In 1456 the aggressive King of Scots, James II, sent an armed expedition against the Isle of Man. As is well-known, Man was at this time a private lordship owned by the then Stanleys, who was known as ‘King of Man.’
Retaliation was swift and led by Stanley’s son, Thomas – yes, he of Bosworth fame for his standing on the sidelines.
‘Ignoring the Anglo-Scottish truce of July 1457, young Stanley crossed by sea from Man to Kirkcudbright, plundered and burned the town and raided the West March. This was a blow to James II, who had made Kirkcudbright a royal burgh after the Douglas forfeitures of 1455, immediately using it as a seaport from which his expedition to Man had sailed.’
Extract from James III, A Political Study, by Norman Macdougall, John Donald Publishers Ltd., 1982. Page 42.
This shows quite a different side to our Thomas!
murreyandblue 
But he was always good at being sneaky. Just ask Richard III.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t know if you know about it, and maybe it’s well-known, but I figured about this about Stanley, and it gives him a motive for the treason. Richard had one legitimate child, Edward. Then he had two older known illegitimate children, and one more unknown, called Richard, and he was a builder in Kent and didn’t receive any noble titles, AFAIK. However, the two PUBLICALLY KNOWN illegitimate children (John and Katherine) DID receive titles, and inheritance, too. And THERE lies the root of Stanley’s treadon. Now let me explain what is my theory. Only legitimate children could inherit lands and property BELONGING DIRECTLY TO THEIR FATHER. ‘Bastards’ could only inherit money or house interior, like tables, or animals, like horses, etc. But nobody said they couldn’t inherit something that DIDN’T belong to their father. After Richard had Lord Buckingham executed for a proven uprising or treason against him, he took away a lot of Buckingham’s lands and property. And gave it to Lord Stanley. Stanley was overjoyed… until Richard III’s beloved badtard daughter Katherine needed a proper dowry for getting married as a daughter of a king. A ‘bastard’ daughter, but still a daughter, and Richard allegedly liked her very much. So what did he do? He gave SOME of the confiscated property from Buckingham which now legally belonged to Lord Stanley… to his daughter. He basically just informed Stanley like – ‘kiddo’ s getting married, I need to give her something, and this wasn’t originally yours anyway, wasn’t it, so give it back’ – and now Katherine owned the property. Isn’t it a VALUABLE REASON to backstab your king in the battle, and to Henry Tudor, no less? THE Henry Tudor who hated and feared Richard so much that he allegedly ordered a lot of written information about how good Richard was, to be destroyed once he got into the throne? I only figured this out when I got my genetic information back and I was told that both of my parents share Richard’s DNA haplogroups (and one of them is allegedly so rare it’s shared only by 1.5 percent of tge world’s population), and tbat I am also SOMEHOW rated to the Greys, De Veres, De La Poles, Howards, Boleyns, Seymours, and so on. That’s VERY suspicious to me, and I think I might be directly connected to Richard or somebody around him, or even his illegitimate kids. So I started looking up things and this is what I found. Greetings from the Czech Republic, Central Europe. Also, my paternal family name is Šlechta, which means Noble, Royal in Czech. It’s too good to pass up,so I am trying to figure out whether I am onto something or not.
LikeLike