The Wars of the Roses
Michael A. Matthews
to make it as historically accurate as possible. While I have been able to
find out roughly what happened when and why, I have found it very difficult
to find much information about the individuals who were involved in the
conflict, particularly the less significant ones. People like Humphrey
Stafford of Southwick and Lord FitzWalter are little more than names in
history books, and I have no idea who they actually were. I have tried to
find some information about these individuals on the Internet, but without
much success (although I did manage to find out that Charlotte of Savoy, the
wife of King Louis XI of France, was born in 1445.)
The things that I want to find out about these people are a) when they were
born, so I can work out how old they were during the conflict, b) what they
looked like and c) what sort of people they were in terms of their
personalities. I don't actually need to know about everyone who was involved
in the Wars - I have composed a list of about 80 individuals whom I am
intending to include in my story, some of whom are extremely obscure. I
realise that it will be impossible to find out everything about all of these
individuals, but any information that I can find would be useful. If you
think you can help me, or if you know of some expert on the subject or
perhaps a book that might be useful, then please let me know.
matthew harley
"Michael A. Matthews" wrote:
> .................. I have composed a list of about 80 individuals whom I am
> intending to include in my story, some of whom are extremely obscure. I
> realise that it will be impossible to find out everything about all of these
> individuals, but any information that I can find would be useful. If you
> think you can help me, or if you know of some expert on the subject or
> perhaps a book that might be useful, then please let me know.
You might find some of them in the Dictionary of National Biography.
Matt Harley
Lblanch001
>the individuals who were involved in the
>conflict, particularly the less significant ones. People like Humphrey
>Stafford of Southwick and Lord FitzWalter
such as
>
>The things that I want to find out about these people are a) when they were
>born, so I can work out how old they were during the conflict, b) what they
>looked like and c) what sort of people they were in terms of their
>personalities.
We're sorry, but the Impossible Dream Department is closed today.
Seriously, there weren't a whole lot of character studies written in the
fifteenth century. Most annoying for the later historian and/or novelist.
I posted a general Wars of the Roses reading list here during the recent past
-- some time in August, I'm sure. You could probably find it on www.deja.com by
searching on my screen-name, this newsgroup, and "Anthony Goodman," one of the
authors I cited. I'd suggest that you do some serious footnote grazing in those
books if you want to track down the lesser fry.
The journal _Medieval Prosopography_ is another possibility.
There are a couple of private mailing lists -- one is Later Medieval Britain
and the other is WarsRoses -- whose regulars possibly could help you. I believe
that both of these are www.onelist.com communities. W have links to both
somewhere on
Finally, it's very likely that the folks over on soc.genealogy.medieval, who
track medieval people's life milestones (born, married, children, death, etc.),
may have researched one or more of your targets. The dividing line between
prosopography and genealogy is pretty thin and one discipline often enriches
and informs the other.
As for how they looked? We don't even have verifiable portraits of the kings
and queens of the period....
Regards,
Laura Blanchard
lbla...@pobox.upenn.edu
(temporarily posting from lblan...@aol.com)
D. Spencer Hines
Do you really think you'll be able to develop them?
You are doing something on the order of _War and Peace_ in a story?
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Scots! wha hae wi' Wallace bled, Scots! wham
Bruce has aften led, Welcome to your gory bed, Or to victory!... Lay
the proud usurpers low! Tyrants fall in every foe! Liberty's in every
blow! - Let us do or die! So may God ever defend the cause of truth
and liberty, as He did that day! Amen." "Scots Wha Hae" ["Bruce's
Address at Bannockburn"] (24 June 1314) [1794] Robert Burns
[1759-1796]
matthew harley <har...@tinet.ie> wrote in message
news:37C96ADA...@tinet.ie...
Michael A. Matthews
Laura Blanchard wrote:
Thanks for the info, Laura. I found your reading list on www.deja.com. Guess
what - three of the books I've been relying on are Richard III (Penguin) and
The Wars of the Roses (Constable) by Desmond Seward and Lancaster & York
(Pimlico) by Alison Weir! Are you saying these books aren't historically
accurate and that I can't trust them? I must admit I've been highly
suspicious of Seward since I found that some elements of his The Wars of the
Roses contradict what he'd said in Richard III!
You also mentioned a book by Phil Haigh about the battles of the Wars of the
Roses. I've got a copy of his book The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the
Roses (Sutton, 1995). Is this the book you're referring to? If it is, then I
heartily recommend it - I've found it extremely useful.
The other books in my collection are:
Boardman, A.W.: The Battle of Towton (Sutton)
Carpenter, Christine: The Wars of the Roses: Politics and the constitution
in England, c. 1437-1509 (Cambridge University Press)
Falkus, Gila: The Life and Times of Edward IV (Weidenfeld and Nicolson)
Ross, Charles: Edward IV (Eyre Methuen)
Storey, R.L.: The End of the House of Lancaster (Sutton)
Warren, John: The Wars of the Roses and the Yorkist Kings (Hodder &
Stoughton)
(I must ashamedly confess that I haven't read all of these books from cover
to cover - I've just been dipping into them to find the information that I
need. I know that's not the best approach, but I can't help it - I'm lazy!)
I've also got a copy of Sharon Penman's novel The Sunne in Splendour
(Penguin). She seems to know a lot about the individuals who were involved
in the conflict, but I'm not sure where she got her information from. I
suspect a lot of it is historical invention!
I'm hoping to get a copy of Paul Murray Kendall's Warwick the Kingmaker
fairly soon, which should help.
I've posted a copy of my original message on the soc.genealogy.medieval
newsgroup. Hopefully they'll be able to help out. I'll also check out those
private mailing lists you mentioned sometime too.
If you come up with any other suggestions or advice, let me know.
Regards,
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
> Don't you think 80 characters in a story is far too many?
>
> Do you really think you'll be able to develop them?
>
> You are doing something on the order of _War and Peace_ in a story?
>
> D. Spencer Hines
>
> Lux et Veritas
> --
>
> D. Spencer Hines --- "Scots! wha hae wi' Wallace bled, Scots! wham
> Bruce has aften led, Welcome to your gory bed, Or to victory!... Lay
> the proud usurpers low! Tyrants fall in every foe! Liberty's in every
> blow! - Let us do or die! So may God ever defend the cause of truth
> and liberty, as He did that day! Amen." "Scots Wha Hae" ["Bruce's
> Address at Bannockburn"] (24 June 1314) [1794] Robert Burns
> [1759-1796]
I'm not intending to include 80 characters in my story. I'm still trying to
work out who was important and who wasn't, so I can get rid of the "small
fry", as Laura Blanchard put it. I'm going to be focussing on about a dozen
or so individuals (Warwick, Edward IV, Henry VI, Queen Margaret, Hastings,
Montagu, Cecily Neville, Queen Elizabeth, Louis IX, Clarence, Gloucester,
York and Salisbury). Another group of characters (Somerset, Clifford,
Northumberland, Edmund Beaufort, George Neville, Charles the Bold,
Fauconberg, Anne Beauchamp, Norfolk, the 13th Earl of Oxford, etc.) will be
my "supporting" characters. The other characters in my story will be there
purely for the sake of historical accuracy, and I am not intending to
develop them.
By the way, what is all that Robert Burns stuff about?
Mike.
D. Spencer Hines
Well it's from one of his most famous poems. We have a thread on
Robert The Bruce going. Take a look.
D. Spencer Hines
Exitus Acta Probat
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Scots! wha hae wi' Wallace bled, Scots! wham
Bruce has aften led, Welcome to your gory bed, Or to victory!... Lay
the proud usurpers low! Tyrants fall in every foe! Liberty's in every
blow! - Let us do or die! So may God ever defend the cause of truth
and liberty, as He did that day! Amen." "Scots Wha Hae" ["Bruce's
Address at Bannockburn"] (24 June 1314) [1794] Robert Burns
[1759-1796]
Michael A. Matthews <mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote in message
news:37c9...@news.jakinternet.co.uk...
Lblanch001
>Thanks for the info, Laura. I found your reading list on www.deja.com. Guess
>what - three of the books I've been relying on are Richard III (Penguin) and
>The Wars of the Roses (Constable) by Desmond Seward and Lancaster & York
>(Pimlico) by Alison Weir! Are you saying these books aren't historically
>accurate and that I can't trust them? I must admit I've been highly
>suspicious of Seward since I found that some elements of his The Wars of the
>Roses contradict what he'd said in Richard III!
I could put it another way -- the footnotes in Seward and Weir are few and far
between, so it's pretty hard to check their facts. Weir was mauled pretty badly
in the Times Literary Supplement for her accuracy for her Henry VIII
book...last time I looked they hadn't reviewed her book on Richard III, and I
don't know about her WoR book's review history (and don't much care).
>You also mentioned a book by Phil Haigh about the battles of the Wars of the
>Roses. I've got a copy of his book The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the
>Roses (Sutton, 1995). Is this the book you're referring to? If it is, then I
>heartily recommend it - I've found it extremely useful.
>
That's the one. I confess that I haven't looked at it much, but I'd expect that
Sutton would have sent it out to some reliable reviewers, so their imprint
alone recommends it to me.
>The other books in my collection are:
>
>Boardman, A.W.: The Battle of Towton (Sutton)
>Carpenter, Christine: The Wars of the Roses: Politics and the constitution
>in England, c. 1437-1509 (Cambridge University Press)
>Falkus, Gila: The Life and Times of Edward IV (Weidenfeld and Nicolson)
>Ross, Charles: Edward IV (Eyre Methuen)
>Storey, R.L.: The End of the House of Lancaster (Sutton)
>Warren, John: The Wars of the Roses and the Yorkist Kings (Hodder &
>Stoughton)
I don't know the Falkus book, but all of the rest of these folks are known to
me -- mostly by reputation, I add, not personally -- as solid historians.
Carpenter is particularly interested in locality studies, so I'd go over her
footnotes with a fine tooth comb looking for bibliography.
>(I must ashamedly confess that I haven't read all of these books from cover
>to cover - I've just been dipping into them to find the information that I
>need. I know that's not the best approach, but I can't help it - I'm lazy!)
Footnotes, footnotes, you'll probably find gold in the footnotes. Also check
the DNB, as someone else pointed out.
>I've also got a copy of Sharon Penman's novel The Sunne in Splendour
>(Penguin). She seems to know a lot about the individuals who were involved
>in the conflict, but I'm not sure where she got her information from. I
>suspect a lot of it is historical invention!
Them's fightin' words, son. One of my favorite Real Medieval Historians speaks
very highly of Penman's research. If she says it took place in a particular
place on a particular day of the week, it did -- in the few cases that it
doesn't, she spells it out in her postscript.
>I'm hoping to get a copy of Paul Murray Kendall's Warwick the Kingmaker
>fairly soon, which should help.
You can do that. It's a good read. But you might want to look for Michael
Hicks' newer and more comprehensive biography. There are also a lot of locality
studies (e.g., A. J. Pollard, _North-eastern England during the Wars of the
Roses_) whose footnotes should be particularly toothsome. A lot of what you
want is probably not going to show up in monographs, but rather in papers from
conference proceedings or in specialty journals.
>If you come up with any other suggestions or advice, let me know.
I think the well just ran dry.
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
> The things that I want to find out about these people are a) when they were
> born, so I can work out how old they were during the conflict,
You might try geneological works such as Burke's Extinct Peerage.
For a novelist, you'll get all the business of who is whom's
brother-in-law and/or cousin.
> b) what they
> looked like and c) what sort of people they were in terms of their
> personalities.
Good luck. I second the proposal of DNB. You get all sorts of
fascinating stuff about, say, how big a dinner was thrown when
some Neville was made a bishop (or was it chancellor of Oxford?).
> If you
> think you can help me, or if you know of some expert on the subject or
> perhaps a book that might be useful, then please let me know.
You might try Freezywater Press's books on who is known to have
participated in which battle and their arms and liveries.
--
David Brewer
"It is foolishness and endless trouble to cast a stone at every
dog that barks at you." - George Silver, gentleman, c.1600
Renia Simmonds
Peace and Conflict in Fifteenth Century England, by John Gillingham, Wedenfeld
and Nicholson, London, 1990. It has a huge bibliography, citing primary sources
as well as secondary sources. (It mentions only one of the two men you mention,
namely Lord Fiztwalter, but only in terms of his death.)
Illustrated Letters of the Paston Family, ed Roger Virgoe, Guild Publishing,
London, 1989, contains two letters mentioning Lord Fitzwalter. Humphrey Stafford
is mentioned in a chapter on the Battles of the Wars of the Roses, as Earl of
Devon.
The Plantagagenet Encyclopedia (An alphabetical guide to 400 years of English
History) Gen Ed, Elizabeth Hallam, Tiger Books International, London, 1996, has
entries for two Humphrey Staffords, one being the 1st duke of Buckingham
(1402-60), the other being 15th Earl of Devon (1439-1469). This is from a series
of 4 books, one of the others being:
The Chronicles of The Wars of the Roses, General Editor Elizabeth Hallam,
Preface by Hugh Trevor-Roper, Bramley Books, Godalming, Surrey, 1996. The Duke
of Buckingham is mentioned on pp 205, 214, 216, 220, 233, and the Earl of Devon
on pp 244, 255.
The Fifteenth Century (The Oxford History of England) 1399-1485, by E.J Jacob,
Clarendon Press, Oxford mentions two Lords Fitzwalter, and three Humphrey
Staffords.
Hope this helps.
Renia
Michael A. Matthews wrote:
> I am trying to write a story set during the Wars of the Roses, and I am keen
> to make it as historically accurate as possible. While I have been able to
> find out roughly what happened when and why, I have found it very difficult
> to find much information about the individuals who were involved in the
> conflict, particularly the less significant ones. People like Humphrey
> Stafford of Southwick and Lord FitzWalter are little more than names in
> history books, and I have no idea who they actually were. I have tried to
> find some information about these individuals on the Internet, but without
> much success (although I did manage to find out that Charlotte of Savoy, the
> wife of King Louis XI of France, was born in 1445.)
>
> The things that I want to find out about these people are a) when they were
> born, so I can work out how old they were during the conflict, b) what they
> looked like and c) what sort of people they were in terms of their
> personalities. I don't actually need to know about everyone who was involved
> in the Wars - I have composed a list of about 80 individuals whom I am
> intending to include in my story, some of whom are extremely obscure. I
> realise that it will be impossible to find out everything about all of these
> individuals, but any information that I can find would be useful. If you
Michael A. Matthews
Thanks for the info.
I just got this reply to my message at soc.genealogy. medieval from Leo van
de Pas:-
"If you want to get biographical details about titled people, the best place
is the Complete Peerage and even Burke's Peerage. However, there are several
books already written on the War of the Roses.
Do you know a great book by Desmond Seward, called surprisingly "The War of
The Roses"? The sub-title is And the lives of Five Men and Women in the
fifteenth Century. This book is published in 1995 by BCA in London, New
York, Sydney, Toronto. I cannot find an ISBN number, but it shows CN4484
whatever that means. Best wishes and success."
Seems that Mr Seward has at least one advocate!
Now I'm really confused. I think I'll try studying something a little less
complicated!
Mike.
P.S. Regarding Sharon Penman's book. I've already found a couple of examples
where her facts contradict what's written in my other sources. Of course, it
could be that my other sources are wrong! Besides, I was not implying that
Ms Penman's book is historically inaccurate. As you said yourself, there
weren't a whole lot of character studies written in the fifteenth century.
There are a lot of historical blanks which she must have filled in with her
imagination. When she says that Warwick's daughter Anne had fair hair and
brown eyes, how do I know that is an established historical fact rather than
a description that Ms Penman has invented to fill a gap in the history
books? If I describe Anne Neville in the same in my story and it isn't based
on historical fact, I could end up being accused of plagiarism, and I
obviously don't want that to happen! While she does indeed point out where
she has deviated from historical fact, she doesn't say where she gets her
information from (apart from vague references to various libraries), so
there is no way I can check to see what is real and what is invention.
I would like apologise for being a bit of a nuisance on this matter, but I
have been working on this project for nearly two years without any outside
assistance, and it is very nice to have someone to talk to!
Michael A. Matthews
Renia Simmonds wrote
> The Plantagenet Encyclopedia (An alphabetical guide to 400 years of
English
> History) Gen Ed, Elizabeth Hallam, Tiger Books International, London,
1996, has
> entries for two Humphrey Staffords, one being the 1st duke of Buckingham
> (1402-60), the other being 15th Earl of Devon (1439-1469).
Result!
Humphrey Stafford of Southwick was made Earl of Devon in 1469 just before he
was decapitated in Bridgwater by some aggrieved locals. Clearly you've found
the right man for me (although I'm not convinced he was the 15th Earl). This
is exactly the sort of info I need - I now know how old he was during the
conflict, and since Charles Ross gives a brief insight into his character in
his Edward IV biography, I need to know nothing more about him!
I'll check out the other sources you recommended at some point.
Mike.
P.S. Would it be worth me posting a complete list of the individuals I'm
interested in on this newsgroup, or do you think that would be asking too
much?
Lblanch001
>
>P.S. Regarding Sharon Penman's book. I've already found a couple of examples
>where her facts contradict what's written in my other sources. Of course, it
>could be that my other sources are wrong! Besides, I was not implying that
>Ms Penman's book is historically inaccurate. As you said yourself, there
>weren't a whole lot of character studies written in the fifteenth century.
>There are a lot of historical blanks which she must have filled in with her
>imagination. When she says that Warwick's daughter Anne had fair hair and
>brown eyes, how do I know that is an established historical fact rather than
>a description that Ms Penman has invented to fill a gap in the history
>books?
I think you can assume that she made up most of the descriptions -- although
those of Edward IV, Elizabeth Woodville, and Richard himself are more or less
fact-based.
Of course, there's no guarantee that the "historical record" you consult,
including, most especially, what passes for primary sources of the period,
isn't equally made up! They did write down the most amazing combination of
rumor, propaganda and wishful thinking as "history." Most unfeeling of them...
Michael A. Matthews
Laura Blanchard wrote
> I think you can assume that she made up most of the descriptions --
although
> those of Edward IV, Elizabeth Woodville, and Richard himself are more or
less
> fact-based.
>
> Of course, there's no guarantee that the "historical record" you consult,
> including, most especially, what passes for primary sources of the period,
> isn't equally made up! They did write down the most amazing combination of
> rumor, propaganda and wishful thinking as "history." Most unfeeling of
them...
So does that mean that if I make things up, I won't get in trouble with
history buffs like yourself?
Mike.
John Wilson
Michael A. Matthews wrote in message <37c9...@news.jakinternet.co.uk>...
>
>Laura Blanchard wrote:
>
>> Seriously, there weren't a whole lot of character studies written in the
>> fifteenth century. Most annoying for the later historian and/or novelist.
>>
>> As for how they looked? We don't even have verifiable portraits of the
>kings
>> and queens of the period....
>>
In these societies I doubt if it was considered polite to point out the
character defects in a reigning king, and, to quote Mark Twain, not overly
safe. Procopius gave two descriptions of Justinian and Theodora and St.
Isadore two assessments of Suinthila. Charles VII is rather homely in his
portrait, but was said to be a fairly handsome man.
Nice feature of the sagas - accounts stick to what the people did and
let you guess why.
Cheers
John GW
Liz Broadwell
: Laura Blanchard wrote
That would depend on two things: 1) What you decide to make up; and 2)
How good you are at making things up. :-) Blatant ahistoricism may get
you hung out to dry; clever guesswork based on the available evidence will
probably earn you the approbation of those who agree with you and the
derision of those who don't. Then again, that's likely to happen in any
case (unless it's your first novel, in which case Kirkus will go easy on
you, saving their most cutting remarks for your second effort).
Peace,
Liz
--
Elizabeth Broadwell | "If all you have is a hammer, everything
(ebro...@english.upenn.edu) | starts to look like a nail.... If all you
Department of English | have is duct tape, everything starts to
University of Pennsylvania | look like a duct. Right. When's the last
Philadelphia, PA | time you used duct tape on a duct?"
-- Larry Wall
Lblanch001
>
>So does that mean that if I make things up, I won't get in trouble with
>history buffs like yourself?
>
Liz Broadwell, I see, has given you a truly responsive answer. You probably
won't get in trouble with me in any way, shape, or form -- about five (or is it
ten?) years ago, I lost my appetite for fiction. That's not to denigrate
anyone's efforts in writing...it's just a change in my own taste.
Michael A. Matthews
Liz Broadwell wrote
> That would depend on two things: 1) What you decide to make up; and 2)
> How good you are at making things up. :-) Blatant ahistoricism may get
> you hung out to dry; clever guesswork based on the available evidence will
> probably earn you the approbation of those who agree with you and the
> derision of those who don't. Then again, that's likely to happen in any
> case (unless it's your first novel, in which case Kirkus will go easy on
> you, saving their most cutting remarks for your second effort).
I'm not writing a novel.
Now you're confused, aren't you?
Mike.
Liz Broadwell
In that case, you have nothing to fear from Kirkus even if you have
already published a novel. :-)
: Now you're confused, aren't you?
Nope. I'm frequently befuddled, but *never* confused.
Michael A. Matthews
> "It is foolishness and endless trouble to cast a stone at every
> dog that barks at you." - George Silver, gentleman, c.1600
I feel inadequate not being able to add some pertinent quotation to my
messages. Perhaps I should invest in a book of quotations!
Mike.
D. Spencer Hines
Or, if you're really innovative, you can try your hand at making up
your own. : )
They do help us understand where you're coming from a bit better and
add some depth to your Internet persona.
Good Luck!
D. Spencer Hines
Umquile Quo Fas Et Gloria Ducunt
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Demagogues, popularizers, whores and charlatans
give people what they want. Statesmen, educators, friends and lovers
give them what they need. [31 August 1999]
Lblanch001 <lblan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990830205937...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> >
> >I feel inadequate not being able to add some pertinent quotation to
my
> >messages. Perhaps I should invest in a book of quotations!
> >
>
> Try Bartlett's Familiar Quotations online at
> http://www.bartleby.com/99/index.html and save your money for
interlibrary loan
> fees or new quill pens or something.
Lblanch001
Lblanch001
>
>I'm not writing a novel.
>
>Now you're confused, aren't you?
>
>
Oh, God. It's another damn wargame.
Hayton
list if you have the time might help. Certainly the answers will come in
bits and bobs but thats how research goes. Might I add to your mounting
list of sources, assorted "Visitations" made Heralds during the 15/16th
centuries. They will provide an accurate heraldry for each individual and
if you are lucky some historical narrative.
Michael A. Matthews wrote in message <37c9...@news.jakinternet.co.uk>...
Paul J Gans
>Michael writes:
>>
>>I'm not writing a novel.
>>
>>Now you're confused, aren't you?
>>
>>
>Oh, God. It's another damn wargame.
In Bureaucratia, the home country of academics, workers
in large corporations, and all government employees,
life is a war game. It is usually worked out in
space. The more space your department can occupy,
the more important it is. Pledging allegiance to
a dean or a vice-president might get you a fief, er,
I mean more office space. If you are very lucky (or
threaten to defect in a serious way) you might even
gain a conference room.
This space must be immediately occupied by non-displaceable
personel. For instance, an office on the border with
another department might be assigned to pregnant faculty
or to a faculty member with several million in grants.
Much time in Bureaucratia is spent in plotting how to
hold on to space, gain more space, and, best of all,
getting your own building.
---- Paul J. Gans [ga...@panix.com]
Michael A. Matthews
Laura Blanchard wrote
> Oh, God. It's another damn wargame.
Now that was uncalled for!!
(Let's see, if I roll a double six, I win the Battle of Towton ... )
Mike.
John Wilson
Paul J Gans wrote in message <7qfdhs$8uo$2...@news.panix.com>...
>In Bureaucratia, (snip)
You omitted to give references, which, of course, would include C.
Northcote Parkinson's works.
JGW
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
> Thanks for the advice, David.
You're very welcome. It is refreshing to find someone who will
take the trouble to say so, at least on those occaisions when I'm
actually being helpful.
I will also recommend Commines memoir, available at www.r3.org,
for an occaisonally candid account of political events in France,
Burgundy and England of his time. Lord Hastings, for example,
never gave Louis XI any reciepts for the bribes he paid him, and
this made Louis value him more greatly.
--
David Brewer
Michael A. Matthews
Hayton wrote
> I agree with everything so far mentioned and think that posting a complete
> list if you have the time might help. Certainly the answers will come in
> bits and bobs but thats how research goes.
You asked for it, so here it is!
These are the individuals that I am most interested in. I realise that there
were many, many more people involved in the Wars, but I cannot possibly
include everyone. I have already decided to omit certain individuals (e.g.
Jasper Tudor, the Stanleys, etc.), and I will probably end up ignoring some
of the people I've listed below. If, however, there are any individuals you
think I should include, let me know.
I am intending to start my story with the Battle of Northampton (July 1460)
and end it with the Battle of Tewkesbury (May 1471). I am therefore not
going to be dealing with Richard of Gloucester's usurpation, which I
personally think is a subject that has been done to death.
The information I have already uncovered about these individuals comes from
a variety of sources, some of which I have been informed are not altogether
reliable. Certain details - particularly the appearance and character of
these people - are based on Sharon Penman's novel The Sunne In Splendour. If
any of the information I've included about the following individuals is
incorrect, please let me know. Any additional information about years of
birth and death, character and appearance would also be appreciated.
However, I would be grateful if you could cite the relevant sources so that
I can include them in my bibliography.
Be warned - some of the following are VERY obscure!
(Apologies for using present tense.)
RICHARD NEVILLE, EARL OF WARWICK (1428-1471)
Warwick is the Earl of Salisbury's eldest son, the Duke of York's nephew and
King Edward's cousin. He has dark hair and brown eyes. He is a charismatic,
energetic, charming and larger-than-life figure, respected by both the
nobility and the common people. He is generous, intelligent and serious
although
he can be witty. He enjoys an extravagant lifestyle, is extremely wealthy
and
has a huge number of retainers at his disposal. He is a courageous soldier
and
an inspirational leader, although he is also impatient and somewhat rash.
But
under his impeccable exterior, Warwick is arrogant, scheming, manipulative
and
ruthless and will do anything to gain power. His emblem is a white, muzzled
bear and ragged staff.
EDWARD IV (1442-1483)
Edward is the eldest son of the Duke of York. He is very tall, strong and
handsome with golden-brown hair and blue eyes. Edward is kind, gentle,
generous, witty, tolerant, easy-going, compassionate and courteous. He is
charming, charismatic, intelligent, pragmatic and cunning, although he can
be impetuous, sometimes lacks foresight and occasionally allows his emotions
to get the better of him. He is generally merciful, but he can be ruthless
when the occasion demands it. He is a fashionable man and lavishes money on
clothes, jewels and feasts. He is a fearless, resourceful and outstanding
soldier - his chosen weapon is a battleaxe. Like Warwick, Edward is an
inspirational leader. He adopts the Sun in Splendour emblem after the battle
of Mortimer's Cross.
HENRY VI (1421-1471)
Henry is short and rather feeble with a slight stoop. He is innocent and
childlike, kindly, gentle, generous, patient, well intentioned and honest.
He is a pious man and wears drab, grey clothes. He has no charisma or
presence and is prone to moments of insanity. He allows himself to be
manipulated by those around him, and plays no active part in the Wars. He is
a victim rather than a villain.
WILLIAM, LORD HASTINGS (1430-1483)
Hastings is one of the Duke of York's retainers and has been a close friend
of the Earl of March all his life. His father also served the House of York.
William becomes one of the most powerful and influential men in England and
King Edward's most trusted counsellor. He is honourable, unswervingly loyal,
charming, gentle, compassionate and is much liked and admired by both the
nobility and the common people alike. He is a fine soldier - brave,
resourceful
and dependable. He is as close to a hero as the 15th Century gets. His
emblem is a black bull.
JOHN NEVILLE, MARQUESS OF MONTAGU (1431-1471)
Montagu is Warwick's younger brother. He is a straightforward,
down-to-earth, honest and open man with a wry wit. He is not interested in
political intrigue and is a man of action rather than words. He is reserved
and dedicated with an unwavering sense of duty. Montagu is a tough,
efficient and dependable soldier and has seemingly limitless stamina. He has
dark hair like his brother.
QUEEN MARGARET OF ANJOU (1429-1482)
King Henry's French wife. Margaret is very beautiful, with pale skin, dark
hair and dark eyes. She is intelligent and courageous but she's also cold,
calculating and ruthless. Ms Penman calls her 'Marguerite d'Anjou' - is
there any justification for this?
QUEEN ELIZABETH WOODVILLE (1437-1492)
Elizabeth is the eldest child of Richard Woodville, Lord Rivers and his wife
Jacquetta. She is one of Queen Margaret's attendants. Her first
husband, Sir John Grey, is killed at St Albans. King Edward later becomes
captivated by her and marries her in secret. She is beautiful, confident and
determined with golden hair, fair skin and an alluring smile. But she is
also glacial, austere, ambitious, calculating, greedy, manipulative,
devious, ruthless and arrogant. She has two children by her first marriage,
Thomas and Richard.
CECILY NEVILLE, DUCHESS OF YORK (1415-1495)
Cecily is the Earl of Salisbury's younger sister and York's wife.
She is tall, slender and very beautiful with golden-brown hair. Cecily is
kind, compassionate pious and is dedicated to her husband and their
children.
GEORGE PLANTAGENET, DUKE OF CLARENCE (1449-1478)
George is tall and handsome with golden-brown hair like his brother Edward,
but he is just as arrogant as his father, the Duke of York. He is witty,
charming and enthusiastic, but he is also greedy, ambitious, fickle in his
loyalties and easily led and falls under Warwick's spell. Takes part in the
battles at Barnet and Tewkesbury.
LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
The "Spider King". Devious and manipulative, he is prepared to do
anything to destroy his enemy, the Duke of Burgundy. He is the cousin of
Margaret of Anjou.
RICHARD PLANTAGENET, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER (1452-1485)
Richard is short, wiry and swarthy like his father, the Duke of York, with
sharp features and brown hair. As a child he is feeble, frail and timid, but
as he grows older he becomes more confident, energetic, out-going and
charming.
But he remains somewhat anxious and highly-strung and constantly fiddles
with his rings or the dagger he wears on his belt and he bites his lower lip
when thinking. He is quick in movement and he fights bravely and ruthlessly
at Barnet and Tewkesbury. But he is also aggressive and rather impatient,
and by the end of the story there is also a hint of madness in his
personality. He uses a war hammer in battle and his emblem is a white boar.
RICHARD PLANTAGENET, 3RD DUKE OF YORK (1411-1460)
Head of the House of York. Richard is short, wiry and swarthy with
sharp features and brown hair. He is incredibly arrogant, stubborn and
spectacularly imprudent, a failing which ultimately leads to his demise.
RICHARD NEVILLE, 1ST EARL OF SALISBURY (1400-1460)
A veteran soldier and father of the Earl of Warwick, the Marquess
of Montagu and the Archbishop of York. Salisbury is experienced, shrewd,
ambitious and ruthless. Takes part in the siege of the Tower of London and
in the battle at Wakefield, where he is captured and subsequently beheaded.
GEORGE NEVILLE, ARCHBISHOP OF YORK (1433-1476)
Warwick's haughty youngest brother. He is Bishop of Exeter, Lord
Chancellor and later Archbishop of York. He is dark haired like his older
brothers. He is a clever, manipulative and opportunistic man - ambitious,
exuberant, devious, fond of political intrigue and only too happy to stab
people in the back if it's to his benefit. However, if things start to go
awry he tends to lose his composure and becomes timid and anxious.
HENRY BEAUFORT, 3RD DUKE OF SOMERSET (1436-1464)
The son of the 2nd Duke of Somerset, Henry becomes the leader of
the Lancastrian army after Buckingham's death at Northampton. Charming,
serious, ferocious and an able soldier. He takes part in the battles at
Wakefield, St Albans and Towton before being defeated and executed at
Hexham. He is the older brother of Edmund Beaufort who becomes the 4th Duke
after his death.
EDMUND BEAUFORT, (SELF-STYLED) 4TH DUKE OF SOMERSET (1439-1471)
The younger brother of Henry Beaufort. He is a young hothead
obsessed with avenging his brother's death. He is charming but arrogant,
impulsive and inept. He is killed in the battle at Tewkesbury. Some of my
sources say that he was Warwick's prisoner in Calais for a time, but
I don't know how this came about, or how or when he gained his
freedom.
HENRY HOLLAND, DUKE OF EXETER (1430-1475)
A cruel and violent Lancastrian noble with an explosive temper and
a sadistic streak. He is also reckless and rather dim-witted. He takes part
in the battles at Wakefield, St Albans, Towton and Barnet.
JOHN, 9TH LORD CLIFFORD (1435-1461)
The most formidable of all the Lancastrian commanders, Clifford is
fearless, single-minded, malicious and ruthless. His father was killed by
York and Clifford has vowed to destroy the Duke and his family. He commands
an elite body of retainers - the 'Flower of Craven' - tough, courageous men
from lands near the Scottish border. He takes part in the battles at
Wakefield, St Albans and Ferrybridge, where he is killed.
CHARLES, DUKE OF BURGUNDY (1433-1477)
The son of Duke Philip of Burgundy, he marries King Edward's
younger sister as part of his father's alliance with England. He becomes
Duke after his father's death in 1467. He is wealthy, ambitious and
arrogant. He is initially reluctant to help Edward in his bid to reclaim the
throne, but does so after England and France unite against him. The Duke and
King Louis are sworn enemies.
ANNE BEAUCHAMP, COUNTESS OF WARWICK (1429-1493)
The devoted wife of the Earl of Warwick and mother of Isabel and Anne.
She is fair-haired like her daughters.
ISABEL NEVILLE, DUCHESS OF CLARENCE (1451-1476)
Warwick's eldest daughter. Beautiful with fair hair and green eyes. She has
a short temper and is easily irritated, becoming spiteful when provoked.
Marries the Duke of Clarence in Calais.
ANNE NEVILLE, PRINCESS OF WALES (1456-1485)
Warwick's youngest daughter. Like her sister, Anne is beautiful and fair,
although she has brown eyes like her father. She is kind, gentle and
gracious but also quiet, nervous and delicate. Marries the Prince of Wales.
WILLIAM NEVILLE, LORD FAUCONBERG & EARL OF KENT (?-1463)
The Earl of Salisbury's younger brother and Warwick's uncle. Nicknamed
"Little Fauconberg". A veteran soldier, he is competent, dedicated and
formidable. He commands the Yorkist vanguard at Northampton and Towton
and also takes part in the battle at Ferrybridge. His emblem is a fishhook.
JOHN MOWBRAY, 3RD DUKE OF NORFOLK (1415-1461)
The Duke of York's powerful and loyal brother-in-law and nephew. He
takes part in the battles at Northampton and St Albans. His son John becomes
the 4th Duke after his death. His emblem is a white lion.
JOHN, LORD WENLOCK (1400-1471)
A veteran soldier and Warwick's loyal lieutenant. Intelligent and
sensible. He takes part in the siege of the Tower of London and fights in
the battles at Ferrybridge, Towton and Tewkesbury, where he is killed by
Edmund Beaufort.
WILLIAM, LORD HERBERT, 1ST EARL OF PEMBROKE (?-1469)
A Welsh Yorkist and veteran soldier. Charismatic and redoubtable
but ambitious, greedy and grasping. He fights in the battles at Mortimer's
Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, serves on the King's Council, is made
Earl of Pembroke in 1468 and takes part in the Battle of Edgecote. His
emblem is a bridled horse.
JOHN DE VERE, 13TH EARL OF OXFORD (1443-1515)
Son of the 12th Earl of Oxford, younger brother of Aubrey de Vere
and Warwick's brother-in-law. A staunch Lancastrian like his father, Oxford
is charismatic and popular. He is a fine and dependable soldier with a
shrewd grasp of strategy and tactics. He joins Warwick's rebellion against
Edward. Takes part in the battle of Barnet. His emblem is a blazing star.
JOHN DE VERE, 12TH EARL OF OXFORD (1408-1462)
A staunch Lancastrian who is executed for plotting against King
Edward. He is the father of Aubrey and John.
EDWARD OF LANCASTER, PRINCE OF WALES (1453-1471)
King Henry's son and heir. Arrogant, aggressive, callous, precocious
and bent on vengeance. Takes part in the battle of Tewkesbury where he is
killed. Sharon Penman calls him Edouard.
EDMUND PLANTAGENET, EARL OF RUTLAND (1443-1460)
York's second eldest son. Edmund is tall with golden-brown hair
like his brothers Edward and George and is rather impatient and irritable.
He is killed by Clifford at Wakefield.
SIR ANDREW TROLLOPE (?-1461)
A veteran Lancastrian. Devious and cunning and a fearsome soldier.
Takes part in the battles at Wakefield, St Albans and Towton, where he is
killed.
HENRY PERCY, 3RD EARL OF NORTHUMBERLAND (1421-1461)
A ruthless Lancastrian noble and sworn enemy of the Nevilles. He
fights at Wakefield, St Albans and Towton, where he is killed.
THOMAS COURTENAY, 6TH/14TH EARL OF DEVON (1432-1461)
A Lancastrian noble who takes part in the battles at Wakefield, St
Albans and Towton, where is captured and executed. He is the older
brother of John Courtenay. There seems to be some debate as to
which Earl of Devon Thomas Courtenay was (6th or 14th). According
to Cedric Delforce of Powderham Castle, this is as a result of the
numerous attainders that the title suffered. Does anybody know what
number he would have been at the time?
JOHN COURTENAY, (SELF-STYLED) 7TH/16TH EARL OF DEVON (1435-1471)
The younger brother of Thomas Courtenay and a staunch Lancastrian.
He fights alongside his brother at Wakefield, St Albans and Towton and is
killed in the battle at Tewkesbury. Some historians say that John Courtenay
was the 7th Earl, some say he was the 16th Earl while others suggest
he was never Earl at all!
SIR WILLIAM CONYERS, "ROBIN OF REDESDALE" (?-1469)
The brother-in-law of Lord Fauconberg's daughter who incites a
rebellion under the pseudonym "Robin of Redesdale". A charismatic and
fearsome Yorkshireman. Redesdale might have been John Conyers,
William's brother, but the general consensus seems to be that he was
Sir William.
HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at Mortimer's
Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if he
was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
SIR ROBERT ASPALL
Edmund of Rutland's tutor.
HENRY BOURCHIER, 1ST EARL OF ESSEX (1406-1483)
A loyal supporter of the Duke of York. Formerly Viscount Bourchier, he is
made Earl of Essex after Towton. He takes part in the battles at
Northampton, St Albans, Ferrybridge and Towton and serves on the
King's Council. He is married to the Duke of York's elder sister, Isabel,
and is the older brother of Archbishop Thomas Bourchier.
CARDINAL THOMAS BOURCHIER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (1407-1486)
Younger brother of Sir Henry Bourchier, he officiates at the
coronation of King Edward.
JOHN DE LA POLE, 2ND DUKE OF SUFFOLK (1442-1491)
A Yorkist noble who fights at St Albans, Ferrybridge and Towton
and serves on the King's Council. He is married to the Duke of York's
daughter Elizabeth - does anyone know when this marriage took place?
JOHN, LORD HOWARD (1430-1485)
A brutal and efficient Yorkist noble who fights at the battle of
Towton and serves on the King's Council. He has dark hair and a long
moustache.
JOHN MOWBRAY, 4TH DUKE OF NORFOLK (1444-1476)
The son of the 3rd Duke of Norfolk and a loyal Yorkist like his father.
A member of the King's Council, he oversees the execution of Edmund
Beaufort after the Battle of Tewkesbury.
SIR JOHN RADCLIFFE, LORD FITZWALTER (?-1461)
A Yorkist noble who takes part in the battles at Mortimer's Cross
and Ferrybridge, where he is killed.
ROBERT, 3RD LORD HUNGERFORD (?-1464)
A Lancastrian noble. He is with Lord Scales during the siege of the
Tower of London and takes part in the battles at Wakefield, St Albans,
Towton and Hexham, where he is captured and executed.
RICHARD WOODVILLE, 1ST EARL RIVERS (1405-1469)
Father of Elizabeth, Anthony and John Woodville. He made his fortune by
marrying the widowed Duchess of Bedford. He is handsome, cultured
and intelligent but greedy, self-seeking, ambitious, rapacious and
arrogant. He is determined to increase his family's wealth with a minimum
amount of effort. He fights for the Lancastrians at Towton but then supports
the Yorkists when his daughter marries King Edward. Captured during
Warwick's first rebellion and executed.
JACQUETTA OF LUXEMBOURG, DUCHESS OF BEDFORD (1416-1472)
Widow of the Duke of Bedford. Marries Richard Woodville in 1436. Mother
of Elizabeth, Anthony and John.
ANTHONY WOODVILLE, 2ND EARL RIVERS (1440-1483)
Eldest son of Richard Woodville and Elizabeth's younger brother. Fights for
the Lancastrians at Towton and takes part in the battles at Barnet and
Tewskesbury on the Yorkist side. He is a handsome, kind, serious, cultured,
intelligent, educated and honourable man and a fine soldier.
SIR JOHN WOODVILLE (1446-1469)
Younger brother of Elizabeth and Anthony. John is handsome but he is just
as arrogant, greedy and grasping as his father. Captured with his father
during Warwick's first rebellion and executed.
SIR JOHN GREY (?-1461)
A Lancastrian knight and the first husband of Elizabeth Woodville.
Father of Thomas and Richard. Fights for the Lancastrians at Wakefield
and St Albans, where he is killed.
SIR THOMAS GREY (1451-1501)
Eldest son of John Grey and Elizabeth Woodville. He commands the Yorkist
rearguard at the battle of Tewkesbury.
SIR RICHARD GREY (1456-1483)
Youngest son of John Grey and Elizabeth Woodville.
ISABEL PLANTAGENET, COUNTESS OF ESSEX (1409-1484)
Elder sister of the Duke of York and wife of Henry Bourchier, Earl of Essex.
ANNE PLANTAGENET, DUCHESS OF EXETER (1439-1476)
Eldest child of the Duke of York and Cecily Neville; King Edward's elder
sister; wife of Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter. Does anyone know what
happened to her after the siege of the Tower of London in 1460?
ELIZABETH PLANTAGENET, DUCHESS OF SUFFOLK (1444-1504)
Daughter of the Duke of York and Cecily Neville; King Edward's
younger sister; wife of John de la Pole, 2nd Duke of Suffolk.
MARGARET PLANTAGENET, DUCHESS OF BURGUNDY (1446-1503)
Daughter of the Duke of York and Cecily Neville; King Edward's younger
sister. Margaret is short with sharp features like her father. She marries
Charles, the future Duke of Burgundy.
THOMAS, LORD SCALES (?-1460)
A brutal veteran soldier. He commands the Lancastrian garrison in
the Tower of London.
HUMPHREY STAFFORD, 1ST DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM (1402-1460)
The Lancastrian leader who is killed at the battle of Northampton.
DR DOMENICO SERIGO
King Edward's personal physician.
WILLIAM, LORD BONVILLE (1393-1461)
A Yorkist noble executed after the battle of St Albans. He is the
mortal enemy of the Courtenay Earls of Devon.
SIR THOMAS KYRIELL
A Yorkist noble executed after the battle of St Albans.
QUEEN CHARLOTTE OF SAVOY (1445-1483)
Wife of King Louis XI.
SIR HUMPHREY NEVILLE
A die hard Lancastrian from the Raby branch of the Neville family.
With his brother Charles he instigates a rebellion on the Scottish borders
in 1469. He is defeated and executed.
CHARLES NEVILLE
Younger brother of Humphrey Neville. He helps his brother to
instigate a revolt in 1469 and is also captured and executed.
ISABELLA INGOLDERTHORPE, MARCHIONESS OF MONTAGU (1439-?)
John Neville's wife. Sharon Penman calls her 'Inglethorpe'.
ELEANOR BOURCHIER, DUCHESS OF NORFOLK (1417-1484)
Wife of the 3rd Duke of Norfolk and younger sister of Henry and Thomas
Bourchier.
KATHERINE NEVILLE, DOWAGER DUCHESS OF NORFOLK
Sister of the Earl of Salisbury, widow of the 2nd Duke of Norfolk and mother
of the 3rd Duke. She marries Elizabeth Woodville's younger brother, John.
KATHERINE NEVILLE, LADY HASTINGS
The fifth daughter of the Earl of Salisbury and Warwick's younger sister.
She marries William Hastings in 1462.
SIR AUBREY DE VERE (?-1462)
Eldest son of the 12th Earl of Oxford. Accused of plotting against
King Edward and executed alongside his father.
THOMAS PERCY, LORD EGREMONT (1422-1460)
The younger brother of the Earl of Northumberland and a
Lancastrian thug, he is killed in the battle of Northampton.
WILLIAM BOOTH, ARCHBISHOP OF YORK
Possibly George Neville's predecessor as Archbishop of York - but I'm
not sure.
GEORGE NEVILLE, DUKE OF BEDFORD (?-1483)
John Neville's son.
PRINCESS ELIZABETH OF YORK (1466-1503)
Eldest child of Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth. Born in Westminster Palace.
PRINCESS MARY OF YORK (1467-1482)
Second child of Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth.
PRINCESS CECILY OF YORK (1469-1507)
Third child of Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth.
PRINCE EDWARD OF YORK (1470-1483)
Fourth child and eldest son of Edward IV and Queen Elizabeth. Born
at Westminster Abbey.
EDMUND BEAUFORT, 2ND DUKE OF SOMERSET (1406-1455)
Father of Henry, 3rd Duke of Somerset and Edmund, 4th Duke of
Somerset.
THOMAS, 8TH LORD CLIFFORD (?-1455)
Father of John, 9th Lord Clifford.
~~~
That's the lot (so far). I am not expecting miracles and I am not expecting
to
find out everything about everyone. However, any information that you
can come up with would be greatly appreciated.
Just in case you're wondering, I'm not expecting everyone to do all the hard
work for me! I will try to examine the various sources that have been
recommended to me over the last few days, particularly the Dictionary of
National Biography (provided I can find a copy, of course).
I also have a general query about the names of the women in my story.
Most historians refer to women by their maiden names, even after they
are married (i.e. Warwick's wife is called Anne Beauchamp, York's
wife is called Cecily Neville, etc.) This has led me to the conclusion
that noblewomen in the 15th century kept their maiden names after
marriage. However, Charles Ross refers to Anne Beauchamp as
Anne Neville, which rather undermines my theory. Can anyone tell
me what surnames I should use for my female characters - maiden
or married? For example, when Edward IV married Elizabeth,
would she have been Woodville, Grey or, as Sharon Penman suggests,
Woodville-Grey?
Thanks.
Mike
P.S. I've just spent the day at Dunster Castle in Somerset, England if
anyone's
interested (which you're probably not!). Thought I'd tell you anyway.
"What about the getting of the garland, keeping it, losing it and winning it
again,
it hath cost more English blood than twice the winning of France ... "
- William Shakespeare's Richard III
(I know it's a bit of an old chestnut, but it's the best I could come up
with!)
Paul J Gans
I wanted to, but I needed to file a Form 864A (REV) first,
and I'm out of them. I could order more on a Form 4523,
but I'm out of that too.
--- Paul J. Gans [ga...@panix.com]
David C. Jack
>
snip
> Ms Penman calls her 'Marguerite d'Anjou' - is
> there any justification for this?
>
snip
Yes. It's the French for 'Margaret of Anjou'.
Dave
John Wilson
Paul J Gans wrote in message <7qhn1o$bmf$5...@news.panix.com>...
>> You omitted to give references, which, of course, would include C.
>>Northcote Parkinson's works.
>and I'm out of them. I could order more on a Form 4523,
>but I'm out of that too.
>
JGW
Rania R Melhem
giving her the name she was born with ?
Rania
Geaux Tigers
LSU '89
On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, David C. Jack wrote:
> Michael A. Matthews wrote:
> >
>
> snip
>
> > Ms Penman calls her 'Marguerite d'Anjou' - is
> > there any justification for this?
> >
Michael A. Matthews
David C. Jack
> > Ms Penman calls her 'Marguerite d'Anjou' - is
> > there any justification for this?
> >
>
> Yes. It's the French for 'Margaret of Anjou'.
I know that! I'm not a complete numpty!
What I meant was - why is Ms Penman the only person who calls her Marguerite
d'Anjou? What would
the people in England have called her at the time?
David C. Jack
>
>
>
> What I meant was - why is Ms Penman the only person who calls her Marguerite
> d'Anjou? What would
> the people in England have called her at the time?
"Your Majesty" ?
Dave
David C. Jack
>
> Since we know that Marguerite d'Anjou was French what is so wrong about
> giving her the name she was born with ?
> Rania
>
> Geaux Tigers
> LSU '89
Same reason the French call Anna von Oestereich Anne d'Autriche.
Dave
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
>
> David C. Jack
> > > Ms Penman calls her 'Marguerite d'Anjou' - is
> > > there any justification for this?
> > >
> > snip
> >
> > Yes. It's the French for 'Margaret of Anjou'.
>
> I know that! I'm not a complete numpty!
>
> What I meant was - why is Ms Penman the only person who calls her Marguerite
> d'Anjou? What would
> the people in England have called her at the time?
"Your Highness"
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
> RICHARD NEVILLE, EARL OF WARWICK (1428-1471)
>
> Warwick is the Earl of Salisbury's eldest son, the Duke of York's nephew and
> King Edward's cousin. He has dark hair and brown eyes. He is a charismatic,
> energetic, charming and larger-than-life figure, respected by both the
> nobility and the common people. He is generous, intelligent and serious although
> he can be witty. He enjoys an extravagant lifestyle, is extremely wealthy and
> has a huge number of retainers at his disposal. He is a courageous soldier and
> an inspirational leader, although he is also impatient and somewhat rash. But
> under his impeccable exterior, Warwick is arrogant, scheming, manipulative and
> ruthless and will do anything to gain power. His emblem is a white, muzzled
> bear and ragged staff.
I recommend that you join the "warsroses" mailing list. There's a
fellow there calling himself "Warwykke" that enjoys discussing the
Great Neville.
He used many badges. The silver bear alone, the ragged staff
alone and the dun cow is another Warwick emblem inherited from his
wife's family. After his father's death he inherited a golden
griffon and a green eagle. A friend of mine, interested in badges
states that he has seen a conjoined bear, staff and griffon as a
Warwick badge.
> EDWARD IV (1442-1483)
>
> Edward is the eldest son of the Duke of York. He is very tall, strong and
> handsome with golden-brown hair and blue eyes. Edward is kind, gentle,
> generous, witty, tolerant, easy-going, compassionate and courteous. He is
> charming, charismatic, intelligent, pragmatic and cunning, although he can
> be impetuous, sometimes lacks foresight and occasionally allows his emotions
> to get the better of him. He is generally merciful, but he can be ruthless
> when the occasion demands it. He is a fashionable man and lavishes money on
> clothes, jewels and feasts. He is a fearless, resourceful and outstanding
> soldier - his chosen weapon is a battleaxe.
An axe of his is supposedly preserved somewhere in France. The
pollaxe is basically the predominant weapon of all gentlemen when
fighting on foot (or perhaps second to longer pollarms; bills and
glaives.) Commines states that Edward fought all his battles on
foot.
> Like Warwick, Edward is an
> inspirational leader. He adopts the Sun in Splendour emblem after the battle
> of Mortimer's Cross.
His previous badge was a white lion, the emblem of the Earls of
March. A white rose, also.
> HENRY VI (1421-1471)
His emblem is an Antelope.
> QUEEN ELIZABETH WOODVILLE (1437-1492)
>
> Elizabeth is the eldest child of Richard Woodville, Lord Rivers and his wife
> Jacquetta. She is one of Queen Margaret's attendants. Her first
> husband, Sir John Grey, is killed at St Albans.
...by an army led by Warwick, hint, hint...
> LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
>
> The "Spider King". Devious and manipulative, he is prepared to do
> anything to destroy his enemy, the Duke of Burgundy. He is the cousin of
> Margaret of Anjou.
I do not know when this dauphin became king, but it was not until
after your time span above begins. Louis was in dispute with his
father and lived in exile at the court in Burgundy, which was
renowned throughout Europe. Undoubtably he knew Charles, the
count of Charolais and later duke of Burgundy quite well. I have
been told that it is known that his standard was among those flown
by the Yorkist army at Towton.
After he becomes king of France there is a civil war in France
called "the War of Public Weal". Read about it in Commines. It's
really funny.
> CHARLES, DUKE OF BURGUNDY (1433-1477)
>
> The son of Duke Philip of Burgundy, he marries King Edward's
> younger sister as part of his father's alliance with England. He becomes
> Duke after his father's death in 1467. He is wealthy, ambitious and
> arrogant. He is initially reluctant to help Edward in his bid to reclaim the
> throne, but does so after England and France unite against him. The Duke and
> King Louis are sworn enemies.
Apparently his personal inclination was to support the
Lancastrians, who had been the last Englishmen to war on France,
but they were already being patronised by the French. Again, read
Commines.
> JOHN, LORD WENLOCK (1400-1471)
>
> A veteran soldier and Warwick's loyal lieutenant. Intelligent and
> sensible. He takes part in the siege of the Tower of London and fights in
> the battles at Ferrybridge, Towton and Tewkesbury, where he is killed by
> Edmund Beaufort.
Commines has much to say about Lord Wenlock.
> HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
>
> A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at Mortimer's
> Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
> battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if he
> was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
Burke's Extinct Peerage will surely tell you.
> JOHN, LORD HOWARD (1430-1485)
>
> A brutal and efficient Yorkist noble who fights at the battle of
> Towton and serves on the King's Council. He has dark hair and a long
> moustache.
Often mentioned in the Paston Papers. Also, some of his personal
accounts have been preserved and are published by Alan Sutton. He
was very close to the Mowbrays, and also to the De Vere's. It is
tragic that he died fighting against De Vere, assuming that one
thinks well of him.
> JACQUETTA OF LUXEMBOURG, DUCHESS OF BEDFORD (1416-1472)
>
> Widow of the Duke of Bedford. Marries Richard Woodville in 1436. Mother
> of Elizabeth, Anthony and John.
Related to the treacherous Count of St. Pol. See Commines.
> SIR THOMAS KYRIELL
>
> A Yorkist noble executed after the battle of St Albans.
A familiar name... was he an English captain in the Hundred Years
War?
> ISABELLA INGOLDERTHORPE, MARCHIONESS OF MONTAGU (1439-?)
>
> John Neville's wife. Sharon Penman calls her 'Inglethorpe'.
Names have no fixed spelling. Is it "Nevil", "Nevill" or
"Neville"? "Shakespeare", "Shakespear" or "Shaxspur"?
> GEORGE NEVILLE, DUKE OF BEDFORD (?-1483)
>
> John Neville's son.
He was affianced to one of Edward IV's daughters, but after his
father was attainted his title was degraded.
> Just in case you're wondering, I'm not expecting everyone to do all the hard
> work for me! I will try to examine the various sources that have been
> recommended to me over the last few days, particularly the Dictionary of
> National Biography (provided I can find a copy, of course).
I'm sure that you will find one at the central library of the
nearest city to you, at the very least.
--
David Brewer, a broken record (Commines... Commines... Commines...)
Brant Gibbard
Brewer) wrote:
>> HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
>>
>> A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at Mortimer's
>> Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
>> battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if he
>> was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
Try asking over on soc.genealogy.medieval. Someone there is likely to
know.
Brant Gibbard
bgib...@inforamp.net
http://home.inforamp.net/~bgibbard/gen
Toronto, Ont.
Michael A. Matthews
David Brewer wrote
> > LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
> >
> > The "Spider King". Devious and manipulative, he is prepared to do
> > anything to destroy his enemy, the Duke of Burgundy. He is the cousin of
> > Margaret of Anjou.
>
> I do not know when this dauphin became king ...
July 1461. I didn't think it was worth including his father in my story.
> > HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
> >
> > A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at
Mortimer's
> > Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
> > battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if
he
> > was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
>
> Burke's Extinct Peerage will surely tell you.
I'll have a look. The Burke's Peerages I found were hopeless. Maybe I was
looking in the wrong ones.
> > ISABELLA INGOLDERTHORPE, MARCHIONESS OF MONTAGU (1439-?)
> >
> > John Neville's wife. Sharon Penman calls her 'Inglethorpe'.
>
> Names have no fixed spelling. Is it "Nevil", "Nevill" or
> "Neville"? "Shakespeare", "Shakespear" or "Shaxspur"?
I think I'll go with Inglethorpe.
> > GEORGE NEVILLE, DUKE OF BEDFORD (?-1483)
> >
> > John Neville's son.
>
> He was affianced to one of Edward IV's daughters ...
He was betrothed to Edward IV's eldest daughter Elizabeth as part of the
King's attempt to compensate John Neville for taking the Earldom of
Northumberland from him. It didn't work. John Neville fought against the
King at Barnet, and died there.
> I'm sure that you will find one at the central library of the
> nearest city to you, at the very least.
I'm not sure about that. I live in Bristol, England. I've visited our
Central Library twice in recent months and couldn't find much of any use.
Admittedly, I wasn't entirely sure what I was looking for, so I'll go back
and have another look as soon as I can.
> David Brewer, a broken record (Commines... Commines... Commines...)
So you think I should read Commines, then?
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
David C. Jack wrote
> "Your Majesty"
David Brewer wrote
> "Your Highness"
Maybe the grovelling Lancastrians did. But I doubt people like Edward IV and
Warwick would have used such a flattering form of address, especially behind
her back!
Besides, that isn't the answer I was looking for. You know very well what I
mean. Stop being awkward!
Maybe if I ask a straight question, I'll get a straight answer:
If I write a scene in which people talk about Margaret of Anjou, how would
they refer to her - as Queen Margaret or Queen Marguerite? Vote now!
Whatever you decide, I will use in my story.
Mike.
P.S. You have to be nice to me today. It's my birthday.
Liz Broadwell
: they refer to her - as Queen Margaret or Queen Marguerite? Vote now!
: Whatever you decide, I will use in my story.
Here's my off-the-cuff suggestion --
If the people talking are friendly to her/supportive of her position, I
would expect them to refer to her (in the third person) by title ("her
highness" or "the queen" -- side question: is "the queen's grace" a
phrase in use at this time period?), the high-to-late Middle Ages in this
part of Europe tending to emphasize positions over persons, IMHO. For the
sake of establishing which queen you're talking about for your readers,
I'd say that having someone refer to "Queen <name>" at a first usage would
be reasonable (or you could simply establish what her name is in the
surrounding narration). For <name>, whether spoken by the friendly or the
unfriendly, I'd consider using "Margaret" if the conversation is being
held by English-speakers, and "Marguerite" if by French. (What <name> the
narrating voice uses is, of course, the narrating voice's problem.)
: P.S. You have to be nice to me today. It's my birthday.
Congratulations on progressing one year closer to the grave. (Cf.
Chaucer's _Reeve's Tale_.)
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
mal...@CORRSFANS.com (Michael A. Matthews) wrote:
[...]
> CHARLES, DUKE OF BURGUNDY (1433-1477)
>
> The son of Duke Philip of Burgundy,
If you want a rather good portrait, see Richard Vaughan's
_Charles the Bold._
Depending on whether you want to get side-tracked into
walk-on characters, he has some interesting bastard brothers
(but I'm not sure if they got to England at any point, or
indeed, whether you're restricting your dramatic action to
England, come to that...).
Mary
Michael A. Matthews
Liz Broadwell wrote
> Here's my off-the-cuff suggestion --
>
> If the people talking are friendly to her/supportive of her position, I
> would expect them to refer to her (in the third person) by title ("her
> highness" or "the queen" -- side question: is "the queen's grace" a
> phrase in use at this time period?), the high-to-late Middle Ages in this
> part of Europe tending to emphasize positions over persons, IMHO. For the
> sake of establishing which queen you're talking about for your readers,
> I'd say that having someone refer to "Queen <name>" at a first usage would
> be reasonable (or you could simply establish what her name is in the
> surrounding narration). For <name>, whether spoken by the friendly or the
> unfriendly, I'd consider using "Margaret" if the conversation is being
> held by English-speakers, and "Marguerite" if by French. (What <name> the
> narrating voice uses is, of course, the narrating voice's problem.)
At last, a sensible answer!
The English called her Margaret.
The French called her Marguerite.
Simple.
But something else has just occurred to me. What would the Burgundians have
called her? Because modern Burgundy is a region of France, I have assumed
that the Burgundians spoke French. But Burgundy used to incorporate parts of
the Low Countries, including The Hague. So what language did they speak -
French, Dutch or something else altogether? As I said, this question has
only just occurred to me, so I haven't looked into it yet myself.
Also, I have so far used "Your Majesty" when referring to Kings and Queens,
"Your Grace" when referring to Dukes, Duchesses and Archbishops and "My
Lord" when referring to Earls, Countesses and the lesser nobility, because
this is what the OED says are the current standard forms of address.
However, times change. Would different forms of address have been used in
the 15th Century?
> : P.S. You have to be nice to me today. It's my birthday.
>
> Congratulations on progressing one year closer to the grave. (Cf.
> Chaucer's _Reeve's Tale_.)
Thanks. Now I'm depressed.
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
Mary wrote
> > CHARLES, DUKE OF BURGUNDY (1433-1477)
> >
> > The son of Duke Philip of Burgundy,
>
> If you want a rather good portrait, see Richard Vaughan's
> _Charles the Bold._
>
> Depending on whether you want to get side-tracked into
> walk-on characters, he has some interesting bastard brothers
> (but I'm not sure if they got to England at any point, or
> indeed, whether you're restricting your dramatic action to
> England, come to that...).
Thanks, Mary.
When you say "portrait", I assume you mean a painting rather than a verbal
description. If you don't, I apologise - I'm afraid I'm not overly furnished
in the brain cell department.
There's a portrait of Charles in my copy of Charles Ross' Edward IV
biography. It might be the same one that you're referring to. He's wearing
armour, has a sword over his shoulder and appears to have designer stubble!
With regard to his bastard brothers, I'm afraid I won't be including them in
my story - I'm having enough trouble keeping track of all the characters
I've got now, without adding more!
I am intending to cover most of the main events that took place between 1460
and 1471, so I will be including scenes in France and Burgundy (although for
the sake of simplicity I'm intending to refer to rather than depict the
events that occurred in Scotland during this period).
Mike.
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
> Warwick would have used such a flattering form of address, especially behind
> her back!
I have heard the term "the bitch of Anjou", but I cannot recall a
primary source.
> Maybe if I ask a straight question, I'll get a straight answer:
Ooooh, get her.
> If I write a scene in which people talk about Margaret of Anjou, how would
> they refer to her - as Queen Margaret or Queen Marguerite? Vote now!
> Whatever you decide, I will use in my story.
It is my general experience that the Medievals understood which
names were cognate in different languages and would freely
translate into the local form, much as we still speak of foreign
kings and popes being called, say, "John", instead of "Jean" or
"Johannes". The majority of forenames, "christian names", were
drawn from a set of christian saints' names common to all
Christendom.
You might want to find an unmodernised contemporary chronical and
see exactly how various names are spelled.
--
David Brewer
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
>
> > > LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
> > >
> > > The "Spider King". Devious and manipulative, he is prepared to do
> > > anything to destroy his enemy, the Duke of Burgundy. He is the cousin of
> > > Margaret of Anjou.
> >
>
> July 1461. I didn't think it was worth including his father in my story.
If Louis had indeed supported the Yorkists in some small way at
Towton, as I am led to believe, and Charles the Rash was
naturally inclined the other way, to support the Lancastrians,
then their respective policies seem really quite ironic. Both, it
would seem, ended up following their fathers' policy, if only to
thwart each other.
> > > HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
> > >
> > > A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at
> Mortimer's
> > > Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
> > > battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if
> he
> > > was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
> >
> > Burke's Extinct Peerage will surely tell you.
>
> I'll have a look. The Burke's Peerages I found were hopeless. Maybe I was
> looking in the wrong ones.
>
> > I'm sure that you will find one at the central library of the
> > nearest city to you, at the very least.
>
> I'm not sure about that. I live in Bristol, England. I've visited our
> Central Library twice in recent months and couldn't find much of any use.
> Admittedly, I wasn't entirely sure what I was looking for, so I'll go back
> and have another look as soon as I can.
Next time I visit Sheffield's central library, I shall look up the
Stafford question myself, to check that I'm not leading you
astray.
At the very least you should check Burke's Extinct to discover the
sheer vastness of the Neville family.
Now that you have admitted that you live in Bristol (of fond
memory, city and county of my birth) it seems inevitable that
Joanna Prescott will drag you off on some pub crawl.
> > David Brewer, a broken record (Commines... Commines... Commines...)
>
> So you think I should read Commines, then?
He was a neutral observer who personally met several of the
protagonists you name (f'rinstance, he knew Lord Wenlock very
well) and wrote about them quite candidly. So, yes.
--
David Brewer
Phyllis M. Gilmore
<mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote:
> If I write a scene in which people talk about Margaret of Anjou, how would
> they refer to her - as Queen Margaret or Queen Marguerite? Vote now!
> Whatever you decide, I will use in my story.
For the fun of it, and completely out of period:
I once read a novelized biography of Marie Antoinette (who was Austrian by
birth). The author addressed the very issue you raise by having la
Dauphine complain, shortly after her marriage, that it was disconcerting
to be addressed by a foreign version of one's name (and as it was her
husband and inlaws doing the addressing, she could hardly tell them off).
It was also disconcerting never to converse in her native tounge. It
might be worth considering a similar option (but better handled, I hope).
And, as a side note, "Mary Queen of Scots" was raised from age 5 or so in
France (as she was intended to be its queen as well). She considered
French her native language and (as far as I can tell) thought of herself
as "Marie."
Phyllis
Sharon L. Krossa
complex one, and the specific mechanics vary hugely from period to
period and culture to culture. While Marie Antoinette may have found it
disconcerting to be addressed by a foreign version of her name, we
cannot take this as evidence that someone in the Middle Ages would have
found it at all disconcerting or odd.
For much of the Middle Ages in much of Europe, transforming names to
some extent to suit the language used appears to have been the norm. But
since the nature of the transformation could include direct translation,
substitution of cognates, substitution of unrelated but associated
names, and/or simple transliteration, all depending on what name in what
language from what culture was being transformed for use in what
language in what culture, the best thing to do is to look at how names
from the language and culture in question were treated in the target
language and culture in the specific era of interest.
Since I specialize in Scottish onomastics, I'm not able to say what the
answer is for England. However, there are those who read this newsgroup
who probably could (especially if the subject line were to catch their
attention)...
Of course, the requirements of a novel may not allow for full fidelity
to medieval practice regarding names -- however, taking such practice
into consideration would make for a more informed decision.
Sharon
PS You may wish to check out the Medieval Naming Guides web site
(address in .sig) to see if there are any articles there that may be of
use.
--
Sharon L. Krossa, kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu
Medieval Scotland: http://www.stanford.edu/~skrossa/medievalscotland/
The most complete index of reliable web articles about pre-1600 names is
Arval's Medieval Naming Guides - http://www.panix.com/~mittle/names/
D. Spencer Hines
Thank God for modern English spelling. Definitely a _Good Thing_.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Sherlock Holmes took his bottle [of
seven-percent solution of cocaine diluted in water] from the corner of
the mantelpiece, and his hypodermic syringe from its neat morocco
case. With his long, white nervous fingers he adjusted the delicate
needle, and rolled back his left shirtcuff. For some little time his
eyes rested thoughtfully upon the sinewy forearm and wrist, all dotted
and scarred with innumerable puncture marks. Finally he thrust the
sharp point home, pressed down the tiny piston, and sank back into the
velvet-lined armchair with a long sigh of satisfaction." _The Sign of
the Four_ (1889) Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle [1859-1930]
Lblanch001 <lblan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990902214614...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> David Brewer writes:
>
> >You might want to find an unmodernised contemporary chronical and
> >see exactly how various names are spelled.
>
> A good thought. Here's a chunk out of the Arrivall, a Yorkist
chronicle, from
> the www.r3.org site:
>
> Aftar all thes things thus fallen, the Twesday in Estar weke, the
xvj. day of
> Aprile, came certayn tydyngs to the Kynge how that Qwene Margaret,
hir sonne
> Edward, callyd Prince of Wales, the Countese of Warwyke, the Priowr
of Seint
> Johns, that tyme called Tresorar of England, the Lord Wenloke, and
many othere
> knyghts, squiers, and othar of theyr party, whiche longe had bene
nowt of the
> land with them, with suche also as, with the sayde Priowr of Seint
Johns, had
> gon into Fraunce to fet them into England, were arryved, and landed
in the west
> contrye, upon Estar day, at Waymowthe, aftar longe abydynge passage,
and beyng
> on the sea, and landinge agayne for defawlte of good wynde and
wethar. For,
> trewthe it is, that the Qwene, Edward hir sonne, with all theyr
felowshipe,
> entendinge to passe out of Normandy into England, toke first the
sea, at
> Humflew, in the monithe of Marche, the xxiiij. day of the same, and,
from that
> tyme forthe wards, they cowlde nat have any stable wethar to passe
with; for
> and it were one day good, anon it chaunged upon them, and was
agaynst them, and
> fayne they were therefor to goo to land agayne. And so, at divars
tymes, they
> toke the sea, and forsoke it agayne, tyll it was the xiij. day of
Aprill,
> Estars Even. That day they passyd. The Countysse of Warwyke had a
shippe of
> avaunctage, and, therefore, landyd afore the othar, at Portsmowthe,
and, from
> thens, she went to Showthampton, entendynge to have gon towards the
Qwene,
> whiche was landyd at Wemowthe.
>
>
> Regards,
> Laura Blanchard
> lbla...@pobox.upenn.edu
> (temporarily posting from lblan...@aol.com)
Roy Bailey
<NOSPAMd...@isomedia.com> writes
>Michael A. Matthews wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> What I meant was - why is Ms Penman the only person who calls her Marguerite
>> d'Anjou? What would
>> the people in England have called her at the time?
>
>
I doubt it. More likely 'Your Grace'. I believe it was Henry VIII who
was the first to be referred to as 'Majesty'.
--
Roy Bailey
West Berkshire.
David Brewer
da...@westmore.demon.co.uk "David Brewer" writes:
> I recommend that you join the "warsroses" mailing list. There's a
> fellow there calling himself "Warwykke" that enjoys discussing the
> Great Neville.
I neglected to state that this list is a "Onelist". You might join
via their website www.onelist.com.
--
David Brewer
Lblanch001
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
>
> Mary wrote
>
> > > CHARLES, DUKE OF BURGUNDY (1433-1477)
> > >
> > > The son of Duke Philip of Burgundy,
> >
> > If you want a rather good portrait, see Richard Vaughan's
> > _Charles the Bold._
> >
> > Depending on whether you want to get side-tracked into
> > walk-on characters, he has some interesting bastard
>brothers (but I'm not sure if they got to England at any
>point, or indeed, whether you're restricting your dramatic
>action to England, come to that...).
>
> Thanks, Mary.
>
> When you say "portrait", I assume you mean a painting
>rather than a verbal description. If you don't, I apologise
>- I'm afraid I'm not overly furnished in the brain cell
>department.
I believe there are some verbal 'portraits' in Vaughan, but
in fact, yes, I was thinking of a painting. Now I come to
look, it's used as the cover to _Charles the Bold_, and is by
Rogier van der Weyden.
>
> There's a portrait of Charles in my copy of Charles Ross'
>Edward IV biography. It might be the same one that you're
>referring to. He's wearing armour, has a sword over his
>shoulder and appears to have designer stubble!
I don't have that one. Looks like I may have to buy another
Charles Ross. :-)
This one is Charles of Burgundy wearing a black doublet, and
the Order of the Golden Fleece (I _think)_ - and holding the
pommel of a sword. Very clean-shaven, and looking - for a
man with a ferocious temper - very thoughtful.
The best version I've got is in Weightman's _Margaret of
York_, which I think I recommended to you before. Now I look
more closely, this has a whole lot of pictures which would be
useful to you - including one of Clarence - but I'm not sure
they're all contemporary.
The reason I recommend Weightman is that Vaughan can be hard
to get hold of (although there's always inter-library loans),
whereas _Margaret of York_ is out in relatively-cheap
paperback from Sutton, and you shouldn't have any trouble
getting hold of it.
>
> With regard to his bastard brothers, I'm afraid I won't be
>including them in my story - I'm having enough trouble
>keeping track of all the characters I've got now, without
>adding more!
Yeah, tell me about it! I think I'm dealing with upwards of
80, myself, so I have every sympathy...
I think one of the brothers - Anthony? - is quite significant
as a military commander, so you might want to look at him
just to check. My favourite, OTOH, is the one who took holy
orders, and was seen off at his funeral by 36 of his
illegitimate children... now _that's_ dramatic potential. :-)
>
> I am intending to cover most of the main events that took
>place between 1460 and 1471,
<g>
Best of luck.
>so I will be including scenes in France and Burgundy
>(although for the sake of simplicity I'm intending to refer
>to rather than depict the events that occurred in Scotland
>during this period).
Too right... I can't remember your original book list, but I
assume you've got Lander? I find him very useful for
following the narrative thrust, as it were.
Oh yes, and assuming you're ending with Towton, Boardman's
_The Medieval Soldier_ has a nice bit at the end on the grave
finds.
I'll go along with David's broken record and suggest you read
Commines (or however we're spelling it this week), but I'm
not sure I'd call him a *neutral* observer, exactly. I'd be
more inclined to say he put himself about a bit - used to be
a loyal subject of Charles, then buggered off to Louis to be
loyal to France... but very well worth reading nonetheless.
Mary
ti...@my-deja.com
"Michael A. Matthews" <mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote:
> The information I have already uncovered about these individuals comes from
> a variety of sources, some of which I have been informed are not altogether
> reliable. Certain details - particularly the appearance and character of
> these people - are based on Sharon Penman's novel The Sunne In Splendour. If
> any of the information I've included about the following individuals is
> incorrect, please let me know. Any additional information about years of
> birth and death, character and appearance would also be appreciated.
> However, I would be grateful if you could cite the relevant sources so that
> I can include them in my bibliography.
>
> Be warned - some of the following are VERY obscure!
>snipped
>
>
> QUEEN ELIZABETH WOODVILLE (1437-1492)
>
> Elizabeth is the eldest child of Richard Woodville, Lord Rivers and his wife
> Jacquetta. She is one of Queen Margaret's attendants. Her first
> husband, Sir John Grey, is killed at St Albans. King Edward later becomes
> captivated by her and marries her in secret. She is beautiful, confident and
> determined with golden hair, fair skin and an alluring smile. But she is
> also glacial, austere, ambitious, calculating, greedy, manipulative,
> devious, ruthless and arrogant. She has two children by her first marriage,
> Thomas and Richard.
In most fiction that purports to prove Richard III's innocence Elizabeth
Woodville is portrayed in this way - with very little evidence. In the same
way that in books against Richard III she is portrayed as a tragic heroine.
Somewhere in between the two like most people is far more accurate. Firstly
her arrogance is usually attributed to the way in which she insisted on being
treated as Queen - often people use the description of her coronation banquet
as evidence for her pride etc - however her coronation varied very little to
that of any other late medieval Queen Consort - one thing that may explain
her behaviour in my view - her insistance on being treated correctly was
that she was the first english born non-royal Queen Consort and was aware
that many people thought she was too low born to occupy such an exalted
position therefore she always ensured that she was treated correctly. She is
credited with gaining vast advancement for her family from Edward IV to the
detriment of the Neville clan - a little of this is nothing more than
snobbery both then and now - the family were regarded as coming from nowhere
and doing very well for themselves - to the detriment of the better born
(the nevilles etc). In fact Edward IV gave very little cash and land grants
to the woodville family in the 1460's and not much more in the 1470's - it is
hard to suggest that they gained more than the Nevilles in the 1460's. As to
the much talked about marriages well the well born families they married into
didn't have any objection to marrying relatives of the Queen at the time -
and considering how the Nevilles had advanced their family by careful and
astute marriages they were hardly in a position to cast stones - the only
marriage that the King and Queen had a vast influence on was that of the
young Duke of Buckingham to the Queen's sister Catherine Woodville - that
marriage goes some way to explain the Duke's antipathy to the Woodvilles and
his siding with Richard of Gloucester in 1483. As to all the other
characteristics - well what evidence for ruthless, glacial etc etc.????????
> RICHARD WOODVILLE, 1ST EARL RIVERS (1405-1469)
>
> Father of Elizabeth, Anthony and John Woodville. He made his fortune by
> marrying the widowed Duchess of Bedford. He is handsome, cultured
> and intelligent but greedy, self-seeking, ambitious, rapacious and
> arrogant.
Once again lets repeat the revisionist party line - there is little actual
evidence to suggest that he was greedy, self-seeking or rapacious - very 20th
Century views applied to a completely different society - the responsibilty
of any man of his position was to increase his families social standing and
wealth. Everything I have discovered about him suggests he was an excellent
soldier (he served with the Duke of York in France) - and changing sides was
hardly unusual if not particularly admirable.
He is determined to increase his family's wealth with a minimum
> amount of effort. He fights for the Lancastrians at Towton but then supports
> the Yorkists when his daughter marries King Edward. Captured during
> Warwick's first rebellion and executed.
>
> JACQUETTA OF LUXEMBOURG, DUCHESS OF BEDFORD (1416-1472)
>
> Widow of the Duke of Bedford. Marries Richard Woodville in 1436. Mother of Elizabeth, Anthony and John
- she also had several other children. Many of whom play an important role.
For your naming query she would having married a man of lower birth continued
to be styled by the rank of her first husband the Uncle of Henry VI which is
why she is referred to as the Duchess of Bedford rather than Lady Woodville
and then later on as the Countess Rivers.
>
>
> I also have a general query about the names of the women in my story.
> Most historians refer to women by their maiden names, even after they
> are married (i.e. Warwick's wife is called Anne Beauchamp, York's
> wife is called Cecily Neville, etc.) This has led me to the conclusion
> that noblewomen in the 15th century kept their maiden names after
> marriage. However, Charles Ross refers to Anne Beauchamp as
> Anne Neville, which rather undermines my theory. Can anyone tell
> me what surnames I should use for my female characters - maiden
> or married? For example, when Edward IV married Elizabeth,
> would she have been Woodville, Grey or, as Sharon Penman suggests,
> Woodville-Grey?
>
She would have been called by her married name I would have thought - as
would all women - Cecily Neville would have have been The Duchess of York - i
think if memory serves after Edward IV became King his mother was referred
to as Cecily Duchess of York late wife to Richard rightful/lawful King of
England - in other words Queen Dowager in all but name. Elizabeth Grey - and
as a widow - either Lady Grey or more likely Dame Elizabeth Grey. I would
hope that you are going to find something about the key players yourself
rather than rely on what Sharon Penman wrote which whether you share all her
conclusions and accept all her research is after all the result of her
imagination and research. And you should not really rely on a novel for
information of real events and real people but should read widely about the
period and try some of the books already mentioned by people in posts - the
richard III society have several excellent publications for loan and purchase
- if you are interested in the period it might well be worth joining.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Renia Simmonds
you email OK?
Renia
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
> HUMPHREY STAFFORD OF SOUTHWICK, 15TH (?) EARL OF DEVON (1439-1469)
>
> A greedy and ambitious Yorkist noble. He fights in the battles at Mortimer's
> Cross, Ferrybridge and Towton, after which he is knighted on the
> battlefield. He also serves on the King's Council. Does anyone know if he
> was related to the Stafford Dukes of Buckingham?
I checked Burke's for you, since I was passing the library.
He was related at least two ways, but neither way very
significantly.
About 1176 Hervey Bagot inherited the Stafford pile via his wife,
Milicent Stafford. Hervey's son Hervey duly inherited and took his
mother's name. Both Stafford families are descended from them.
Hervey was succeeded by his son Robert, Robert by son Nicholas,
Nicholas by son Edmund, Edmund by son Ralph and Ralph by son
Ralph.
This Ralph, the first Earl of Stafford was succeeded by his son
Hugh. Ralph's daughter Margaret married Sir John Stafford who was
also descended from Milicent and Hervey above.
Hugh was suceeded by his son Edmund, Edmund by son Humphrey,
Humphrey by his son Humphrey, 1st. Duke of Buckingham who died at
St. Albans 1455.
Returning to Sir John, son-in-law of Ralph, 1st. Earl Stafford,
he was succeeded by his son Sir Humphrey, Humphrey by his son
Sir Humphrey "of the silver hand", Humphrey by his son Sir
Humphrey. This Humprey's first son John's son Humphrey inherited
but was killed in Jack Cade's rebellion. Humphrey's second son
William (brother of John above) had a son called Humphrey who then
inherited and was summoned to parliament as a baron addressed
"Humfrido Stafford de Suthwyck" and was advanced to the Earldom of
Devon in 1469 for a few months before being attainted.
It seems very unlikely that he would be called the 15th Earl.
Does that answer your question?
(I have simplified things a bit here and there.)
Summary:
Ralph - Hugh - Edmund - Hump - Hump(Buckingham)
- Mag+John - Hump - Hump - Hump - John - Hump
- Will - Hump(Devon)
--
David Brewer
"Watch out, watch out, watch out, there's a Humphrey about" -
British advertisement slogan for milk, from 1970's
Michael A. Matthews
Laura Blanchard wrote
That would "The Historie of the Arrivall of King Edward IV in England and
the Final Recoverye of his Kingdomes From Henry VI, A.D. 1471", n'est pas?
(catchy title)
Did they really spell Weymouth in two different ways in the space of a few
lines?
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
David Brewer wrote
> > > > LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
> If Louis had indeed supported the Yorkists in some small way at
> Towton, as I am led to believe, and Charles the Rash was
> naturally inclined the other way, to support the Lancastrians,
> then their respective policies seem really quite ironic. Both, it
> would seem, ended up following their fathers' policy, if only to
> thwart each other.
Charles the Rash?
> At the very least you should check Burke's Extinct to discover the
> sheer vastness of the Neville family.
I was going to go to the library today. But it's too damn hot.
> Now that you have admitted that you live in Bristol (of fond
> memory, city and county of my birth) it seems inevitable that
> Joanna Prescott will drag you off on some pub crawl.
Never touch alcohol. Poisons the mind and the body. (That sounded good,
didn't it? Better than the real reason why I don't drink the stuff, anyway).
> > > David Brewer, a broken record (Commines... Commines... Commines...)
> >
> > So you think I should read Commines, then?
>
> He was a neutral observer who personally met several of the
> protagonists you name (f'rinstance, he knew Lord Wenlock very
> well) and wrote about them quite candidly. So, yes.
Where might I find a copy of the said man's fine works?
Mike.
P.S. With regards to your message about the "warsroses" mailing list, sorry
to be thicker than a whale omelette, but what exactly is a "Onelist".
Michael A. Matthews
Sharon L. Krossa wrote
> The issue of name transformation to suit the language being used is a
> complex one, and the specific mechanics vary hugely from period to
> period and culture to culture. While Marie Antoinette may have found it
> disconcerting to be addressed by a foreign version of her name, we
> cannot take this as evidence that someone in the Middle Ages would have
> found it at all disconcerting or odd.
>
> For much of the Middle Ages in much of Europe, transforming names to
> some extent to suit the language used appears to have been the norm. But
> since the nature of the transformation could include direct translation,
> substitution of cognates, substitution of unrelated but associated
> names, and/or simple transliteration, all depending on what name in what
> language from what culture was being transformed for use in what
> language in what culture, the best thing to do is to look at how names
> from the language and culture in question were treated in the target
> language and culture in the specific era of interest.
>
> Since I specialize in Scottish onomastics, I'm not able to say what the
> answer is for England. However, there are those who read this newsgroup
> who probably could (especially if the subject line were to catch their
> attention)...
>
> Of course, the requirements of a novel may not allow for full fidelity
> to medieval practice regarding names -- however, taking such practice
> into consideration would make for a more informed decision.
Great. I only had one surviving brain cell, now that's fried as well!
Sorry to be sarcastic, Sharon, but I really didn't understand much of that.
When sending me messages, it would be best if you assumed that I don't have
a Ph.D. in Being a Very Clever Person.
After all, I'm only a writer!
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
Mary wrote
> The best version I've got is in Weightman's _Margaret of
> York_, which I think I recommended to you before. Now I look
> more closely, this has a whole lot of pictures which would be
> useful to you - including one of Clarence - but I'm not sure
> they're all contemporary.
>
> The reason I recommend Weightman is that Vaughan can be hard
> to get hold of (although there's always inter-library loans),
> whereas _Margaret of York_ is out in relatively-cheap
> paperback from Sutton, and you shouldn't have any trouble
> getting hold of it.
Sounds promising. I'll try to find a copy.
> I think one of the brothers - Anthony? - is quite significant
> as a military commander, so you might want to look at him
> just to check.
Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy?
> My favourite, OTOH, is the one who took holy
> orders, and was seen off at his funeral by 36 of his
> illegitimate children... now _that's_ dramatic potential. :-)
What a way to go!
> > I am intending to cover most of the main events that took
> >place between 1460 and 1471,
>
> <g>
>
> Best of luck.
OK. Maybe I was exaggerrating a bit. I've written a 53-page synopsis which
covers the main events I'm intending to include. I may have to pare this
down a bit later as it's a bit complicated. (The first version of my
synopsis that I wrote back in early 1998 was just 6 pages long!)
> >so I will be including scenes in France and Burgundy
> >(although for the sake of simplicity I'm intending to refer
> >to rather than depict the events that occurred in Scotland
> >during this period).
>
> Too right... I can't remember your original book list, but I
> assume you've got Lander? I find him very useful for
> following the narrative thrust, as it were.
I actually don't have Lander. Which of his books were you referring to?
Alison Weir (boo! hiss!) lists five in her bibliography!
> Oh yes, and assuming you're ending with Towton, Boardman's
> _The Medieval Soldier_ has a nice bit at the end on the grave
> finds.
I'm going to include Towton, but I'm ending with Tewkesbury (or rather
Edward's triumphant return to London after Tewkesbury and the subsequent
murder of Henry VI). I've got Andrew Boardman's The Battle of Towton, which
is rather good. I also saw him on Channel 4's excellent Secrets of the Dead
programme which dealt with Towton. Seems that if you want to know about
Towton, Boardman is your man.
By the way, this weekend's Time Team Live looks like it might be
interesting. For those of you who don't know, they're going to be
investigating Roman, Viking and Norman sites in the city.
Mike
Brant Gibbard
<mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote:
>Charles the Rash?
>
Same person more commonly referred to as "Charles the Bold". Rash is a
much better translation of "Téméraire", as it conveys more of the
negative implications of the original.
"Bold" is a bit of a diplomatic mis-translation that makes him sound
noble and decisive, which was not what was intended. A bit like the
way that "William the Sly" usually gets called "William the Silent".
Michael A. Matthews
Mary wrote
> This one is Charles of Burgundy wearing a black doublet, and
> the Order of the Golden Fleece (I _think)_ - and holding the
> pommel of a sword. Very clean-shaven, and looking - for a
> man with a ferocious temper - very thoughtful.
I've had another look at the portrait of Charles in Ross' Edward IV. He's
wearing a ram insignia around his neck which is, apparently, the symbol of
the Burgundian Order of the Golden Fleece. But he's definitely wearing
armour rather than a doublet, so it must be a different painting. The six
o'clock shadow might be a trick of the light, by the way.
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
Renia Simmonds wrote
> I've been trying to send stuff to you privately, but it keeps bouncing
back. Is
> you email OK?
I presume you're talking to me. It's hard to figure out who is saying what
to who with so many responses to my Wars of the Roses question!
I've been wondering about my e-mail. I haven't received a sausage in over a
week. My ISP was having trouble with their incoming mail server for a while,
but they reckon it's OK now, so I guess there must be another problem.
Either I've got a set-up problem (which I doubt as I was receiving e-mail OK
at the beginning of last week), or something else is awry. Trouble is, I
know nothing about this Internet stuff. I was hoping it would sort itself
out, but it looks like I'm going to have to phone up my ISP and find out
what's going on.
I'll let you know what happens.
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
I wrote
> I've been wondering about my e-mail. I haven't received a sausage in over
a
> week. My ISP was having trouble with their incoming mail server for a
while,
> but they reckon it's OK now, so I guess there must be another problem.
> Either I've got a set-up problem (which I doubt as I was receiving e-mail
OK
> at the beginning of last week), or something else is awry. Trouble is, I
> know nothing about this Internet stuff. I was hoping it would sort itself
> out, but it looks like I'm going to have to phone up my ISP and find out
> what's going on.
>
> I'll let you know what happens.
Just phoned my ISP and a very nice man informed me that they are STILL
having trouble with their servers. Hopefully that explains it. They reckon
that everything should be fixed in the next 24 to 48 hours, but I have my
doubts. If you keep trying to send me stuff, I'll let you know when (or
should that be if) we have lift off.
Guess this is what you get for subscribing to a free ISP - a dodgy mail
server and the wrong news server address AND technical support phone number
printed on their info leaflet!
Mike
Michael A. Matthews
David Brewer wrote
Thanks, David.
I got a bit lost in the paragraph starting "Returning to Sir John ... " When
you said, "This Humphrey's first son John's son Humphrey inherited ... ", I
presume you mean that Humphrey's son John had a son called Humphrey who
inherited, right?
I thought there must have been a connection between the two Humphrey
Staffords somewhere, but it is rather vague so I don't think I need to
mention it.
I agree with you about Hump not being the 15th Earl. I'm not sure where that
comes from.
I'm curious to know what version of Burke's you found this in. I couldn't
find anything as informative as this in the books I looked in.
Mike.
So what relation was Humphrey, Earl of Devon to Humphrey, 2nd Duke of
Buckingham?
(Only joking!)
D. Spencer Hines
"The notion that a language can be regularized in word
meaning, pronounciation, [sic] and spelling is a modern
conceit, doomed to ultimate failure, though the advent
of radio and television has seemingly slowed changes
in the formal language." [sic]
So much for that cerebral emanation desperately chasing after a
thought.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Sherlock Holmes took his bottle [of
seven-percent solution of cocaine diluted in water] from the corner of
the mantelpiece, and his hypodermic syringe from its neat morocco
case. With his long, white nervous fingers he adjusted the delicate
needle, and rolled back his left shirtcuff. For some little time his
eyes rested thoughtfully upon the sinewy forearm and wrist, all dotted
and scarred with innumerable puncture marks. Finally he thrust the
sharp point home, pressed down the tiny piston, and sank back into the
velvet-lined armchair with a long sigh of satisfaction." _The Sign of
the Four_ (1889) Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle [1859-1930]
Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:7qpsq8$f58$2...@news.panix.com...
> As has been true until very recently, the spelling was
> phonetic (note that the terminal "e's" are pronounced)
> and hence not regularized.
>
> The notion that a language can be regularized in word
> meaning, pronounciation, and spelling is a modern
> conceit, doomed to ultimate failure, though the advent
> of radio and television has seemingly slowed changes
> in the formal language.
>
> So yes, one could spell a word slightly differently in
> the same document.
>
> Look at the grammar too:
>
> "The Countysse of Warwyke had a shippe of
> avaunctage, and, therefore, landyd afore
> the othar, at Portsmowthe, and, from thens,
> she went to Showthampton, entendynge to have
> gon towards the Qwene, whiche was landyd at
> Wemowthe."
>
> I love the construction "whiche was landyd" in
> reference to the "Qwene".
>
> ---- Paul J. Gans [ga...@panix.com]
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
>
> David Brewer wrote
>
> > > > > LOUIS XI, KING OF FRANCE (1423-1483)
>
> > If Louis had indeed supported the Yorkists in some small way at
> > Towton, as I am led to believe, and Charles the Rash was
> > naturally inclined the other way, to support the Lancastrians,
> > then their respective policies seem really quite ironic. Both, it
> > would seem, ended up following their fathers' policy, if only to
> > thwart each other.
>
> Charles the Rash?
Charles Valois, Count of Charolais, later Duke of Burgundy, known
(out of period?) as "Charles le temeraire", translated variously
as bold, rash and foolhardy. Charles-who-got-his-head-staved-in-
by-a-Switzer-with-a-halberd. Him.
> > At the very least you should check Burke's Extinct to discover the
> > sheer vastness of the Neville family.
>
> I was going to go to the library today. But it's too damn hot.
So you could have played in the fountains outside the Count's
Louse to cool off.
> > > So you think I should read Commines, then?
> >
> > He was a neutral observer who personally met several of the
> > protagonists you name (f'rinstance, he knew Lord Wenlock very
> > well) and wrote about them quite candidly. So, yes.
>
> Where might I find a copy of the said man's fine works?
Follow links from http://www.r3.org/. Laura also has Warkworth and
the Arrivall all and other shit you ain't never heard of.
> P.S. With regards to your message about the "warsroses" mailing list, sorry
> to be thicker than a whale omelette, but what exactly is a "Onelist".
http://www.onelist.com/ should explain everything. Search on the
keyword "warsroses". Onelist.com host mailing lists on many
diverse topics, anybody can start one up.
Paul J Gans
Lblanch001
>That would "The Historie of the Arrivall of King Edward IV in England and
>the Final Recoverye of his Kingdomes From Henry VI, A.D. 1471", n'est pas?
>(catchy title)
>
>Did they really spell Weymouth in two different ways in the space of a few
>lines?
>
Well, I suppose it could be an error on the part of the nineteenth century
transcriber or typesetter but -- yeah. That's what they did. I went back to the
printed text and that's what's there. I'm not inclined to chase it back to the
ms, though...
Paul J Gans
>I wrote
>Mike
Here's what my attempt at mail to you returned to me:
<mal...@CORRSFANS.com>: host mail.jakinternet.co.uk[212.41.41.4] said: 550
5.7.1 Mail relay not allowed at this server
[ Part 2: "Undelivered Message" ]
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 21:38:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com>
To: Michael A. Matthews <mal...@CORRSFANS.com>
Subject: Re: The Wars of the Roses
** end of excerpt ***
Perhaps that will help them. But I suspect they already
know it.
Ian Mac Lure
: On Fri, 3 Sep 1999 11:07:00 +0100, "Michael A. Matthews"
: <mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote:
:>Charles the Rash?
:>
: Same person more commonly referred to as "Charles the Bold". Rash is a
: much better translation of "Temeraire", as it conveys more of the
: negative implications of the original.
: "Bold" is a bit of a diplomatic mis-translation that makes him sound
: noble and decisive, which was not what was intended. A bit like the
: way that "William the Sly" usually gets called "William the Silent".
The explanation of "Silent" is that what words he said were
wisely chosen and ought to be listened to. This may have been
a dig at his peers.
--
*******************************************************************
***** Ian B MacLure ***** Sunnyvale, CA ***** Engineer/Archer *****
* No Times Like The Maritimes *************************************
*******************************************************************
* Opinions Expressed Here Are Mine. That's Mine , Mine, MINE ******
*******************************************************************
Brant Gibbard
>Brant Gibbard <bgib...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>: "Bold" is a bit of a diplomatic mis-translation that makes him sound
>: noble and decisive, which was not what was intended. A bit like the
>: way that "William the Sly" usually gets called "William the Silent".
>
> The explanation of "Silent" is that what words he said were
> wisely chosen and ought to be listened to. This may have been
> a dig at his peers.
Greatly though I admire the man, "Schluwe" doesn't mean "Silent" in
Dutch. It means "Sly".
(Of course, I normally call him William the Silent myself, because I
want to be understood, but I found it quite amusing when a Dutch
speaker pointed out to me the difference in the conotations of the
usual names for him in Dutch and English.)
Michael A. Matthews
David Brewer wrote
> Follow links from http://www.r3.org/. Laura also has Warkworth and
> the Arrivall all and other shit you ain't never heard of.
You will be glad to know that I finally had a look at http://www.r3.org/. My
cash flow is a bit constipated at the moment and so I am not able to "surf"
(God I hate that word) the net willy-nilly, so I only had a quick look, but
what I saw was impressive. Rest assured that I shall be pumping Mr Commines
thoroughly in the debriefing room over the next few days.
Mike.
Michael A. Matthews
Paul J Gans wrote
> Here's what my attempt at mail to you returned to me:
>
> <mal...@CORRSFANS.com>: host mail.jakinternet.co.uk[212.41.41.4] said: 550
> 5.7.1 Mail relay not allowed at this server
>
>
> [ Part 2: "Undelivered Message" ]
>
> Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 21:38:59 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com>
> To: Michael A. Matthews <mal...@CORRSFANS.com>
> Subject: Re: The Wars of the Roses
>
> ** end of excerpt ***
>
> Perhaps that will help them. But I suspect they already
> know it.
Thanks, Paul. I'll see what happens over the next couple of days, and if I
still don't get anywhere I'll e-mail the above to them (provided my outgoing
mail server is OK!)
Mike.
Renia Simmonds
> Renia Simmonds wrote
>
> > I've been trying to send stuff to you privately, but it keeps bouncing
> back. Is
> > you email OK?
>
> I presume you're talking to me. It's hard to figure out who is saying what
> to who with so many responses to my Wars of the Roses question!
Yah, sorry, was me to thee! I'll try again over the weekend. (When's Time Team?
Sunday? Haven't got my TV/Radio Times yet.) Can't wait. Best prog on telly.
Thought there'd be one over Bank Hol.
Renia
>
>
> I've been wondering about my e-mail. I haven't received a sausage in over a
> week. My ISP was having trouble with their incoming mail server for a while,
> but they reckon it's OK now, so I guess there must be another problem.
> Either I've got a set-up problem (which I doubt as I was receiving e-mail OK
> at the beginning of last week), or something else is awry. Trouble is, I
> know nothing about this Internet stuff. I was hoping it would sort itself
> out, but it looks like I'm going to have to phone up my ISP and find out
> what's going on.
>
> I'll let you know what happens.
>
> Mike.
David Brewer
mal...@CORRSFANS.com "Michael A. Matthews" writes:
>
> David Brewer wrote
> > Hugh was suceeded by his son Edmund, Edmund by son Humphrey,
> > Humphrey by his son Humphrey, 1st. Duke of Buckingham who died at
> > St. Albans 1455.
Whoops! this is wrong. Humphrey Duke of Buckingham died at
Northampton, 1460. His son, Humphrey, died at St. Albans. Both of
these Humphreys were suceeded by the younger Humphrey's son
Humphrey, the second Duke of Buckingham.
Hugh - Edmund - Duke Humphrey - Humphrey - Duke Humphrey
Doh. How could I get that wrong.
> > Returning to Sir John, son-in-law of Ralph, 1st. Earl Stafford,
> > he was succeeded by his son Sir Humphrey, Humphrey by his son
> > Sir Humphrey "of the silver hand", Humphrey by his son Sir
> > Humphrey. This Humprey's first son John's son Humphrey inherited
> > but was killed in Jack Cade's rebellion. Humphrey's second son
> > William (brother of John above) had a son called Humphrey who then
> > inherited and was summoned to parliament as a baron addressed
> > "Humfrido Stafford de Suthwyck" and was advanced to the Earldom of
> > Devon in 1469 for a few months before being attainted.
> >
> > It seems very unlikely that he would be called the 15th Earl.
> >
> > Does that answer your question?
> >
> > (I have simplified things a bit here and there.)
New, corrected, summary:
Ralph, 1st. Earl, an original garter knight.
- Hugh, 2nd. Earl
- Thomas, 3rd. Earl
- William, 4th. Earl
- Edmund, 5th. Earl, died Shrewbury, 1403
- Humphrey, 1st. Duke of Buckingham, died Northampton, 1460
- Humphrey, died 1st. St. Albans, 1455
- Humphrey, 2nd. Duke of Buckingham, executed, 1483
- Magaret marries Sir John Stafford, a distant cousin
- Humphrey
- Humphrey
- Humphrey
- John
- Humphrey
- William
- Humphrey, Earl of Devon, executed, 1469
Well now, that's a bit clearer.
> I got a bit lost in the paragraph starting "Returning to Sir John ... " When
> you said, "This Humphrey's first son John's son Humphrey inherited ... ", I
> presume you mean that Humphrey's son John had a son called Humphrey who
> inherited, right?
Yes.
> I thought there must have been a connection between the two Humphrey
> Staffords somewhere, but it is rather vague so I don't think I need to
> mention it.
On the other hand, all this "Humphrey" business may have been an
effort by the junior branch to profit by asscoiation with the
senior.
> I'm curious to know what version of Burke's you found this in. I couldn't
> find anything as informative as this in the books I looked in.
I shall examine the publication details next time I hit the
library. I only know it as Burke's Extinct Peerage. It has very
dense type of an antiquated style.
> So what relation was Humphrey, Earl of Devon to Humphrey, 2nd Duke of
> Buckingham?
Fifth cousin, once removed. I haven't mapped out the complete
family tree, though, so in the Staffords' choice of wives there
might be a closer relationship.
D. Spencer Hines
Humphrey. Noble name. What's its derivation?
The second syllable may be akin to German "frei".
Some semi-authoritative group recently voted Humphrey Bogart
[1899-1957] the #1 film actor, or something of the sort.
Can you imagine the reaction if they tried to market a film today
starring an actor, particularly as a romantic lead, named "Humphrey"?
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
David Brewer <da...@westmore.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:936438...@westmore.demon.co.uk...
D. Spencer Hines
was the American actor Humphrey Bogart, who starred in 'The Maltese
Falcon' and 'Casablanca'.
Do we buy all this?
DSH
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
D. Spencer Hines <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:...
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
wrote:
> As has been true until very recently, the spelling was
> phonetic
I would say until printing.
Ken Young
ken...@cix.co.uk
Maternity is a matter of fact
Paternity is a matter of opinion
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
(Michael A. Matthews) wrote:
> Charles the Rash?
The polite form was Charles the Bold in either case the Duke of
Burgundy.
Paul J Gans
>On 4 Sep 1999 01:31:52 GMT, Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>The notion that a language can be regularized in word
>>meaning, pronounciation, and spelling is a modern
>>conceit, doomed to ultimate failure, though the advent
>>of radio and television has seemingly slowed changes
>>in the formal language.
>I'd say that it is far from doomed. English is becoming accepted as
>the global lingua franca for economic reasons.
>As someone who spends a lot of her time telling students the
>differences between American and British meanings and orthography, I
>would welcome more regularisation, preferably based on the etymology
>of words.
>Radio and TV are experienced aurally so, in these media, formal
>language is not so important. Extremes of pronunciation should, IMHO,
>be avoided in non-fictional broadcasts in order that the audience can
>understand.
>This is not to say that I don't appreciate the variety of the English
>language, but in formal usage sloppiness can lead to
>misunderstandings. Hence perhaps why French was used as the language
>of diplomacy. _It_ was and is regulated.
But of course. That's also why the "regulated" language
isn't spoken in France. _Le hot dog_ isn't regulated
French, but it is what is spoken.
Usage in English, especially in the U.S. is changing fairly
rapidly. We can complain about it, but the spoken language
isn't much like the formal written language.
And yes, it does lead to sloppyness and misunderstandings.
Nevertheless, the language still changes. Always has,
always will.
Brian M. Scott
> On 4 Sep 1999 01:31:52 GMT, Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote:
> >The notion that a language can be regularized in word
> >meaning, pronounciation, and spelling is a modern
> >conceit, doomed to ultimate failure, though the advent
> >of radio and television has seemingly slowed changes
> >in the formal language.
> I'd say that it is far from doomed. English is becoming accepted as
> the global lingua franca for economic reasons.
That, however, is not going to have much effect on anyone's native
variety of English. I suspect that the various varieties will continue
to go their own ways, especially the so-called New Englishes (Hong Kong
English, Singapore English, Indian English(es), etc.). The differences
in phonology, lexicon, and syntax are more substantial than is often
realized. Most of the following examples are understandable
irrespective of one's own variety, but I doubt that most people would
realize that each of them is normal, everyday English in some part of
the world and either not used or considered substandard in other parts.
1. I done shot me a squirrel.
2. That will make Peter and I's job easier.
3. The lass divn't gan to the pictures, pet.
4. As well, there are three other cases of this.
5. I am not knowing where to find a stepney.
6. They're a lousy team any more.
7. She's the student that's books I borrowed.
8. If Hitler had invaded earlier, he may have captured Moscow.
9. She mustn't be in: her car's not there.
10. You must finish today your work.
11. I might could do it.
> Hence perhaps why French was used as the language
> of diplomacy. _It_ was and is regulated.
In theory. Spoken French is almost a different language from the
traditional written language that is generally taught.
Brian M. Scott
D. Spencer Hines
expression:
"She graduated High School in 1996."
It seems to be quite popular among New Yorkers.
Does anyone have any profound thoughts on this?
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
Brian M. Scott <BMS...@stratos.net> wrote in message
news:37D18B...@stratos.net...
Lblanch001
>> > So you think I should read Commines, then?
>>
>> He was a neutral observer who personally met several of the
>> protagonists you name (f'rinstance, he knew Lord Wenlock very
>> well) and wrote about them quite candidly. So, yes.
>
>Where might I find a copy of the said man's fine works?
http://www.r3.org/bookcase/de_commynes/
In fact, you might just want to take a look at the references available from
http://www.r3.org/bookcase/
Michael A. Matthews
Renia wrote
> Yah, sorry, was me to thee! I'll try again over the weekend. (When's Time
Team?
> Sunday? Haven't got my TV/Radio Times yet.) Can't wait. Best prog on
telly.
> Thought there'd be one over Bank Hol.
Sorry for the delay in responding to your Time Team query, but your message
has only just winged its way on to my server.
It was on twice yesterday (Friday) and twice today (Saturday) and it will be
on twice tomorrow (er ... that would be Sunday) at 2.05pm and 5.30pm.
In other words, you've missed four instalments already!
I hope that you found out about the programme from a slightly more reliable
source than myself and managed to see some of today's stuff. If not, I could
give you a quick summary, although you haven't missed that much, and I'm
sure they'll do a quick recap tomorrow anyway. If you were really, really
desperate, I've got some of it on tape, although Gawd knows how I would get
it to you!
Mike.
btw, with regards to my e-mail, things would appear to be going from bad to
worse. Up until now, I just wasn't getting any mail. Now I can't even
connect to my server - I get a big fat 'orrible error message. So I wouldn't
try sending me anything just yet!
Michael A. Matthews
Laura wrote
> http://www.r3.org/bookcase/de_commynes/
>
> In fact, you might just want to take a look at the references available
from
> http://www.r3.org/bookcase/
Thanks, Laura. Already been there, done that, read the book, well ... some
of it, anyway ... just the title at the moment, in fact ... but at least
I've made the effort at last.
Mike.
D. Spencer Hines
Charming!
That's absolutely Clintonian. Or should I say Blairan?
"I've read parts of the book" --- meaning the title and perhaps the
title page. "I've scanned the book thoroughly" --- meaning I've
flipped the pages and even looked at the index.
Masterful!
DSH
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
Michael A. Matthews <mal...@CORRSFANS.com> wrote in message
news:37d1...@news.jakinternet.co.uk...
Eric P. Fein
"D. Spencer Hines" wrote:
>
> One hears many Americans, including the Vice President, using the
> expression:
>
> "She graduated High School in 1996."
>
> It seems to be quite popular among New Yorkers.
>
> Does anyone have any profound thoughts on this?
Other than the fact that it drives me up the wall? No, no profound
thoughts.
eric
D. Spencer Hines
1. She was graduated from High School in 1996.
2. She graduated from High School in 1996.
3. She graduated High School in 1996.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
Fortem Posce Animum
--
D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
Eric P. Fein <waka-...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:37D1B1A6...@worldnet.att.net...
Brian M. Scott
> Sharon L. Krossa wrote
[...]
> > For much of the Middle Ages in much of Europe, transforming names to
> > some extent to suit the language used appears to have been the norm. But
> > since the nature of the transformation could include direct translation,
> > substitution of cognates, substitution of unrelated but associated
> > names, and/or simple transliteration, all depending on what name in what
> > language from what culture was being transformed for use in what
> > language in what culture, the best thing to do is to look at how names
> > from the language and culture in question were treated in the target
> > language and culture in the specific era of interest.
[...]
> Sorry to be sarcastic, Sharon, but I really didn't understand much of that.
These examples may be helpful. I haven't taken the time to dig up real
medieval examples for everything, but these will at least illustrate the
concepts.
Direct translation: The French byname <Vintesisdeners> '26 pence' might
be (partially) translated to English <Sixandtwenti> '26' (This is an
actual example.)
Substitution of cognates: The Italian <Giovanni> might be turned into
English <John> or French <Jean>. (A combination of the two occurs in
the case of the 15th c. Italian banker <Giovanni Sacchi>, who was known
to his English as <Jean Sac>.)
Substitution of unrelated but associated names: For some reason the
Scottish Gaelic names <Gille Easbuig> and <Eachan> came to be associated
with the Germanic and Greek names <Archibald> and <Hector>,
respectively. A man with the Gaelic name <Eachan mac Gille Easbuig>
'Eachan son of Gille Easbuig' might have gone into an English-language
record c.1300 as <Hector Erchebaudessone> 'Hector Archibald's son'.
Simple transliteration: A name might be respelled phonetically according
to the local language. <Eachan mac Gille Easbuig>, for instance, might
in this way have been turned into <Aychyn Macgillespek>.
Brian M. Scott
Renia Simmonds
First, the word "from" is missing.
Second, in England, only those with a university degree graduate. So we
would say, she left High School in 1996 (with so many exams results).
Renia
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> One hears many Americans, including the Vice President, using the
> expression:
>
> "She graduated High School in 1996."
>
> It seems to be quite popular among New Yorkers.
>
> Does anyone have any profound thoughts on this?
>
> D. Spencer Hines
>
> Lux et Veritas
> --
>
> D. Spencer Hines --- "Back in steerage [on a Boeing 747, over
> Newfoundland] where the package tours go, the fifty-two members of Old
> World Fantasy, a tour of eleven countries in seventeen days, are
> returning to Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Shoulder room is twenty
> inches. Hip room between armrests is twenty inches. This is two
> inches more space than a slave had on the Middle Passage." _Hannibal_,
> Thomas Harris, Delacorte Press, [1999], p. 247.
>
Michael A. Matthews
<ti...@my-deja.com> wrote
> > QUEEN ELIZABETH WOODVILLE (1437-1492)
> >
> > Elizabeth is the eldest child of Richard Woodville, Lord Rivers and his
wife
> > Jacquetta. She is one of Queen Margaret's attendants. Her first
> > husband, Sir John Grey, is killed at St Albans. King Edward later
becomes
> > captivated by her and marries her in secret. She is beautiful, confident
and
> > determined with golden hair, fair skin and an alluring smile. But she is
> > also glacial, austere, ambitious, calculating, greedy, manipulative,
> > devious, ruthless and arrogant. She has two children by her first
marriage,
> > Thomas and Richard.
>
> In most fiction that purports to prove Richard III's innocence Elizabeth
> Woodville is portrayed in this way - with very little evidence. In the
same
> way that in books against Richard III she is portrayed as a tragic
heroine.
> Somewhere in between the two like most people is far more accurate.
Firstly
> her arrogance is usually attributed to the way in which she insisted on
being
> treated as Queen - often people use the description of her coronation
banquet
> as evidence for her pride etc - however her coronation varied very little
to
> that of any other late medieval Queen Consort - one thing that may explain
> her behaviour in my view - her insistance on being treated correctly was
> that she was the first english born non-royal Queen Consort and was aware
> that many people thought she was too low born to occupy such an exalted
> position therefore she always ensured that she was treated correctly. She
is
> credited with gaining vast advancement for her family from Edward IV to
the
> detriment of the Neville clan - a little of this is nothing more than
> snobbery both then and now - the family were regarded as coming from
nowhere
> and doing very well for themselves - to the detriment of the better born
> (the nevilles etc). In fact Edward IV gave very little cash and land
grants
> to the woodville family in the 1460's and not much more in the 1470's - it
is
> hard to suggest that they gained more than the Nevilles in the 1460's. As
to
> the much talked about marriages well the well born families they married
into
> didn't have any objection to marrying relatives of the Queen at the time -
> and considering how the Nevilles had advanced their family by careful and
> astute marriages they were hardly in a position to cast stones - the only
> marriage that the King and Queen had a vast influence on was that of the
> young Duke of Buckingham to the Queen's sister Catherine Woodville - that
> marriage goes some way to explain the Duke's antipathy to the Woodvilles
and
> his siding with Richard of Gloucester in 1483. As to all the other
> characteristics - well what evidence for ruthless, glacial etc
etc.????????
This description is based on what I've read in my so-called unreliable
sources. For example, Alison Weir's Lancaster & York, Chapter 21 says, "She
was of medium height, with a good figure, and she was beautiful, having long
gilt-blonde hair and an alluring smile ... she was also calculating,
ambitious, devious, greedy, ruthless and arrogant." Desmond Seward (boo!
hiss!) also portrays Elizabeth in a rather harsh light ("a cold, grasping
woman"), and yet I believe that he is against Richard III.
I am, you will be glad to know, not going to portray Elizabeth in such a
poor light. I am intending instead to make her aloof and slightly haughty
but still dedicated and caring - which perhaps is the sort of
"middle-of-the-road" portrayl you suggest. With regard to the Woodville's
advancement through the marriage, I've already written a scene in which
Warwick accuses Lord Rivers of gaining his position through marriage, to
which Edward replies, "But then so did you."
> > RICHARD WOODVILLE, 1ST EARL RIVERS (1405-1469)
> >
> > Father of Elizabeth, Anthony and John Woodville. He made his fortune by
> > marrying the widowed Duchess of Bedford. He is handsome, cultured
> > and intelligent but greedy, self-seeking, ambitious, rapacious and
> > arrogant.
>
> Once again lets repeat the revisionist party line - there is little actual
> evidence to suggest that he was greedy, self-seeking or rapacious - very
20th
> Century views applied to a completely different society - the
responsibilty
> of any man of his position was to increase his families social standing
and
> wealth. Everything I have discovered about him suggests he was an
excellent
> soldier (he served with the Duke of York in France) - and changing sides
was
> hardly unusual if not particularly admirable.
Fair point. But this time it isn't just my unreliable sources I'm relying
on. John Warren's The Wars of the Roses and the Yorkist Kings says, "They
[the Woodvilles] seem to have been more than usually objectionable. With
honourable exceptions - Sir Anthony Woodville perhaps - the Woodville clan
appears to have been arrogant, grasping and vengeful." According to Laura
Blanchard, Mr Warren is a reliable historian. Besides, being an excellent
soldier doesn't automatically make a person lovable - quite the opposite in
most cases, I would suggest.
> I would
> hope that you are going to find something about the key players yourself
...
Already have. Here's my complete list of sources again, for those who didn't
see it the first time.
Boardman, A.W.: The Battle of Towton (Sutton)
Carpenter, Christine: The Wars of the Roses: Politics and the constitution
in England, c. 1437-1509 (Cambridge University Press)
Encarta 96 Encyclopedia - World English Edition (Microsoft)
Falkus, Gila: The Life and Times of Edward IV (Weidenfeld and Nicolson)
Haigh, Philip A.: The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the Roses (Sutton)
Hall, Edward: The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre
and Yorke (extracts printed in The Arden Shakespeare's King Henry VI Parts
1, 2 & 3)
Kendall, Paul: Warwick the Kingmaker (George Allen and Unwin)
Penman, Sharon: The Sunne in Splendour (Penguin Fiction)
Ross, Charles: Edward IV (Eyre Methuen)
Seward, Desmond: Richard III: England's Black Legend (Penguin)
Seward, Desmond: The Wars of the Roses (Constable)
Shakespeare, William: King Henry VI Parts 1, 2 & 3 (ed. Andrew S.
Cairncross, The Arden Shakespeare)
Storey, R.L.: The End of the House of Lancaster (Sutton)
Warren, John: The Wars of the Roses and the Yorkist Kings (Hodder &
Stoughton)
Warwick Castle: The Finest Medieval Castle in England (Warwick Castle Ltd.)
Weir, Alison: Lancaster & York: The Wars of the Roses (Pimlico)
> ... rather than rely on what Sharon Penman wrote ...
Not intending to.
> whether you share all her conclusions and accept all her research ...
I've already got a lecture from Laura Blanchard for suggesting that Ms
Penman is an unreliable source.
> ... And you should not really rely on a novel for
> information of real events and real people
I know.
Mike.
Sorry if this reply is a bit terse, feeling a bit miffed this morning.
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk () wrote:
> In article <37cf...@news.jakinternet.co.uk>,
>mal...@CORRSFANS.com
> (Michael A. Matthews) wrote:
>
> > Charles the Rash?
> The polite form was Charles the Bold in either case the
>Duke of Burgundy.
The polite version was "Yes _sir,_ boss!", in any one of half
a dozen languages... <g>
Michael A. Matthews
> She would have been called by her married name I would have thought - as
> would all women - Cecily Neville would have have been The Duchess of
York - i
> think if memory serves after Edward IV became King his mother was referred
> to as Cecily Duchess of York late wife to Richard rightful/lawful King of
> England - in other words Queen Dowager in all but name. Elizabeth Grey -
and
> as a widow - either Lady Grey or more likely Dame Elizabeth Grey.
With regard to the above, I have made the following alterations to my "cast
of characters":-
Queen Elizabeth Woodville = Dame Elizabeth Grey, later Queen Elizabeth
Cecily Neville, Duchess Of York = Cecily (Plantagenet?), Duchess Of York
Anne Beauchamp, Countess Of Warwick = Anne Neville, Countess of Warwick
Isabel Neville, Duchess Of Clarence = Isabel (Plantagenet?), Duchess of
Clarence
Anne Neville, Princess Of Wales = Anne (Plantagenet???), Princess of Wales
Isabel Plantagenet, Countess Of Essex = Isabel Bourchier, Countess of Essex
Anne Plantagenet, Duchess Of Exeter = Anne Holland, Duchess of Exeter
Elizabeth Plantagenet, Duchess Of Suffolk = Elizabeth de la Pole, Duchess of
Suffolk
Margaret Plantagenet, Duchess Of Burgundy = Margaret (What? Just Margaret?),
Duchess of Burgundy
Isabella Ingolderthorpe, Marchioness Of Montagu = Isabella Neville,
Marchioness of Montagu
Eleanor Bourchier, Duchess Of Norfolk = Eleanor Mowbray, Duchess of Norfolk
Katherine Neville, dowager Duchess Of Norfolk = Katherine Mowbray/Woodville,
dowager D-o-N
Katherine Neville, Lady Hastings = Katherine Hastings, Lady Hastings
Any further thoughts or disagreements about the above, please let me know.
Mike.
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
(Brian M. Scott) wrote:
[...]
> 11. I might could do it.
Okay, I give up. Japan?
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
[...]
>Because modern Burgundy is a region of France, I have
>assumed that the Burgundians spoke French. But Burgundy used
>to incorporate parts of the Low Countries, including The
>Hague. So what language did they speak - French, Dutch or
>something else altogether?
Yes. :-)
You have a real problem with Burgundy - it's almost
impossible to simplify. IIRC, by the period you're looking
at, Burgundy is divided in the south into two main regions
(County of, Duchy of), and some attached provinces; and in
the north it consists of the Low Countries (please don't ask
me which bits of Flanders/Netherlands/Holland/Belgium is
which, where or when...)
The 'gap' that stops it being a middle European kingdom
stretching from Switzerland to the sea is the Duchy of
Lorraine (French), hence Charles's repeated efforts to
conquer it, the last of which got him splatted.
My admittedly-vague recollection is that the court spoke
French in Dijon (the southern 'capital'), and something
Flemish when they were in Bruges; and that Burgundy had about
four main languages. (Brian, help!) Basically, it's about
as disunited as you can get and still hang together as a
political unity - which in my opinion is why it went down the
toilet so fast when the last of the Valois dukes snuffed it,
them being the only things holding the whole sorry collection
together.
I realise this doesn't help you much. Sorry about that!
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
>
> Mary wrote
>
[...]
> > I think one of the brothers - Anthony? - is quite
>significant as a military commander, so you might want to
>look at him just to check.
>
> Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy?
That's him! Rather better at organised walloping than
Charles, but then, that's not too much of a contest.
>
[...]
> > > I am intending to cover most of the main events that
>took place between 1460 and 1471,
> >
> > <g>
> >
> > Best of luck.
>
> OK. Maybe I was exaggerrating a bit. I've written a 53-page
>synopsis which covers the main events I'm intending to
>include. I may have to pare this down a bit later as it's a
>bit complicated. (The first version of my synopsis that I
>wrote back in early 1998 was just 6 pages long!)
Yersss... I'd go back to the 6 page version, if I were you!
I don't know how much you get into your synopsis pages, but
here's a warning: I had a 60-page synopsis for this last
thing I'm finishing, which I fondly believed was going to
become an average 130,000 word novel.
It's coming in around the 480,000 word mark.
I advise against this, as watching publishers expire from
shock is, while entertaining, ultimately counter-productive.
;-)
>
[...]
> I actually don't have Lander. Which of his books were you
>referring to? Alison Weir (boo! hiss!) lists five in her
>bibliography!
[fx: consults shelves]
'The War of the Roses'. Also easily available in (cheapish)
Sutton paperback.
Actually...
[steps to one side where Laura can't hear us]
...I quite like Weir, and Seward as well. They're readable,
and they're gossipy, which if you're nicking, um, researching
things for a novel is often exactly what one needs.
Of course, this also leads to a certain amount of "oh
bugger!" when you check with Lander or Ross and find out it
didn't quite happen that way, but that's history for you.
>
[...]
> I'm going to include Towton, but I'm ending with Tewkesbury
>(or rather Edward's triumphant return to London after
>Tewkesbury and the subsequent murder of Henry VI). [...]
Go on, then - whodunnit? <g>
> By the way, this weekend's Time Team Live looks like it
>might be interesting. [...]
Thanks for the thought. As ever, I remembered just in time
to miss it! But it was too hot for the brain to work,
anyway...
Mary
Michael A. Matthews
Mary wrote
> I don't know how much you get into your synopsis pages, but
> here's a warning: I had a 60-page synopsis for this last
> thing I'm finishing, which I fondly believed was going to
> become an average 130,000 word novel.
>
> It's coming in around the 480,000 word mark.
I'm not writing a novel!
My synopsis is very detailed, with loads of dialogue and stuff, but the
finished product (if I ever get that far, which is highly unlikely - I've
been stuck at a camp near Saxton for ages) is still going to be VERY long!
(I've actually just added another scene, so it's now even longer!)
> ...I quite like Weir, and Seward as well. They're readable,
> and they're gossipy, which if you're nicking, um, researching
> things for a novel is often exactly what one needs.
At last! So do I. All the other books may be more accurate, but in terms of
sheer number of facts per page (albeit slightly dubious ones), Alison Weir
comes out on top every time. And I've found stuff in her Lancaster & York
that isn't in any of my other books. As long as you cross-check with a more
reliable source, I don't see what the problem is. I'm not quite so sure
about Seward though. I've got his Richard III: England's Black Legend and
The Wars of the Roses and I've found a number of descrepencies between the
two, which is rather alarming.
> Go on, then - whodunnit?
Gloucester in the Wakefield Tower with the poleaxe (at least that's my
theory and I'm sticking to it).
> > By the way, this weekend's Time Team Live looks like it
> >might be interesting. [...]
>
> Thanks for the thought. As ever, I remembered just in time
> to miss it!
Still one more instalment to go - tonight at 5.30pm (which may, of course,
be yesterday at 5.30pm by the time this message gets through!)
> But it was too hot for the brain to work, anyway...
Yes, tis rather warm, isn't it?
Mike.
Paul J Gans
>In article <37cf...@news.jakinternet.co.uk>,
>mal...@CORRSFANS.com (Michael A. Matthews) wrote:
>>
>> Mary wrote
>>
>[...]
>> > I think one of the brothers - Anthony? - is quite
>>significant as a military commander, so you might want to
>>look at him just to check.
>>
>> Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy?
>That's him! Rather better at organised walloping than
>Charles, but then, that's not too much of a contest.
>>
>[...]
>> > > I am intending to cover most of the main events that
>>took place between 1460 and 1471,
>> >
>> > <g>
>> >
>> > Best of luck.
>>
>> OK. Maybe I was exaggerrating a bit. I've written a 53-page
>>synopsis which covers the main events I'm intending to
>>include. I may have to pare this down a bit later as it's a
>>bit complicated. (The first version of my synopsis that I
>>wrote back in early 1998 was just 6 pages long!)
>Yersss... I'd go back to the 6 page version, if I were you!
>I don't know how much you get into your synopsis pages, but
>here's a warning: I had a 60-page synopsis for this last
>thing I'm finishing, which I fondly believed was going to
>become an average 130,000 word novel.
>It's coming in around the 480,000 word mark.
>I advise against this, as watching publishers expire from
>shock is, while entertaining, ultimately counter-productive.
>;-)
[much snipped]
Good grief Mary! The publishers will release it in
four volumes at the rate of one very 18 months. Some
of us may not live to get to the end at that rate... ;-)
And then they'll demand a sequel...