
probably have to come from the British Library in
London which is how I acquired the Stonor Letters.
It`s a bit of a roundabout route and takes time.
I`ll look in into the Richard III Society membership,
although apart from the library sources, whether or
not it would be of real benefit to me is probably
doubtful. I`m not sure if there is a branch in Ireland
or indeed if there are any Ricardians. (I`ll probably get
inundated by Emails after saying that.) I`ve lived in
Northern Ireland for 40+ years, but I`m an Englishman
who was reared near Stratford-upon-Avon (Bard country).
Hence my interest in the "Roses".

"At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
volume in question would be about 450 pounds."

(lol) Thanks. At that price I`ll have to give it a miss.

Thanks again for your help Laura.

Alan

===========================

--- In , Laura Blanchard
<lblanchard@...> wrote:
>
> I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the C. A.
> J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he reissued
> in 1969, is still under copyright.
>
> Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
> "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a member
> of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
> certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from the
> Society library. You might consider joining, as you
> get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
> discount for pensioners.
>
> At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
> volume in question would be about 450 pounds.
>
> --- alanth252 <alanth252@...> wrote:
>
> > Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in this
> > subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it in
> > depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting on
> > in years (67), and having limited resources, I`m
> > curtailed with lack of real research material.
> > Most of it comes from the internet. The local
> > library is very helpful, and through them by phone
> > I recently obtained a copy of the Stallworth/Stonor
> > letter, but there is only so much they can do. I`d
> > be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum could
> > supply me with internet links to The Great Chronicle
> >
> > of London and the The Usurpation of Richard III by
> > Dominic Mancini.
> >
> > The former is available to buy, if one can afford
> > it,
> > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas
> > and
> > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in
> > £s?
> >
> > The latter is available on line through JSTOR, but I
> >
> > don`t have student access to it.
> >
> > I`m sure there are others in equally restricted
> > circumstances, so any help in this matter could
> > also help them.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alan
> >
> > ====================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Current exchange rate is UKP456,
Cannot believe that price. my copy cost UKP40, though that was a
while ago.
The Usurpation is available in a paperback version which doesn't cost
much.
Try a search on AddAll.com but maybe there is a copy somewhere on line.
Good luck
Paul

On 20 Aug 2007, at 11:37, alanth252 wrote:

> The former is available to buy, if one can afford it,
> I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas and
> Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in £s?

"Richard Liveth Yet!"

Roughly double.

Paul Trevor Bale wrote:
>
> Current exchange rate is UKP456,
> Cannot believe that price. my copy cost UKP40, though that was a
> while ago.
> The Usurpation is available in a paperback version which doesn't cost
> much.
> Try a search on AddAll.com but maybe there is a copy somewhere on line.
> Good luck
> Paul
>
> On 20 Aug 2007, at 11:37, alanth252 wrote:
>
> > The former is available to buy, if one can afford it,
> > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas and
> > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in £s?
>
> "Richard Liveth Yet!"
>


>
>

Hi Paul,

Looked on AddALL.com. No luck! However I will continue my search for
the paperback edition of the London Chronicle elsewhere. Thanks.

I know "The Usurpation of Richard III" is online at JSTOR. Just can`t
get access to the site. Now if any student with access to JSTOR
could download etc. etc... Christmas could maybe come early. One
lives in hope.

Alan

=====================

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale
<paultrevor@...> wrote:
>
> Current exchange rate is UKP456,
> Cannot believe that price. my copy cost UKP40, though that was a
> while ago.
> The Usurpation is available in a paperback version which doesn't
cost
> much.
> Try a search on AddAll.com but maybe there is a copy somewhere on
line.
> Good luck
> Paul
>
> On 20 Aug 2007, at 11:37, alanth252 wrote:
>
> > The former is available to buy, if one can afford it,
> > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas and
> > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in £s?
>
> "Richard Liveth Yet!"
>

--- In , "alanth252"
<alanth252@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply Laura.
>
> "I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the C. A.
> J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he reissued
> in 1969, is still under copyright."
>
> Yes I was afraid of that.
>
> "Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
> "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a member
> of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
> certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from the
> Society library. You might consider joining, as you
> get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
> discount for pensioners."
>
> We do have an inter-library service in the UK, but I
> live in Belfast and the books I`m looking for would
> probably have to come from the British Library in
> London which is how I acquired the Stonor Letters.
> It`s a bit of a roundabout route and takes time.
> I`ll look in into the Richard III Society membership,
> although apart from the library sources, whether or
> not it would be of real benefit to me is probably
> doubtful. I`m not sure if there is a branch in Ireland
> or indeed if there are any Ricardians. (I`ll probably get
> inundated by Emails after saying that.) I`ve lived in
> Northern Ireland for 40+ years, but I`m an Englishman
> who was reared near Stratford-upon-Avon (Bard country).
> Hence my interest in the "Roses".
>
Alan:

Did you realise that the BL does an e-mail service? They charge a
basic £23.50 plus 20 or 50 pence per copy? Call them on 0870-444-1500.

Stephen

> "At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
> volume in question would be about 450 pounds."
>
> (lol) Thanks. At that price I`ll have to give it a miss.
>
> Thanks again for your help Laura.
>
> Alan
>
> ===========================
>
> --- In , Laura Blanchard
> <lblanchard@> wrote:
> >
> > I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the C. A.
> > J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he reissued
> > in 1969, is still under copyright.
> >
> > Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> > borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
> > "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a member
> > of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
> > certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from the
> > Society library. You might consider joining, as you
> > get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
> > discount for pensioners.
> >
> > At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
> > volume in question would be about 450 pounds.
> >
> > --- alanth252 <alanth252@> wrote:
> >
> > > Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in this
> > > subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it in
> > > depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting on
> > > in years (67), and having limited resources, I`m
> > > curtailed with lack of real research material.
> > > Most of it comes from the internet. The local
> > > library is very helpful, and through them by phone
> > > I recently obtained a copy of the Stallworth/Stonor
> > > letter, but there is only so much they can do. I`d
> > > be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum could
> > > supply me with internet links to The Great Chronicle
> > >
> > > of London and the The Usurpation of Richard III by
> > > Dominic Mancini.
> > >
> > > The former is available to buy, if one can afford
> > > it,
> > > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by Thomas
> > > and
> > > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is $850 in
> > > £s?
> > >
> > > The latter is available on line through JSTOR, but I
> > >
> > > don`t have student access to it.
> > >
> > > I`m sure there are others in equally restricted
> > > circumstances, so any help in this matter could
> > > also help them.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Alan
> > >
> > > ====================
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Thanks Stephen. No I didn`t. I`m puzzled my local library didn`t tell
me about it. I`ll check it out. Thanks again.

Alan

==============


> Did you realise that the BL does an e-mail service? They charge a
> basic £23.50 plus 20 or 50 pence per copy? Call them on 0870-444-1500.
>
> Stephen
>
>Brevity snip.

There's a copy of the Great Chronicle here in
Philadelphia at the University of Pennsylvania
Library. Alas, I no longer have borrowing privileges
there, but if you're looking for just a bit of it I
suppose I could transcribe.

--- Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:

> --- In ,
> "alanth252"
> <alanth252@...> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your reply Laura.
> >
> > "I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the
> C. A.
> > J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he
> reissued
> > in 1969, is still under copyright."
> >
> > Yes I was afraid of that.
> >
> > "Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> > borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
> > "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a
> member
> > of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
> > certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from
> the
> > Society library. You might consider joining, as
> you
> > get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
> > discount for pensioners."
> >
> > We do have an inter-library service in the UK, but
> I
> > live in Belfast and the books I`m looking for
> would
> > probably have to come from the British Library in
> > London which is how I acquired the Stonor Letters.
> > It`s a bit of a roundabout route and takes time.
> > I`ll look in into the Richard III Society
> membership,
> > although apart from the library sources, whether
> or
> > not it would be of real benefit to me is probably
> > doubtful. I`m not sure if there is a branch in
> Ireland
> > or indeed if there are any Ricardians. (I`ll
> probably get
> > inundated by Emails after saying that.) I`ve lived
> in
> > Northern Ireland for 40+ years, but I`m an
> Englishman
> > who was reared near Stratford-upon-Avon (Bard
> country).
> > Hence my interest in the "Roses".
> >
> Alan:
>
> Did you realise that the BL does an e-mail service?
> They charge a
> basic £23.50 plus 20 or 50 pence per copy? Call them
> on 0870-444-1500.
>
> Stephen
>
> > "At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
> > volume in question would be about 450 pounds."
> >
> > (lol) Thanks. At that price I`ll have to give it a
> miss.
> >
> > Thanks again for your help Laura.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > ===========================
> >
> > --- In ,
> Laura Blanchard
> > <lblanchard@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the
> C. A.
> > > J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he
> reissued
> > > in 1969, is still under copyright.
> > >
> > > Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> > > borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call
> it
> > > "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a
> member
> > > of the Richard III Society you can borrow
> Mancini
> > > certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle,
> from the
> > > Society library. You might consider joining, as
> you
> > > get access to all kinds of things, and they have
> a
> > > discount for pensioners.
> > >
> > > At the moment, with the scary exchange rates,
> the
> > > volume in question would be about 450 pounds.
> > >
> > > --- alanth252 <alanth252@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in
> this
> > > > subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it
> in
> > > > depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting
> on
> > > > in years (67), and having limited resources,
> I`m
> > > > curtailed with lack of real research material.
>
> > > > Most of it comes from the internet. The local
> > > > library is very helpful, and through them by
> phone
> > > > I recently obtained a copy of the
> Stallworth/Stonor
> > > > letter, but there is only so much they can do.
> I`d
> > > > be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum
> could
> > > > supply me with internet links to The Great
> Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > of London and the The Usurpation of Richard
> III by
> > > > Dominic Mancini.
> > > >
> > > > The former is available to buy, if one can
> afford
> > > > it,
> > > > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by
> Thomas
> > > > and
> > > > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is
> $850 in
> > > > £s?
> > > >
> > > > The latter is available on line through JSTOR,
> but I
> > > >
> > > > don`t have student access to it.
> > > >
> > > > I`m sure there are others in equally
> restricted
> > > > circumstances, so any help in this matter
> could
> > > > also help them.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > ====================
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

There are two copies in the library at Queen's
University, Belfast, neither of them on loan at
present.

(Isn't the internet wonderful?)

--- alanth252 <alanth252@...> wrote:

> Thanks Stephen. No I didn`t. I`m puzzled my local
> library didn`t tell
> me about it. I`ll check it out. Thanks again.
>
> Alan
>
> ==============
>
>
> > Did you realise that the BL does an e-mail
> service? They charge a
> > basic £23.50 plus 20 or 50 pence per copy? Call
> them on 0870-444-1500.
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> >Brevity snip.
>
>

There's a copy of the Great Chronicle here in
Philadelphia at the University of Pennsylvania
Library. Alas, I no longer have borrowing privileges
there, but if you're looking for just a bit of it I
suppose I could transcribe.

--- Stephen Lark <stephenmlark@...> wrote:

> --- In ,
> "alanth252"
> <alanth252@...> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your reply Laura.
> >
> > "I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the
> C. A.
> > J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he
> reissued
> > in 1969, is still under copyright."
> >
> > Yes I was afraid of that.
> >
> > "Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> > borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call it
> > "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a
> member
> > of the Richard III Society you can borrow Mancini
> > certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle, from
> the
> > Society library. You might consider joining, as
> you
> > get access to all kinds of things, and they have a
> > discount for pensioners."
> >
> > We do have an inter-library service in the UK, but
> I
> > live in Belfast and the books I`m looking for
> would
> > probably have to come from the British Library in
> > London which is how I acquired the Stonor Letters.
> > It`s a bit of a roundabout route and takes time.
> > I`ll look in into the Richard III Society
> membership,
> > although apart from the library sources, whether
> or
> > not it would be of real benefit to me is probably
> > doubtful. I`m not sure if there is a branch in
> Ireland
> > or indeed if there are any Ricardians. (I`ll
> probably get
> > inundated by Emails after saying that.) I`ve lived
> in
> > Northern Ireland for 40+ years, but I`m an
> Englishman
> > who was reared near Stratford-upon-Avon (Bard
> country).
> > Hence my interest in the "Roses".
> >
> Alan:
>
> Did you realise that the BL does an e-mail service?
> They charge a
> basic £23.50 plus 20 or 50 pence per copy? Call them
> on 0870-444-1500.
>
> Stephen
>
> > "At the moment, with the scary exchange rates, the
> > volume in question would be about 450 pounds."
> >
> > (lol) Thanks. At that price I`ll have to give it a
> miss.
> >
> > Thanks again for your help Laura.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > ===========================
> >
> > --- In ,
> Laura Blanchard
> > <lblanchard@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know about the Great Chronicle, but the
> C. A.
> > > J. Armstrong translation of Mancini, which he
> reissued
> > > in 1969, is still under copyright.
> > >
> > > Do you have access to a library with reciprocal
> > > borrowing privileges? (Here in the U.S. we call
> it
> > > "interlibrary loan") Additionally, if you are a
> member
> > > of the Richard III Society you can borrow
> Mancini
> > > certainly, and possibly the Great Chronicle,
> from the
> > > Society library. You might consider joining, as
> you
> > > get access to all kinds of things, and they have
> a
> > > discount for pensioners.
> > >
> > > At the moment, with the scary exchange rates,
> the
> > > volume in question would be about 450 pounds.
> > >
> > > --- alanth252 <alanth252@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Although I`ve had a lifetime lay interest in
> this
> > > > subject, I`ve only recently begun to tackle it
> in
> > > > depth. Being somewhat housebound, and getting
> on
> > > > in years (67), and having limited resources,
> I`m
> > > > curtailed with lack of real research material.
>
> > > > Most of it comes from the internet. The local
> > > > library is very helpful, and through them by
> phone
> > > > I recently obtained a copy of the
> Stallworth/Stonor
> > > > letter, but there is only so much they can do.
> I`d
> > > > be grateful therefore if anyone on the forum
> could
> > > > supply me with internet links to The Great
> Chronicle
> > > >
> > > > of London and the The Usurpation of Richard
> III by
> > > > Dominic Mancini.
> > > >
> > > > The former is available to buy, if one can
> afford
> > > > it,
> > > > I can`t. (The Great Chronicle of London by
> Thomas
> > > > and
> > > > Thornley at $850.00 (CAD $ 894.74) What is
> $850 in
> > > > £s?
> > > >
> > > > The latter is available on line through JSTOR,
> but I
> > > >
> > > > don`t have student access to it.
> > > >
> > > > I`m sure there are others in equally
> restricted
> > > > circumstances, so any help in this matter
> could
> > > > also help them.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > ====================
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

What has happened to the Forum? I posted a message on Sunday and nothing has appeared since Saturday morning

--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> What has happened to the Forum? I posted a message on Sunday and
nothing has appeared since Saturday morning


Perhaps it's because sometimes people ask a question or propose a
topic, only to be told that it's been discussed before (what hasn't?)
or that they're using this august forum to do their family geneology
research or that they have everything all wrong and should read ten
authoritative works before joining in again.

Katy

Messages are back - I have just resent Sunday's about Debenham and Bruys - but the topics are not in chronological order, although other fora are suffering the same way.

----- Original Message -----
From: oregonkaty
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:21 AM
Subject: Re: Help!


--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<stephenmlark@...> wrote:
>
> What has happened to the Forum? I posted a message on Sunday and
nothing has appeared since Saturday morning

Perhaps it's because sometimes people ask a question or propose a
topic, only to be told that it's been discussed before (what hasn't?)
or that they're using this august forum to do their family geneology
research or that they have everything all wrong and should read ten
authoritative works before joining in again.

Katy

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "Stephen Lark"
> <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> >
> > What has happened to the Forum? I posted a message on Sunday and
> nothing has appeared since Saturday morning
>
>
>
> or that they have everything all wrong and should read ten
> authoritative works before joining in again.
>
> Katy
>
Too true Katy, too true - I have not posted any messages (although I do log on and read them from time to
time) since the ferocious attack on me by a member of this forum whom took umbrage to a message I
posted in reply to a question by another member, I must say much to my bewilderment. I have not got
over it to this day as I feel it was totally unwarranted. I was upset by the sheer nastiness of the response
-another member joined in - that my husband noticed and asked me what was wrong with me. I did not
explain to him, he would have been furious. It was implied I was not "sophisticated" as other members of
the Forum who were, sophistocated, would see that my posted message was rubbish. Now I fully
understand that everybody on a forum is not going to agree with everything others say, but surely to God,
you can do so without being scathing/ rude. I remember another occasion when I was reprimanded for
referring to Edward of Middleham as little Ned. Some people really do need to chill!
Another thing - if some members find some topics boring or irritating, why do they not just ignore them.
Surely messages that you do not agree with are better than no messages at all. I think forum members
should be encouraged not discouraged. I have noticed that there are quite a few members who no longer
participate. Of course they may have other reasons, lack of time etc., The point I am making is, I did say I
woud not be sending any more messages, but in reply to your message Katy, is that I am sure this kind of
behaviour/treatment of forum members turns some people of posting as they are afriaid of getting shot
down in flames/belittled (as I was). After all forums of this kind, although taken very seriously by some,
should also be fun and an enjoyable experience. You do not want to log on and get involved in rows and
acrimony - life is too short for that.

Having said that, I did enjoy the forum prior to the above - especially the postings by Marie (what Marie
does not know about this period in history is not worth putting on a postage stamp - I particularly enjoyed
the messages re was it possible for Richard of York to have made it back in time to get Proud Cis up the
duff !!- hee hee),Katy and Paul.
best wishes
Eileen

Can I just second (or third) these messages. I don't think any
subjects covered by the forum's remit (ie 15th & 16th century
history) should be vetoed. Everything has been discussed before
(except perhaps Henry Wyatt's barnacles) so it's no vetoes or no
forum really. Fresh discussions on old subjects can always produce
new ideas.
Eileen, I'm really sorry to hear how upset you were. Perhaps that
should serve as a reminder to us all that not only is ridicule not a
form of argument but it also hurts people - something that's easy to
forget when the other person appears only as a set of words on your
screen. I've missed your posts too so please give it another try.

Marie


--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In , "Stephen Lark"
> > <stephenmlark@> wrote:
> > >
> > > What has happened to the Forum? I posted a message on Sunday and
> > nothing has appeared since Saturday morning
> >
> >
> >
> > or that they have everything all wrong and should read ten
> > authoritative works before joining in again.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> Too true Katy, too true - I have not posted any messages (although
I do log on and read them from time to
> time) since the ferocious attack on me by a member of this forum
whom took umbrage to a message I
> posted in reply to a question by another member, I must say much to
my bewilderment. I have not got
> over it to this day as I feel it was totally unwarranted. I was
upset by the sheer nastiness of the response
> -another member joined in - that my husband noticed and asked me
what was wrong with me. I did not
> explain to him, he would have been furious. It was implied I was
not "sophisticated" as other members of
> the Forum who were, sophistocated, would see that my posted
message was rubbish. Now I fully
> understand that everybody on a forum is not going to agree with
everything others say, but surely to God,
> you can do so without being scathing/ rude. I remember another
occasion when I was reprimanded for
> referring to Edward of Middleham as little Ned. Some people really
do need to chill!
> Another thing - if some members find some topics boring or
irritating, why do they not just ignore them.
> Surely messages that you do not agree with are better than no
messages at all. I think forum members
> should be encouraged not discouraged. I have noticed that there
are quite a few members who no longer
> participate. Of course they may have other reasons, lack of time
etc., The point I am making is, I did say I
> woud not be sending any more messages, but in reply to your message
Katy, is that I am sure this kind of
> behaviour/treatment of forum members turns some people of posting
as they are afriaid of getting shot
> down in flames/belittled (as I was). After all forums of this
kind, although taken very seriously by some,
> should also be fun and an enjoyable experience. You do not want
to log on and get involved in rows and
> acrimony - life is too short for that.
>
> Having said that, I did enjoy the forum prior to the above -
especially the postings by Marie (what Marie
> does not know about this period in history is not worth putting on
a postage stamp - I particularly enjoyed
> the messages re was it possible for Richard of York to have made it
back in time to get Proud Cis up the
> duff !!- hee hee),Katy and Paul.
> best wishes
> Eileen
>

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

>
> Having said that, I did enjoy the forum prior to the above -
especially the postings by Marie (what Marie
> does not know about this period in history is not worth putting on a
postage stamp

> best wishes
> Eileen



Not only is Marie very knowledgable about both small and large aspects
of our favorite subject -- and is able to impart this knowledge
clearly and kindly -- but she is incredibly generous with what she has
learned. In many cases, this is not simply a matter of pulling the
right reference book off the shelf, but rather the product of original
research that she has done by visiting places and making first-hand
observations and obtaining copies of the original documents. She has
taught herself not only read Latin but Latin in 15th century
handwriting including the shorthand and abbreviations used in records
of official proceedings. Then she freely shares the product of that
effort and expense with all of us.

I think most of us are unaware how lucky we are to have her contribute
to this forum.

Katy

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> -

>
>
> Not only is Marie very knowledgable about both small and large aspects
> of our favorite subject -- and is able to impart this knowledge
> clearly and kindly -- but she is incredibly generous with what she has
> learned. In many cases, this is not simply a matter of pulling the
> right reference book off the shelf, but rather the product of original
> research that she has done by visiting places

And nothing beats being able to visit places associated with events in Richards life. It makes me tingle.
I have stood at the spot in Tewkesbury Abbey where Isobel Neville's coffin stood,surrounded by candles and
stood at the entrance to the crypt where she and George were entombed. I wondered to myself did her sister
attend her funeral, or had they fallen out by then? did Richard stand nearby whilst George was buried, did
Cicely attend? Certainly Edward would not have made an appearance:-) How strange when brother kills
brother
I touched the great door of the Abbey through which the Yorkists entered and dragged out the defeated
Lancastrians. I went along and found the place in the High Street where days later the Lancastrians were
beheaded. I wanted to grab passersby by the arm and say to them 'do you realise what took place here',
but,they would probably thought I was mad! Then there was the battle trail - of all wars, Civil war must be
the most abhorrant, Englishmen killing fellow Englishmen. Tragic. You must be very hard hearted not to be
moved.
Ive visited Bosworth field and stood contemplating that awful day, and stood at the well where Richard was
supposed to have taken his last drink, I was not the only one that day, it was bedecked with white roses!
Years later I find out I was probably standing in the wrong place :-) All that emotion for nothing!
Then Westminster Abbey, sitting not far from the very spot where Richard & Anne were crowned, and the sad
little place where the plaque is telling us Anne is buried close to that spot. To think that Richard stood near
that very spot himself. Ive stood in front of the urn containing THE BONES. I thought to myself " what a
load of old baloney" (as Al Fayed said describing Paul Burrell's evidence:-) I wanted to SHOUT 'its not
proven' but again, I would probably have been dismissed as a mad woman.
There is Cosby Hall where Richard lived for a while - now moved to a different place, but Cosby Hall in the
wrong place is better than no Cosby Hall. Mortimers Cross, and St Pauls Cathedral where Warwicks body lay
displayed nearby when the Old St Pauls still stood.
Of course, if you cant make it to these places, Google Maps are good, you can then via your computer for
example home right in to where the Battle of Barnet was fought and what are possibly burial mounds.
All good stuff - oh and please forgive this long message, it is completely self-indulgent of me hee hee
best wishes Eileen

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

> And nothing beats being able to visit places associated with events
in Richards life. It makes me tingle.

> Of course, if you cant make it to these places, Google Maps are
good, you can then via your computer for
> example home right in to where the Battle of Barnet was fought and
what are possibly burial mounds.
> All good stuff - oh and please forgive this long message, it is
completely self-indulgent of me hee hee
> best wishes Eileen


I know what you mean, Eileen. Last May I visited England and Scotland
with my son. We flew in to Heathrow and took the Tube to Tower Hill
Station. At the station we emerged, blinking, into the drizzle, and
directly across the street was the Tower of London in the mist. I
just stood there staring, and wondering why no one else was staring.
Because I was probably the only one to whom this was a new and
mesmerizing sight, no doubt.

The same in Edinburgh. I couldn't believe all the people in office
attire, hurrying up the cobbles of Princes Street in high-heeled
shoes, with the castle looming above them on that great black ancient
volcano core. Their commonplace was my lifetime's dream.

I hope I don't ever get too old or too jaded to stop and stare at
wondrous things.

Katy

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> I know what you mean, Eileen. Last May I visited England and Scotland
> with my son. We flew in to Heathrow and took the Tube to Tower Hill
> Station. At the station we emerged, blinking, into the drizzle, and
> directly across the street was the Tower of London in the mist. I
> just stood there staring, and wondering why no one else was staring.
> Because I was probably the only one to whom this was a new and
> mesmerizing sight, no doubt.
>
> The same in Edinburgh. I couldn't believe all the people in office
> attire, hurrying up the cobbles of Princes Street in high-heeled
> shoes, with the castle looming above them on that great black ancient
> volcano core. Their commonplace was my lifetime's dream.
>
>
>
> Katy
>
I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average, the English seem to neither know nor care about
their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall, how many of them realise that just a few feet away
from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his Banqueting House onto a platform and was
beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their council tax to ponder on what happened 300 years
ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from overseas absolutely thrive on British
history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit places.
My husband's eyes begin to glaze over if I start to talk about historical stuff - but that is fair enough as he gets
the same response from me when he starts talking about golf or Arsenal (non-UK members of the forum,
Arsenal is a football team payed obscene amounts of money to kick a ball about and ....... ooooops! I digress;-)
) Eileen

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

> I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
the English seem to neither know nor care about
> their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall, how
many of them realise that just a few feet away
> from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his
Banqueting House onto a platform and was
> beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their council
tax to ponder on what happened 300 years
> ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from


Oh, I don't think it's shameful. It's just human nature. Familiarity
breeds at least boredom.

Here in Portland we have snow-covered volcanoes surrounding us. On a
clear day you can see five of them, from close-by Mount Hood to the
sometimes steaming stub of Mount St Helens, plus Mount Jefferson,
Mount Adams, and far to the north, the immense bulk of Mount Rainier.
I'm sure visitors wonder why Portlanders aren't stopped dead in our
tracks by the beauty of Mount Hood, looking close enough to touch.

Here are a few photos of Mount Hood. Scroll down and you'll see how
it looks from Portland.

Katy

Being English I can confirm that I'm very much an exception in having
an interest in history.
One of the reasons the Royal Family is so popular is precisely
because English people know nothing of real history, and put the
current family in it's place.
I've heard some people claim that the likes America, Russia, China,
India, France and Italy have no history because they have no Royal
family!

--- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
>
> > I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
> the English seem to neither know nor care about
> > their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall,
how
> many of them realise that just a few feet away
> > from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from
his
> Banqueting House onto a platform and was
> > beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their
council
> tax to ponder on what happened 300 years
> > ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people
from
>
>
> Oh, I don't think it's shameful. It's just human nature.
Familiarity
> breeds at least boredom.
>
> Here in Portland we have snow-covered volcanoes surrounding us. On
a
> clear day you can see five of them, from close-by Mount Hood to the
> sometimes steaming stub of Mount St Helens, plus Mount Jefferson,
> Mount Adams, and far to the north, the immense bulk of Mount
Rainier.
> I'm sure visitors wonder why Portlanders aren't stopped dead in our
> tracks by the beauty of Mount Hood, looking close enough to touch.
>
> Here are a few photos of Mount Hood. Scroll down and you'll see how
> it looks from Portland.
>
> Katy
>

I think I can safely say that I know and care about English history. I have
visited the Banqueting House - and once went to a party there hosted by the
Prince of Wales. (I was the junior member of staff of the charity it was in
aid of.)

But I also spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses from
Streatham into central London - most notably, the time spent working for
the said charity.

I am happy to say that I am not so obsessive about English history that
Charles I's scaffold flashed into my brain on a daily basis as I passed its
location.

But, unlike some Italian cities, London is not just for tourists and its
residents have 21st-century lives to lead. This is a Good Thing. England is
neither a giant historical theme park, nor an unsinkable aircraft carrier.

At 14:02 20/04/2008, Eileen wrote:
>I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average, the
>English seem to neither know nor care about
>their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall, how many
>of them realise that just a few feet away
>from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his
>Banqueting House onto a platform and was
>beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their council tax to
>ponder on what happened 300 years
>ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from
>overseas absolutely thrive on British
>history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit places.


Best wishes
Christine

Christine Headley
Butterrow, Stroud, Glos

--- In , Christine H <christinelheadley@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> But I also spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses from
> Streatham into central London - most notably, the time spent working for
> the said charity.

Christine - I too spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses,and now like you
live in Gloucestershire! About 20 miles from Stroud - small world
Eileen
>
> At 14:02 20/04/2008, Eileen wrote:
> >I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average, the
> >English seem to neither know nor care about
> >their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall, how many
> >of them realise that just a few feet away
> >from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his
> >Banqueting House onto a platform and was
> >beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their council tax to
> >ponder on what happened 300 years
> >ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from
> >overseas absolutely thrive on British
> >history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit places.
>
>
> Best wishes
> Christine
>
> Christine Headley
> Butterrow, Stroud, Glos
>

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Here are a few photos of Mount Hood. Scroll down and you'll see how
> it looks from Portland.
>
> Katy
>
I cant find your photos Katy - am I doing something wrong?

Eileen

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Here are a few photos of Mount Hood. Scroll down and you'll see how
> > it looks from Portland.
> >
> > Katy
> >
> I cant find your photos Katy - am I doing something wrong?




No...I just forgot to add the link. If I had a dollar for every time
I've done that, I could visit the UK more often.

Here it is:

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Hood/images.html


Katy

Streatham! So many memories of childhood! I went to school in the
other direction, on the 115. My school's lower house was in a manor
house once visited by Elizabeth, owned by a man named Carew. Can't
avoid history really, even if one wanted to. My house at school was
named after Sir Geoffrey de Mandeville, a family that came over with
the Conqueror in 1066.
The Streatham Odeon was the place I saw many, many movies, including
a reissue of the one that changed my life, Olivier's version of
Shakespeare's Richard III. My mother took me because it had a battle
in it, and I had already shown a love of Roman history. She loved Larry!
Paul

On 20 Apr 2008, at 18:45, eileen wrote:
> --- In , Christine H
> <christinelheadley@...>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> But I also spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses from
>> Streatham into central London - most notably, the time spent
>> working for
>> the said charity.
>
> Christine - I too spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159
> buses,and now like you
> live in Gloucestershire! About 20 miles from Stroud - small world
> Eileen
>>
>> At 14:02 20/04/2008, Eileen wrote:
>>> I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
>>> the
>>> English seem to neither know nor care about
>>> their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall,
>>> how many
>>> of them realise that just a few feet away
>>> from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his
>>> Banqueting House onto a platform and was
>>> beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their
>>> council tax to
>>> ponder on what happened 300 years
>>> ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from
>>> overseas absolutely thrive on British
>>> history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit places.
>>
>>
>> Best wishes
>> Christine
>>
>> Christine Headley
>> Butterrow, Stroud, Glos
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

On 20 Apr 2008, at 14:02, eileen wrote:
> I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
> the English seem to neither know nor care about
> their history.


I think in general you are probably correct Eileen, especially if you
watch any game shows and listen to the paucity of historical
knowledge. Ask about a king, they usually answer Henry VIII; ask
about a queen, and they answer Elizabeth. Recently I watched one
where the question was "Which number Mary Queen of England was called
Bloody?" The contestant started by saying, "Well I keep thinking Mary
Queen of Scots". Er, hello!! Clue was in the question when he said
England!
Makes me mad. But then the way our education system has gone recently
history is no longer important, 2nd World War apart.
Paul

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Streatham! So many memories of childhood!
> Paul

Paul competely OT this - but did you ever go to the Locarno at Streatham??!! Of course
this may be before your time and I may be giving my age away by mentioning it??!! ;-}
>
> On 20 Apr 2008, at 18:45, eileen wrote:
> > --- In , Christine H
> > <christinelheadley@>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> But I also spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses from
> >> Streatham into central London - most notably, the time spent
> >> working for
> >> the said charity.
> >
> > Christine - I too spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159
> > buses,and now like you
> > live in Gloucestershire! About 20 miles from Stroud - small world
> > Eileen
> >>
> >> At 14:02 20/04/2008, Eileen wrote:
> >>> I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
> >>> the
> >>> English seem to neither know nor care about
> >>> their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall,
> >>> how many
> >>> of them realise that just a few feet away
> >>> from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from his
> >>> Banqueting House onto a platform and was
> >>> beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their
> >>> council tax to
> >>> ponder on what happened 300 years
> >>> ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people from
> >>> overseas absolutely thrive on British
> >>> history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit places.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best wishes
> >> Christine
> >>
> >> Christine Headley
> >> Butterrow, Stroud, Glos
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
>
> On 20 Apr 2008, at 14:02, eileen wrote:
> > I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
> > the English seem to neither know nor care about
> > their history.
>
>
> I think in general you are probably correct Eileen, especially if you
> watch any game shows and listen to the paucity of historical
> knowledge.
> Paul
>
Yes - I still stand by what I said - if you are English and visiting this forum, then, of course, you are
interested in history - but please note that I said 'on average'.

I recall when visiting WH Smiths in an attempt to have a peek at Hicks' book Anne Neville I could not find
it - even in the history section - what I could find were copious books on Jordan, the Spice Girls, Gerri
Halliwell and various footballers etc., etc., rows and rows of them. What does this tell you.

Eileen

I remember the place but never went there.
Paul

On 21 Apr 2008, at 12:35, eileen wrote:
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale
> <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>>
>> Streatham! So many memories of childhood!
>> Paul
>
> Paul competely OT this - but did you ever go to the Locarno at
> Streatham??!! Of course
> this may be before your time and I may be giving my age away by
> mentioning it??!! ;-}
>>
>> On 20 Apr 2008, at 18:45, eileen wrote:
>>> --- In , Christine H
>>> <christinelheadley@>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But I also spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159 buses
>>>> from
>>>> Streatham into central London - most notably, the time spent
>>>> working for
>>>> the said charity.
>>>
>>> Christine - I too spent some years travelling on the 109 and 159
>>> buses,and now like you
>>> live in Gloucestershire! About 20 miles from Stroud - small world
>>> Eileen
>>>>
>>>> At 14:02 20/04/2008, Eileen wrote:
>>>>> I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
>>>>> the
>>>>> English seem to neither know nor care about
>>>>> their history. As they sit on the bus, driving down Whitehall,
>>>>> how many
>>>>> of them realise that just a few feet away
>>>>> from where they are sitting a king stepped out of a window from
>>>>> his
>>>>> Banqueting House onto a platform and was
>>>>> beheaded. Possibly they are too worried about paying their
>>>>> council tax to
>>>>> ponder on what happened 300 years
>>>>> ago. This is rather shameful when you consider how much people
>>>>> from
>>>>> overseas absolutely thrive on British
>>>>> history and like yourself travel thousands of miles to visit
>>>>> places.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes
>>>> Christine
>>>>
>>>> Christine Headley
>>>> Butterrow, Stroud, Glos
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

On 21 Apr 2008, at 12:46, eileen wrote:
> I recall when visiting WH Smiths in an attempt to have a peek at
> Hicks' book Anne Neville I could not find
> it - even in the history section - what I could find were copious
> books on Jordan, the Spice Girls, Gerri
> Halliwell and various footballers etc., etc., rows and rows of
> them. What does this tell you.


Well, one, Hicks book is garbage, to put it mildly<!>; two, we are
celebrity obsessed these days. Kids when asked what they want to be
answer 'Famous'. None want to work to get there though!
Paul

--- In , oregonkaty <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> No...I just forgot to add the link. If I had a dollar for every time
> I've done that, I could visit the UK more often.
>
> Here it is:
>
> http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Hood/images.html
>
>
> Katy

Amazing - thank you Katy

Now, can you tell me how do you go about adding a link??
Thanks
Eileen
>

Every time I take the road south from Warwick I think that somewhere
on the way I must be passing the spot where Edward & Richard
persuaded George to switch sides and rejoin them, although I have
never seen anything to suggest exactly where that momentous meeting
took place. Visiting Warwick Castle itself it is possible to see
where Richard had building work done.

When visiting Middleham Castle I like to imagine Richard & Anne
playing there as children, perhaps promising to marry each other when
they grew up.

Minster Lovell is a place where I go and remember Richard's loyal
friend Francis.

Richard G

--- In , "eileen"
<ebatesparrot@...> wrote:
>
> And nothing beats being able to visit places associated with events
in Richards life. It makes me tingle.
> I have stood at the spot in Tewkesbury Abbey where Isobel Neville's
coffin stood,surrounded by candles and
> stood at the entrance to the crypt where she and George were
entombed. I wondered to myself did her sister
> attend her funeral, or had they fallen out by then? did Richard
stand nearby whilst George was buried, did
> Cicely attend? Certainly Edward would not have made an appearance:-
) How strange when brother kills
> brother
> I touched the great door of the Abbey through which the Yorkists
entered and dragged out the defeated
> Lancastrians. I went along and found the place in the High Street
where days later the Lancastrians were
> beheaded. I wanted to grab passersby by the arm and say to
them 'do you realise what took place here',
> but,they would probably thought I was mad! Then there was the
battle trail - of all wars, Civil war must be
> the most abhorrant, Englishmen killing fellow Englishmen. Tragic.
You must be very hard hearted not to be
> moved.
> Ive visited Bosworth field and stood contemplating that awful day,
and stood at the well where Richard was
> supposed to have taken his last drink, I was not the only one that
day, it was bedecked with white roses!
> Years later I find out I was probably standing in the wrong place :-
) All that emotion for nothing!
> Then Westminster Abbey, sitting not far from the very spot where
Richard & Anne were crowned, and the sad
> little place where the plaque is telling us Anne is buried close to
that spot. To think that Richard stood near
> that very spot himself. Ive stood in front of the urn containing
THE BONES. I thought to myself " what a
> load of old baloney" (as Al Fayed said describing Paul Burrell's
evidence:-) I wanted to SHOUT 'its not
> proven' but again, I would probably have been dismissed as a mad
woman.
> There is Cosby Hall where Richard lived for a while - now moved to
a different place, but Cosby Hall in the
> wrong place is better than no Cosby Hall. Mortimers Cross, and
St Pauls Cathedral where Warwicks body lay
> displayed nearby when the Old St Pauls still stood.
> Of course, if you cant make it to these places, Google Maps are
good, you can then via your computer for
> example home right in to where the Battle of Barnet was fought and
what are possibly burial mounds.
> All good stuff - oh and please forgive this long message, it is
completely self-indulgent of me hee hee
> best wishes Eileen
>

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

>
> Amazing - thank you Katy
>
> Now, can you tell me how do you go about adding a link??
> Thanks
> Eileen
> >


You put your cursor on the web site address (the long string of
characters that begins http), click on it, and hit the C on your
keyboard. Then you go to wherever you want to add the link -- in my R
III forum posting, in this case -- and click on it with the cursor,
and hit the V key. The link magically appears.

Katy

Hi Eileen,
When my husband and I came to England more or less specifically to attend the Bosworth reenactment in 2004 (though we made a whole two week trip of it and got engaged at Avebury - much to my surprise) everywhere we went, when my husband told folks where we were going, the standard answer was,
"Bosworth..... Bosworth.... that was Cromwell, right?"
Now I know the Wars of the Roses was not all that important in the overall thousands of years of British history and all... but we got that reaction from a lot of the shopkeepers IN Market Bosworth. They had no idea there was even something going on that weekend.
Now THAT was a little odd.
Cheers,
Mishka
(currently in Virginia, USA)


> On 20 Apr 2008, at 14:02, eileen wrote:
> > I think I can safely say, without contradiction, that on average,
> > the English seem to neither know nor care about
> > their history.
>
>
> I think in general you are probably correct Eileen, especially if you
> watch any game shows and listen to the paucity of historical
> knowledge.
> Paul
>
Yes - I still stand by what I said - if you are English and visiting this forum, then, of course, you are
interested in history - but please note that I said 'on average'.

I recall when visiting WH Smiths in an attempt to have a peek at Hicks' book Anne Neville I could not find
it - even in the history section - what I could find were copious books on Jordan, the Spice Girls, Gerri
Halliwell and various footballers etc., etc., rows and rows of them. What does this tell you.

Eileen


---------------------------------
www.mishkajaeger.com

---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

Gee, thanks, fellas. You're making me blush. That's really
appreciated.

I only wish I did know everything there is to know. No I don't - it
would mean there'd be nothing left to find out.

Thanks again, ladies,

Marie

-- In , oregonkaty
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In , "eileen"
> <ebatesparrot@> wrote:
>
> >
> > Having said that, I did enjoy the forum prior to the above -
> especially the postings by Marie (what Marie
> > does not know about this period in history is not worth putting
on a
> postage stamp
>
> > best wishes
> > Eileen
>
>
>
> Not only is Marie very knowledgable about both small and large
aspects
> of our favorite subject -- and is able to impart this knowledge
> clearly and kindly -- but she is incredibly generous with what she
has
> learned. In many cases, this is not simply a matter of pulling the
> right reference book off the shelf, but rather the product of
original
> research that she has done by visiting places and making first-hand
> observations and obtaining copies of the original documents. She
has
> taught herself not only read Latin but Latin in 15th century
> handwriting including the shorthand and abbreviations used in
records
> of official proceedings. Then she freely shares the product of that
> effort and expense with all of us.
>
> I think most of us are unaware how lucky we are to have her
contribute
> to this forum.
>
> Katy
>