WILLIAM CATESBY, GOOD GUY, BAD GUY, TRAITOR? THE CLUES IN HIS WILL

REBLOGGED FROM A MEDIEVAL POTPOURRI sparkypus.com Brass of William Catesby,  Ashby St Ledgers Church.   Commissioned by William’s son in 1507.  Date of death 20th August is incorrect, predating Bosworth,  perhaps in an attempt to cover up his inglorious end.  Note the damage across the neck.  Photo Aidan McRae Thomas Flkir As no doubt can be seen… Continue reading WILLIAM CATESBY, GOOD GUY, BAD GUY, TRAITOR? THE CLUES IN HIS WILL

V.B. Lamb’s unanswered questions

(see this article) If Henry VII “knew” that Edward IV‘s sons were dead by the time of his accession, why did he take nineteen years to produce any “evidence”, particularly when two individuals appeared claiming to be one or both of those “Princes” in 1487 and 1491? If he “knew” that Edward IV hadn’t committed… Continue reading V.B. Lamb’s unanswered questions

The Betrayal of Richard III by V B Lamb – a book review

Reblogged from A Medieval Potpourri sparkypus.com Artist Emma Vieceli This book is a little gem.  Written by the late Vivien Beatrix Lamb and first published in 1959 it’s no surprise that it’s still in print and a new edition available from The Richard III Society online shop with an introduction and notes by  Peter Hammond.   … Continue reading The Betrayal of Richard III by V B Lamb – a book review

Spreading propaganda works both ways, as John of Gaunt discovered….

As we all know, the Tudors were masters of propaganda. The lies about Richard III poured forth throughout their usurpation, and still persist to this day. If they could say something unpleasant and derogatory about him, they did. Perhaps it was in their blood, of course, because they were descended (one way or another) from… Continue reading Spreading propaganda works both ways, as John of Gaunt discovered….

Bishop Stillington’s Testimony: Was it Enough under Church Law?

Originally posted on RICARDIAN LOONS:
Richard III remains one of the most controversial kings of England because of the manner in which he came to the throne:? not by battle or conquest, but by a legal claim that Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was invalid, rendering their children ineligible to stand in the line…

The four Southampton rebels….?

Well, this article starts off as follows:- “….WHEN King Edward IV died in April 1483, his brother Richard of Gloucester was named Lord Protector of Edward’s son, the 12-year-old Edward V…. “….But before Edward could be crowned, Richard arranged for his parents’ marriage to be declared invalid, making the Princes illegitimate and ineligible for the… Continue reading The four Southampton rebels….?

So the options for those “Princes” are:

“Lambert Simnel” was Edward V. Sir John Evans was Edward V. Sir Edward Guildford was Edward V and Dr. John Clement was Richard of Shrewsbury or his son. “Perkin Warbeck” was Richard of Shrewsbury. Richard of Eastwell was Richard of Shrewsbury. Obviously, some of these are mutually exclusive but some are compatible. Even before the… Continue reading So the options for those “Princes” are:

Let’s compare Anne Neville and Elizabeth Woodville, the two queens of York . . . .

“ . . . . The role of consort can make or break a monarchy. Some have seen their reign saved by the energies of their spouse while others have seen their power waver because of their consort’s actions. Here, we look at the consorts of the House of York . . . .” Thus… Continue reading Let’s compare Anne Neville and Elizabeth Woodville, the two queens of York . . . .

Richard III’s claims about Edward V’s bastardy had “traction”….

Here’s a link to an interesting article about the bastardy of Edward V, and the reception of Richard’s claims concerning it. Specifically with regard to the IPM of Hastings. You can download the full PDF. And as a ‘taster’:- “….Richard’s claim that Edward V was a bastard did have traction in the localities after the… Continue reading Richard III’s claims about Edward V’s bastardy had “traction”….