Richard III | Page 7 | Tudor Personalities | Forum

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Richard III
June 9, 2014
6:58 pm
Avatar
Bob the Builder
Ludlow
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 99
Member Since:
June 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
121sp_Permalink sp_Print

killed at Stoke Field – or legged it to Europe?

i’m unconvinced by the ‘executed at the same time as Edward of Warwick and Perking Warbeck’ theory as theres simply no paper trail, unlike for the other charactors in the story, and i think the idea that he lived out his days as a bricklayer in Kent (or other annonymous life..) doesn’t seem to fit with the way that the Plantagenet children were, unless they dabbled in plots, pretty well looked after by the Tudor monarchs.

either, imv, he just dies of one of the many maladies available early on in the Tudor period like his sister Katherine, he is killed at Stoke Field and his body isn’t recognised or just buried in a mass grave, or he gets out and (perhaps) tries to get to the court in Burgundy.

i suppose, with conspiracy hat wedged firmly on, if anyone wanted to train up a pretender, having the son of a King – and perhaps Sir Francis Lovell? – doing the training might be a good start…

its very interesting that these two – possibly the closest to RIII left – dissappear at the same time. could be coincidence, but from what i can see there was enormous loyalty amongst his immediate circle.

June 9, 2014
7:36 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
122sp_Permalink sp_Print

I was thinking much the same thing Bob. It does seem as if it is possible that the latin speaking bricky in Essex could well be the Nothus son of Richard 3rd. He probably knew it better for his head to stay on his shoulders and live his life as circumspect as possible.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 13, 2014
2:30 pm
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
123sp_Permalink sp_Print

Jasmine said
All the stuff about the pension is correct, but then John just vanishes. If he had been involved in the PW affair, then one might expect a record of his trial, conviction and execution – but there is nothing. It is as if he just fell off the edge of the world.

Yes Buck said he was involved in an ‘Irish plot’ and Henry had him executed, but I don’t know if Kincaid managed to source that one. I looked at Buck’s source myself and couldn’t find it.

Bob & Bo I don’t think anyone ever connected John with Richard of Eastwell, at the time they thought he was another illegitimate son – and his age would have made him a child when Richard died. Baldwin thinks he was Richard of Shrewsbury but Jasmine keeps pouring cold water on my favourite theory Frown Spoilsport.

June 13, 2014
4:38 pm
Avatar
Jasmine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 161
Member Since:
December 30, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
124sp_Permalink sp_Print

You know it makes sense, Olga Laugh

June 13, 2014
6:08 pm
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
125sp_Permalink sp_Print

Stop it Laugh

June 13, 2014
7:55 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
126sp_Permalink sp_Print

Olga Jasmine, don’t make me get the water cannon out on you two again. LOL.. If you are really lucky you might just get away with a brick each around the back of your heads LOL.
It is an intriquing situation though, just to who the latin speaking bricky actually was? Richard of Shrewsbury does seem a likely candidate, but one has to ask how he got there and why he didn’t chose to persue his claim to the throne?
That of course if we assume that the Eastwell latin speaking lad was Richard.
I don’t think we can put it down to sheer dumb luck that this lad could speak Latin, as Latin was a language that was really only spoken in royal circles. Everybody else made do with whatever dialect was spoken in the area of their birth.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 14, 2014
1:59 am
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
127sp_Permalink sp_Print

Well Richard of Eastwell claims he was the illegitimate son of Richard III. Most historians dismiss this because Richard III acknowledged all of his illegitimate children, which is why David Baldwin thinks he may have been Edward IV’s son. But then perhaps if the boy was very young he may not have been known about yet. Who knows? There is barely a mention of Richard’s illegitimate daughter until Richard arranged her marriage. I have not read extensively on this, maybe Jasmine can help? John was mentioned when he was appointed Captain of Calais and knighted. I don’t know if there are earlier records of either of them, perhaps Richard was simply not recorded because he was a child and R3 had plans for him later.
Someone mentioned *somewhere* the other day that we would not have known about Edward IV’s illegitimate daughter Grace unless she was mentioned attending Elizabeth Woodville’s funeral. Now this doesn’t mean she was not looked after, on the contrary, it seems that EW befriended the girl.

June 14, 2014
5:51 am
Avatar
Jasmine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 161
Member Since:
December 30, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
128sp_Permalink sp_Print

Boleyn said

I don’t think we can put it down to sheer dumb luck that this lad could speak Latin, as Latin was a language that was really only spoken in royal circles. Everybody else made do with whatever dialect was spoken in the area of their birth.

Or religious circles, Boleyn. That’s why there is a view he was a former religious who had been displaced by the Dissolution. As for claiming to be or it being claimed on his behalf, that he was an illegitimate son of a long dead king, perhaps it was just a question of trying to be someone of importance or interest instead of living a hum-drum existence as a bricklayer on a country estate in Kent? You know, a sort of Tudor version of the people who claim to have been at school with famous pop stars etc…..

June 14, 2014
5:55 am
Avatar
Jasmine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 161
Member Since:
December 30, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
129sp_Permalink sp_Print

Olga said

Well Richard of Eastwell claims he was the illegitimate son of Richard III. Most historians dismiss this because Richard III acknowledged all of his illegitimate children, which is why David Baldwin thinks he may have been Edward IV’s son. But then perhaps if the boy was very young he may not have been known about yet. Who knows? There is barely a mention of Richard’s illegitimate daughter until Richard arranged her marriage. I have not read extensively on this, maybe Jasmine can help? John was mentioned when he was appointed Captain of Calais and knighted. I don’t know if there are earlier records of either of them, perhaps Richard was simply not recorded because he was a child and R3 had plans for him later.
Someone mentioned *somewhere* the other day that we would not have known about Edward IV’s illegitimate daughter Grace unless she was mentioned attending Elizabeth Woodville’s funeral. Now this doesn’t mean she was not looked after, on the contrary, it seems that EW befriended the girl.

Good point, Olga. I’ll have to read up on it, but I think John of Gloucester was known about before he was appointed Captain of Calais. According to the dates given at the time of his death, Richard of Eastwell would have been 16 around the time of Bosworth and one would expect that had he been the king’s son, some mention of him would have been made earlier in the reign – 14 would have been considered a reasonable age for a future knight or whatever employment the king would wish for him, to have become known to a wider ‘auldience’.

June 14, 2014
5:59 am
Avatar
Jasmine
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 161
Member Since:
December 30, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
130sp_Permalink sp_Print

Where I take issue with David Baldwin’s theory that Richard of Eastwell was in fact the younger brother of Edward V is that it would have required a joint conspiracy between Richard III, Henry VII and Henry VIII to all agree (not at the same time, of course, but serially) to allow him to live in England as a relatively free man in return for his keeping his birth a secret. Now I can’t see the Tudors allowing a Yorkist Prince to live, bearing in mind that many others with weaker Yorkist claims were imprisoned and/or executed. After all, the Titulus Regius had been repealed by Henry VII which made young Richard king on the death of Edward V.

June 14, 2014
12:56 pm
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
131sp_Permalink sp_Print

Here’s the thing, there was 60 years between Bosworth and Richard Plantagenet turning up in Eastwell. That would make him 75/6 if he was that age when Richard III died. He took a labourer job at Eastwell. It is not completely impossible, but I think it is highly unusual that he would be labouring at that age. It is possible he was younger when Richard died. I am just speculating of course. The theory he was displaced by the Dissolution is very interesting. Perhaps he thought a wild tale like that would give him more protection?
Henry VII did not hunt down York descendants. Warwick was executed only after pressure from Spain. I haven’t read about Warbeck yet but I just finished Blood Sisters and was interested to see Warbeck wrote to Isabella of Castille, effectively signing his own death warrant – and young Warwick’s. Henry VIII is another matter but perhaps if bloody Reginald Pole hadn’t been cavorting about Europe leaving his elderly mother to the mercy of a monster she may have fared better.

June 14, 2014
4:21 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
132sp_Permalink sp_Print

I agree Olga, it does seem feasable to think that Eastwell bricky may well have been a former monk. It may well be that he invented the story of being Richard Plantagenet to earn some money, as you say it would have been unusual to have been labouring at such a great age, and if he had no other family to look after him, in his dotage, he would need to get some money from somewhere.
Reginald Pole was the real target of H8’s malice, since he couldn’t get at Reginald he struck down his mother instead, to my mind at least it just goes to show how vindictive and tyrannical H8 had become. Even if Reginald had been in England during this time I feel that H8 still would have murdered Lady Salisbury, just because he couldn’t in his concious strike down Reginald. He would have spent the rest of his life in prison, he couldn’t afford to kill Reginald, as he was the Pope’s pet lapdog, at that time. Although I have read somewhere that shortly before Reginald died in 1558, the Pope was looking into Reginald’s affairs and it appears Reginald wasn’t as Holy as he appeared.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 14, 2014
5:54 pm
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I don’t agree Bo. He had killed plenty of men of the church by that time, he had no conscience in that regard. Margaret had lived almost her entire life, more than 50 years, perfectly safely under the Tudors and was horrified at what Reginald was doing. Well I think I am sure they wrote to him many times telling him to come home. Probably because she realised what danger it was placing her family in.

June 15, 2014
12:05 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
134sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thank you Olga, and yeah you are right in saying H8 had chopped up or burnt churchman before now, but I believe that H8 was trying to build bridges with the Pope towards the end of his life. I don’t mean in the sence of returning to Rome, and the Catholic faith, that would never happen, but more from the point of view of of trying to build a happy medium where both religions could co-exist, by agreeing to disagree.
Cardinal Pole did rather push the limits of H8’s temper though. I think Margaret believed that she could perhaps arrange a reconsilation between Reginald and H8, but if that what she really did think she underestimated H8’s malice. I think of all H8’s murders Margaret’s is probably one of the worse. She was a little old lady for heavens sake, she had been through some really tough times in her life, and all she tried to do was keep the peace.
Even K.H tried to reason without success over H8’s malice towards Margaret. In many ways that shows me that even K.H, young though she was could see that what H8 was doing was wrong.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 16, 2014
8:51 am
Avatar
Olga
Australia
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 766
Member Since:
October 28, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
135sp_Permalink sp_Print

Well our young Catherine was not the idiot people enjoy making her out to be. She was by all accounts a kind young thing with a big heart. But she is dismissed because she made the error of developing a crush on her cousin because she craved the company of people closer to her age.

I agree I think Margaret Pole is amongst the worst of Henry’s crimes, it actually makes my blood boil thinking about it.

June 16, 2014
11:07 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
136sp_Permalink sp_Print

I agree Olga, K.H has always come across as a silly little empty head, when in fact she has many hidden depth’s to her, she was kind, and it was clear she cared a great deal about what people thought of her. Her kindnesses towards others less fortuate is well known. H8 showered the girl with gifts, but even then she shared those gifts with others. I know that when Margaret Pole was in the Tower prior to her execution, K.H sent a gift of money and warm clothing so that she could at least have some comforts over the long winter months.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

October 5, 2014
5:02 am
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2337
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
137sp_Permalink sp_Print

Richard III, the ‘hunchback king’, really could have been a formidable warrior . . . and his body double can prove it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..e-warrior-…-and-his-body-double-can-prove-it.html

For centuries, he has been known as the hunchback king — popularly demonised as weak and deformed.

But experts claim they can now prove that Richard III may have been a formidable warrior.

Dominic Smee, a 27-year-old unemployed teacher from Tamworth, Staffordshire, has the same rare form of adolescent-onset scoliosis that Richard III was thought to have had, resulting in spinal curvature of 75 degrees to the right and an S-shaped curvature of the ribs.

Mr Smee has taken part in a series of challenges with experts, including a cavalry charge, to assess what the king might have been capable of when he went into battle with Henry VII in 1485.

The results, to be shown on a Channel 4 documentary tonight, suggest that Richard III’s scoliosis need not have prevented him from fulfilling his role as a warrior.

It's always bunnies.

October 5, 2014
5:13 am
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2337
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
138sp_Permalink sp_Print

I guess these ” Experts” have never read any history books at all….Since RIII was known in his time and during the early Tudor era as being a notable fighter, as being a Duke’s son and as a king’s brother…

He was trained as a nobleman’s son to be a horseman and was skilled as a fighter and his acumen as a general had been noted in both of the battles which restord Edwrd IV to his throne..

It's always bunnies.

October 5, 2014
2:25 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
139sp_Permalink sp_Print

I agree Anyanka, to be honest Richard had something that actually set him apart from his peers. I do rather feel that of all the Duke’s boys Richard was perhaps the most gifted of all as he refused to allow his disability to get the better of him and was perhaps one of the finest warriors of Plantaganant age.
H5 was as good but ertainly not better than Richard. H5 destroyed the French army in little over 2 hours with his skilled archers, but to be honest that at the time was a mighty victory for England, H5 regained France (albeit temporarly) since King John had let the French crown slip through his fingers.
But Richard’s victories made Agincourt look like a ride on Professor Burps bubble works at Chessington’s world of adventures.
I must admit I was guilty of believing the Shakespear’s and the Tudor progandists who made Richard look the nephew murdering villian,and took the throne, but now I’ve got to know him better, I think that he was a remarkable man and a formidible warrior, It’s just a shame that his reign was just so short, it would have been interesting to see how England would fair under the Yorks Instead of the British lion on our flag would we have a boar and ragged staff?
I do think that although there were tenitive enquiries to marry Richard to the Portugese Princess I get the feeling he may have married into Scotland, so that he could bring peace at last between the 2 counties.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

October 5, 2014
4:16 pm
Avatar
Bob the Builder
Ludlow
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 99
Member Since:
June 3, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
140sp_Permalink sp_Print

Boleyn said

…But Richard’s victories made Agincourt look like a ride on Professor Burps bubble works at Chessington’s world of adventures…

i’m not sure i’d go that far – Richard was a skilled and capable soldier, he was a skilled and capable subordinate commander, and he was a skilled and capable overall commander – but he did not win a number of large engagements one after the other as Henry V did.

Richard won a number of difficult, militarily precarious and politically demanding campaigns – in Wales, in Scotland, in Northumberland and Cumberland/Westmoreland – they were charactorised by manouver warfare, lots of small scale engagements and raids, and the application of politics. as a subordinate commander he helped (played a crucial role..) win two massive battles under Edward IV – but the truth, for those of us who like him, is that the only major (large) battle he fought in where he was the overall commander was at Bosworth.

now personally i think he lost Bosworth by bad luck, not a lack of skill or a mighty opponant, but because his horse got stuck in a bog – which is a pretty rubbish reason to lose a battle – but that doesn’t stop the hard numbers looking less than brilliant. had his horse found firmer ground for another ten yards we might remember Bosworth as the last gasp of a nobody Lancastrian who’se name would only come up in pub quizes, but thats not how it ended…

Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 214

Currently Online:
11 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Anyanka: 2337

Boleyn: 2285

Sharon: 2115

Bella44: 933

DuchessofBrittany: 846

Mya Elise: 781

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 425948

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 13

Topics: 1683

Posts: 23040

Newest Members:

qvist been, Barmans, baba elvis, doctormorris, jameejendnd, snowline

Administrators: Claire: 959