Books

A very good biography of Prince Albert


And just finishing these two. Not quite sure how I feel about them yet.





Next up:

Talking about Books Cass, I had a collection of over 2000 stored double deep in 3 Bookcases in my Living Room. Had been collecting for years. I would guess about £5000 or more . After phoning around Book buyers who offered sod all really, I gave the lot to the British Heart Foundation, 34 Boxes of 'em !

nicko wrote: Talking about Books Cass, I had a collection of over 2000 stored double deep in 3 Bookcases in my Living Room. Had been collecting for years. I would guess about £5000 or more . After phoning around Book buyers who offered sod all really, I gave the lot to the British Heart Foundation, 34 Boxes of 'em !

It’s a sad reality nowadays. Unless it’s a first edition, out of print or a rare item, serious book sellers won’t look at it.

My only suggestion for people is to get on Amazon marketplace to sell their books. Or as you did, (and thank you by the way), given them to a charity that can sell them to raise funds. Or create a neighborhood free little library. Also keep in mind, nursing homes, hospitals, short term rehabilitation facilities and laundromats.

I have to turn away lots of donations sadly, due to no space and lack of care of the books being donated. If I get a black bin bag full of donations dumped on the doorstep of the library, I put it in my trunk without opening the bag and take it to the tip. Bedbugs or1 small speck of mold could wipe out my entire collection if I brought it into the library.

People have been taught to treasure books, quite rightly, but as with all things, they eventually come to the end of their life and should be recycled if possible.

I hope Sister Queens goes into the offspring of the two, because that is almost half of European history. Because Joanna married Phillip I of the Habsburgs, she spawned half the royalty of Europe, including Spain, Portugal, Austria and the Spanish Netherlands (Belgium and Luxembourg, as well as parts of northern France, southern Netherlands, and western Germany with the capital being Brussels).

Catherine of Aragon, through her daughter Mary I (along with Mary Stuart) defined the religious boundaries of Europe, with Mary, Queen of Scots, France (and putatively, England) being the last hope of Catholicism in the British Isles and northwestern Europe.

Should be a fascinating read. I'll look for it.

I only keep the books, or plays, that I really enjoyed. Can’t seem to part with them. Me and a couple of other friends used to have a little book club years ago...I kinda miss that.

Since I’ve been writing for over two years, I stopped reading. I miss that too.

Cass wrote:

nicko wrote: Talking about Books Cass, I had a collection of over 2000 stored double deep in 3 Bookcases in my Living Room. Had been collecting for years. I would guess about £5000 or more . After phoning around Book buyers who offered sod all really, I gave the lot to the British Heart Foundation, 34 Boxes of 'em !

It’s a sad reality nowadays. Unless it’s a first edition, out of print or a rare item, serious book sellers won’t look at it.

My only suggestion for people is to get on Amazon marketplace to sell their books. Or as you did, (and thank you by the way), given them to a charity that can sell them to raise funds. Or create a neighborhood free little library. Also keep in mind, nursing homes, hospitals, short term rehabilitation facilities and laundromats.

I have to turn away lots of donations sadly, due to no space and lack of care of the books being donated. If I get a black bin bag full of donations dumped on the doorstep of the library, I put it in my trunk without opening the bag and take it to the tip. Bedbugs or1 small speck of mold could wipe out my entire collection if I brought it into the library.

People have been taught to treasure books, quite rightly, but as with all things, they eventually come to the end of their life and should be recycled if possible.

I actually once had the police contact me about a few boxes of books I donated to the library. After a few months they ended up at the police station, reported as potentially stolen property...

eddie wrote:I only keep the books, or plays, that I really enjoyed. Can’t seem to part with them. Me and a couple of other friends used to have a little book club years ago...I kinda miss that.

Since I’ve been writing for over two years, I stopped reading. I miss that too.

I have 4 bookcases and the large one is triple rowed. All filled with ones that I can’t get rid of. Ever.

I finally joined a book club after all these years. They read mostly fiction so I’m thinking of when I host in April about what non-fiction I will choose. I’m just starting a great book on the Titanic that I forgot in my list.

Get back to reading. It’s so relaxing and it will probably help your writing.

Original Quill wrote:I hope Sister Queens goes into the offspring of the two, because that is almost half of European history.  Because Joanna married Phillip I of the Habsburgs, she spawned half the royalty of Europe, including Spain, Portugal, Austria and the Spanish Netherlands (Belgium and Luxembourg, as well as parts of northern France, southern Netherlands, and western Germany with the capital being Brussels).

Catherine of Aragon, through her daughter Mary I (along with Mary Stuart) defined the religious boundaries of Europe, with Mary, Queen of Scots, France (and putatively, England) being the last hope of Catholicism in the British Isles and northwestern Europe.

Should be a fascinating read.  I'll look for it.

Glad you will look at it.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Cass wrote:

It’s a sad reality nowadays. Unless it’s a first edition, out of print or a rare item, serious book sellers won’t look at it.

My only suggestion for people is to get on Amazon marketplace to sell their books. Or as you did, (and thank you by the way), given them to a charity that can sell them to raise funds. Or create a neighborhood free little library. Also keep in mind, nursing homes, hospitals, short term rehabilitation facilities and laundromats.

I have to turn away lots of donations sadly, due to no space and lack of care of the books being donated. If I get a black bin bag full of donations dumped on the doorstep of the library, I put it in my trunk without opening the bag and take it to the tip. Bedbugs or1 small speck of mold could wipe out my entire collection if I brought it into the library.

People have been taught to treasure books, quite rightly, but as with all things, they eventually come to the end of their life and should be recycled if possible.

I actually once had the police contact me about a few boxes of books I donated to the library. After a few months they ended up at the police station, reported as potentially stolen property...

It’s been known to happen. It’s more DVDs now. Harder to steal than VHS.

I'm currently reading Dan Jones's The Wars of the Roses charting the fall of the Plantagenets and the start of the Tudor era following the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

I got it back in the autumn during a week's stay in Leicestershire during which I visited the site of the battle (three times!) and also Richard the Third's tomb in Leicester.

When Richard's grave was discovered under a city car park a few years ago I was one of those who petitioned for him to be re-buried in Westminster Abbey alongside many English monarchs. He was, after all, a King of England and did much good for the country and its people notwithstanding the alleged murder of the "princes in the Tower" (My belief is that he was innocent, but my case for the defence is far, far too long to set out here.)

I have, after visiting his last resting place, changed my mind about his burial. In Westminster Abbey he would have been one monarch among many, whereas in Leicester Cathedral he lies in a most magnificent stately tomb following a funeral with full military honours as befitting a brave and skilled general.

The city did him proud, and as one of the cathedral guides told me when we were discussing the arguments about his final resting place: "It's a case of finders, keepers. We found him; we keep him. And anyway, he's so far been worth about 60 million quid to the local economy!"

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm currently reading Dan Jones's The Wars of the Roses charting the fall of the Plantagenets and the start of the Tudor era following the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

I got it back in the autumn during a week's stay in Leicestershire during which I visited the site of the battle (three times!) and also Richard the Third's tomb in Leicester.

When Richard's grave was discovered under a city car park a few years ago I was one of those who petitioned for him to be re-buried in Westminster Abbey alongside many English monarchs. He was, after all, a King of England and did much good for the country and its people notwithstanding the alleged murder of the "princes in the Tower" (My belief is that he was innocent, but my case for the defence is far, far too long to set out here.)

I have, after visiting his last resting place, changed my mind about his burial. In Westminster Abbey he would have been one monarch among many, whereas in Leicester Cathedral he lies in a most magnificent stately tomb following a funeral with full military honours as befitting a brave and skilled general.

The city did him proud, and as one of the cathedral guides told me when we were discussing the arguments about his final resting place: "It's a case of finders, keepers. We found him; we keep him. And anyway, he's so far been worth about 60 million quid to the local economy!"

What a coincidence! I just ordered this book (along with Jones's 'Summer of Blood' on the Peasants Revolt), after watching his entire documentary series on the Plantagenets and the WotR after a recommendation on Youtube. Looking forward to getting into it. Is it as a good a read as I can expect?

I feel sure i read a book called sister queens but it was focused on Margaret and Mary Tudor and Catherine of Aragon (sister in law)

btw, great to see you here again, cass

xx

I'm currently reading "The Tao of Willie" by Willie Nelson. It's the sort of book only he could have gotten away with, but it's pretty cool, I've been reading it like sort of a secular Bible.

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm currently reading Dan Jones's The Wars of the Roses charting the fall of the Plantagenets and the start of the Tudor era following the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

I got it back in the autumn during a week's stay in Leicestershire during which I visited the site of the battle (three times!) and also Richard the Third's tomb in Leicester.

When Richard's grave was discovered under a city car park a few years ago I was one of those who petitioned for him to be re-buried in Westminster Abbey alongside many English monarchs. He was, after all, a King of England and did much good for the country and its people notwithstanding the alleged murder of the "princes in the Tower" (My belief is that he was innocent, but my case for the defence is far, far too long to set out here.)

I have, after visiting his last resting place, changed my mind about his burial. In Westminster Abbey he would have been one monarch among many, whereas in Leicester Cathedral he lies in a most magnificent stately tomb following a funeral with full military honours as befitting a brave and skilled general.

The city did him proud, and as one of the cathedral guides told me when we were discussing the arguments about his final resting place: "It's a case of finders, keepers. We found him; we keep him. And anyway, he's so far been worth about 60 million quid to the local economy!"

What a coincidence! I just ordered this book (along with Jones's 'Summer of Blood' on the Peasants Revolt), after watching his entire documentary series on the Plantagenets and the WotR after a recommendation on Youtube. Looking forward to getting into it. Is it as a good a read as I can expect?

I’ve had him on my must read list but just haven’t gotten around to him yet. Thanks for the reminders guys.

Lord M would love one day to have a discussion about the Princes in the Tower. My personal belief is that he wanted it done and was hoping someone else would do the dirty work, as I believe happened. I too believe that he does belong in Westminster Abbey.

Ben Reilly wrote:I'm currently reading "The Tao of Willie" by Willie Nelson. It's the sort of book only he could have gotten away with, but it's pretty cool, I've been reading it like sort of a secular Bible.

Again on my never ending, ever increasing list of must reads. Willie is a hoot.

gelico wrote:


I feel sure i read a book called sister queens but it was focused on Margaret and Mary Tudor and Catherine of Aragon (sister in law)

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

Cass wrote:

gelico wrote:


I feel sure i read a book called sister queens but it was focused on Margaret and Mary Tudor and Catherine of Aragon (sister in law)

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

Margaret Tudor was Queen of Scots from 1503 until 1513, by marriage to James IV of Scotland, whose granddaughter was Mary, Queen of Scots, and of France, and by legal right, Queen of England in lieu of the usurper, Elizabeth I.

Mary Tudor was Mary I, or Bloody Mary, who was daughter of Catherine of Aragon and Henry Viii, and the last Catholic Queen of England.

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm currently reading Dan Jones's The Wars of the Roses charting the fall of the Plantagenets and the start of the Tudor era following the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

I got it back in the autumn during a week's stay in Leicestershire during which I visited the site of the battle (three times!) and also Richard the Third's tomb in Leicester.

When Richard's grave was discovered under a city car park a few years ago I was one of those who petitioned for him to be re-buried in Westminster Abbey alongside many English monarchs. He was, after all, a King of England and did much good for the country and its people notwithstanding the alleged murder of the "princes in the Tower" (My belief is that he was innocent, but my case for the defence is far, far too long to set out here.)

I have, after visiting his last resting place, changed my mind about his burial. In Westminster Abbey he would have been one monarch among many, whereas in Leicester Cathedral he lies in a most magnificent stately tomb following a funeral with full military honours as befitting a brave and skilled general.

The city did him proud, and as one of the cathedral guides told me when we were discussing the arguments about his final resting place: "It's a case of finders, keepers. We found him; we keep him. And anyway, he's so far been worth about 60 million quid to the local economy!"

What a coincidence! I just ordered this book (along with Jones's 'Summer of Blood' on the Peasants Revolt), after watching his entire documentary series on the Plantagenets and the WotR after a recommendation on Youtube. Looking forward to getting into it. Is it as a good a read as I can expect?

I haven't got very far into the book, but from what I have read I would say that I'm impressed and looking forward to progressing further into a very promising "read."

I have to admit, however, that as a Richard 111 fan I could be held to be somewhat biased!

Cass wrote:

gelico wrote:


I feel sure i read a book called sister queens but it was focused on Margaret and Mary Tudor and Catherine of Aragon (sister in law)

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

that was it and yes i have read some of Alison Weir, also Jean Plaidy. I love the historical novels

another history one i enjoyed was Children of England, (I think that's what it was called) for Mary, Elizabeth, Edward and Lady Jane, can't remember who wrote it though

Original Quill wrote:

Cass wrote:

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

Mary Tudor was Mary I, or Bloody Mary, who was daughter of Catherine of Aragon and Henry Viii, and the last Catholic Queen of England.

yes, indeed but we were talking of sisters and Henry's sister was obviously the original Mary Tudor, although history has never known her by that name.  After her brief marriage to the French King, she was always known as Duchess of Suffolk

Cass wrote:

gelico wrote:


I feel sure i read a book called sister queens but it was focused on Margaret and Mary Tudor and Catherine of Aragon (sister in law)

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

Innocent Traitor was so sad

gelico wrote:

Original Quill wrote:



Mary Tudor was Mary I, or Bloody Mary, who was daughter of Catherine of Aragon and Henry VIII, and the last Catholic Queen of England.

yes, indeed but we were talking of sisters and Henry's sister was obviously the original Mary Tudor, although history has never known her by that name.  After her brief marriage to the French King, she was always known as Duchess of Suffolk

Henry had two sisters.  His elder sister was Margaret, who married James IV of Scotland, beget James V of Scotland, whose daughter was Mary, Queen of Scots.

By the above I was simply clarifying who I meant by Mary Tudor (not Mary Tudor Brandon).

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm currently reading Dan Jones's The Wars of the Roses charting the fall of the Plantagenets and the start of the Tudor era following the battle of Bosworth in 1485.

I got it back in the autumn during a week's stay in Leicestershire during which I visited the site of the battle (three times!) and also Richard the Third's tomb in Leicester.

When Richard's grave was discovered under a city car park a few years ago I was one of those who petitioned for him to be re-buried in Westminster Abbey alongside many English monarchs. He was, after all, a King of England and did much good for the country and its people notwithstanding the alleged murder of the "princes in the Tower" (My belief is that he was innocent, but my case for the defence is far, far too long to set out here.)

I have, after visiting his last resting place, changed my mind about his burial. In Westminster Abbey he would have been one monarch among many, whereas in Leicester Cathedral he lies in a most magnificent stately tomb following a funeral with full military honours as befitting a brave and skilled general.

The city did him proud, and as one of the cathedral guides told me when we were discussing the arguments about his final resting place: "It's a case of finders, keepers. We found him; we keep him. And anyway, he's so far been worth about 60 million quid to the local economy!"

What a coincidence! I just ordered this book (along with Jones's 'Summer of Blood' on the Peasants Revolt), after watching his entire documentary series on the Plantagenets and the WotR after a recommendation on Youtube. Looking forward to getting into it. Is it as a good a read as I can expect?

I haven't got very far into the book, but from what I have read I would say that I'm impressed and looking forward to progressing further into a very promising "read."

I have to admit, however, that as a Richard 111 fan I could be held to be somewhat biased!

I'm a big fan of the wars (don't take that out context lol), so very much looking forward to it. Don't share your love of Rich 3 though, pretty convinced even if he didn't personally do it, he certainly gave the order

Would be interested in your case for him though!

I think that Richmond did it. When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty. He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal. He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII? His claim was tenuous, at best. Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt. Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London. Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

Original Quill wrote:I think that Richmond did it.  When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty.  He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal.  He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII?  His claim was tenuous, at best.  Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt.  Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London.  Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

If that were the case, why were they never seen after 1483?
Why did Richard have himself crowned King (during the same summer of the last sighting of the boys)?

If it were a simple case of everyone knew, or believing, they were alive right up to the point Richard was killed, then I'd think the case more likely. Henry could have had them killed then let it be believed they'd been killed by his enemy sometime before Bosworth.

But that wasn't the case. They vanished entirely after summer 1483 and Richard was crowned king. Very odd things to happen if they weren't actually killed until 1485 or later.

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I think that Richmond did it.  When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty.  He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal.  He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII?  His claim was tenuous, at best.  Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt.  Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London.  Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

If that were the case, why were they never seen after 1483?
Why did Richard have himself crowned King (during the same summer of the last sighting of the boys)?

Keep in mind that Richard was the guardian of the boys. The Salic law had just been broken by Bolingbroke. Times were uncertain. Richard, who otherwise was a great administrator and soldier for his brother, might have been trying to safeguard the boys.

Les wrote:If it were a simple case of everyone knew, or believing, they were alive right up to the point Richard was killed, then I'd think the case more likely. Henry could have had them killed then let it be believed they'd been killed by his enemy sometime before Bosworth.

Isn't that what he did?

Les wrote:But that wasn't the case. They vanished entirely after summer 1483 and Richard was crowned king. Very odd things to happen if they weren't actually killed until 1485 or later.

It's my understanding that the boys were seen, openly, up until the end at Bosworth. Their mother, Elizabeth Wyldville, was the sister of Lord Rivers, a strong Lancesterian supporter. Once Edward died, the boys were subject to being used in the Wars of the Roses. That's why Edward gave Richard guardianship over them...so they wouldn't be used to extinguish the York claim. Unfortunately, at Bosworth Market, the York claim was extinguished by battle.

It was left to Richmond (Henry VII) to clean up the mess, and he did so by killing the boys. Or, at least, that's how the theory goes.

gelico wrote:

Cass wrote:

Was it Three Queens by Philippa Gregory? If you liked it, check out Alison Weir. She writes both great fiction and non-fiction about The Plantagenets York’s and Tudors.

Thanks sweets xx

that was it and yes i have read some of Alison Weir, also Jean Plaidy.  I love the historical novels

another history one i enjoyed was Children of England, (I think that's what it was called) for Mary, Elizabeth, Edward and Lady Jane, can't remember who wrote it though

That was Alison Weir. Excellent book. I have it on my shelf

2019 was a year strong in women during WW1 & 2 and the Resistance in fiction. Let me know if you need a few titles, but off the top of my head try The Lost Roses, and The Lost Girls of Paris.

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I think that Richmond did it.  When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty.  He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal.  He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII?  His claim was tenuous, at best.  Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt.  Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London.  Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

If that were the case, why were they never seen after 1483?
Why did Richard have himself crowned King (during the same summer of the last sighting of the boys)?

If it were a simple case of everyone knew, or believing, they were alive right up to the point Richard was killed, then I'd think the case more likely. Henry could have had them killed then let it be believed they'd been killed by his enemy sometime before Bosworth.

But that wasn't the case. They vanished entirely after summer 1483 and Richard was crowned king. Very odd things to happen if they weren't actually killed until 1485 or later.

Correct Les.

Quill, Lord Rivers was killed in 1483 by Richards’s orders along with his nephew Thomas Grey, half brother to the Princes, while they were bringing the boys back to London on the orders of their mother who was in Sanctuary. She knew what Richard was plotting and was trying to get them to safety and have Edward crowned.

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I think that Richmond did it.  When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty.  He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal.  He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII?  His claim was tenuous, at best.  Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt.  Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London.  Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

If that were the case, why were they never seen after 1483?
Why did Richard have himself crowned King (during the same summer of the last sighting of the boys)?

Keep in mind that Richard was the guardian of the boys.  The Salic law had just been broken by Bolingbroke.  Times were uncertain.  Richard, who otherwise was a great administrator and soldier for his brother, might have been trying to safeguard the boys.

Les wrote:If it were a simple case of everyone knew, or believing, they were alive right up to the point Richard was killed, then I'd think the case more likely. Henry could have had them killed then let it be believed they'd been killed by his enemy sometime before Bosworth.

Isn't that what he did?

Les wrote:But that wasn't the case. They vanished entirely after summer 1483 and Richard was crowned king. Very odd things to happen if they weren't actually killed until 1485 or later.

It's my understanding that the boys were seen, openly, up until the end at Bosworth.  Their mother, Elizabeth Wyldville, was the sister of Lord Rivers, a strong Lancesterian supporter.  Once Edward died, the boys were subject to being used in the Wars of the Roses.  That's why Edward gave Richard guardianship over them...so they wouldn't be used to extinguish the York claim.  Unfortunately, at Bosworth Market, the York claim was extinguished by battle.

It was left to Richmond (Henry VII) to clean up the mess, and he did so by killing the boys.  Or, at least, that's how the theory goes.

If he wanted people to be absolutely sure they were alive, why didn't he let them be seen?

From what I've read, both in books and online, and from documentaries on this topic, the boys weren't seen after the summer of 1483. Which again, strongly suggests they weren't there to be seen.

If they were confirmed alive until Bosworth, I'd be inclined to agree, but that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

And sure, Henry IV broke the Salic law. Yet Edward IV entrusted his brother with his sons, not so he could usurp the throne. It is a stunning power grab, which was entirely uncalled for and only further helped Henry Tudor.

Cass wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I think that Richmond did it.  When he became Henry VII, he was obsessed with the fact that he was a break in the Plantagenet dynasty.  He himself married Elizabeth York, daughter of Edward IV, to try to actuate the deal.  He was active on the marriage market, marrying his son Arthur to the Princess of Aragon, his daughter Margaret to the King of Scotland...he even tried to marry his widowed mother-in-law to James III of Scotland.

If the sons of Edward IV were still alive, who would suffer more than Henry VII?  His claim was tenuous, at best.  Two living Plantagenets would trump his claim over some vague bastard lineage of John of Gaunt.  Under the reign of Richard III, their uncle, the boys were seen playing freely on the grounds of the Tower of London.  Only when Henry VII took over did the boys disappear.

The evidence is pretty persuasive.

If that were the case, why were they never seen after 1483?
Why did Richard have himself crowned King (during the same summer of the last sighting of the boys)?

If it were a simple case of everyone knew, or believing, they were alive right up to the point Richard was killed, then I'd think the case more likely. Henry could have had them killed then let it be believed they'd been killed by his enemy sometime before Bosworth.

But that wasn't the case. They vanished entirely after summer 1483 and Richard was crowned king. Very odd things to happen if they weren't actually killed until 1485 or later.

Correct Les.

Quill, Lord Rivers was killed in 1483 by Richards’s orders along with his nephew Thomas Grey, half brother to the Princes, while they were bringing the boys back to London on the orders of their mother who was in Sanctuary. She knew what Richard was plotting and was trying to get them to safety and have Edward crowned.

Right!

He committed so many deceptive, violent actions in the lead up to becoming king, it is hard to imagine he would go the whole way with it. Else why do so many questionable things to begin with. He was, admittedly, in fear of the Woodville clan using their own power against him; but really that only further backs the claim he would take his own bid for power to its most awful conclusion.

Cass wrote:Quill, Lord Rivers was killed in 1483 by Richards’s orders along with his nephew Thomas Grey, half brother to the Princes, while they were bringing the boys back to London on the orders of their mother who was in Sanctuary. She knew what Richard was plotting and was trying to get them to safety and have Edward crowned.

What difference does that make?  I am describing the mother, Elizabeth Wyldville, and where she comes from.  Despite her marriage to Edward IV, she was a Lancastrian.

Rivers might have been gone, but the Lancastrian cause did not die with him.  Richard III was a York, and this was the Wars of the Roses.  If Elizabeth, the mother of the boys, or anyone of her party had been named regent for the boys, it would have meant certain death for Richard.  That's why Edward IV put him in charge of the boy who would be Edward V.

These are the kinds of things that Shakespeare didn't tell us, as he tried to butter up the Tudors.

Looking to get this next, which I think Fred would like




Christianity is the most enduring and influential legacy of the ancient world, and its emergence the single most transformative development in Western history. Even the increasing number in the West today who have abandoned the faith of their forebears, and dismiss all religion as pointless superstition, remain recognisably its heirs. Seen close-up, the division between a sceptic and a believer may seem unbridgeable. Widen the focus, though, and Christianity's enduring impact upon the West can be seen in the emergence of much that has traditionally been cast as its nemesis: in science, in secularism, and yes, even in atheism.

That is why Dominion will place the story of how we came to be what we are, and how we think the way that we do, in the broadest historical context. Ranging in time from the Persian invasion of Greece in 480 BC to the on-going migration crisis in Europe today, and from Nebuchadnezzar to the Beatles, it will explore just what it was that made Christianity so revolutionary and disruptive; how completely it came to saturate the mind-set of Latin Christendom; and why, in a West that has become increasingly doubtful of religion's claims, so many of its instincts remain irredeemably Christian. The aim is twofold: to make the reader appreciate just how novel and uncanny were Christian teachings when they first appeared in the world; and to make ourselves, and all that we take for granted, appear similarly strange in consequence. We stand at the end-point of an extraordinary transformation in the understanding of what it is to be human: one that can only be fully appreciated by tracing the arc of its parabola over millennia.

Thorin wrote:Looking to get this next, which I think Fred would like




Christianity is the most enduring and influential legacy of the ancient world, and its emergence the single most transformative development in Western history. Even the increasing number in the West today who have abandoned the faith of their forebears, and dismiss all religion as pointless superstition, remain recognisably its heirs. Seen close-up, the division between a sceptic and a believer may seem unbridgeable. Widen the focus, though, and Christianity's enduring impact upon the West can be seen in the emergence of much that has traditionally been cast as its nemesis: in science, in secularism, and yes, even in atheism.

That is why Dominion will place the story of how we came to be what we are, and how we think the way that we do, in the broadest historical context. Ranging in time from the Persian invasion of Greece in 480 BC to the on-going migration crisis in Europe today, and from Nebuchadnezzar to the Beatles, it will explore just what it was that made Christianity so revolutionary and disruptive; how completely it came to saturate the mind-set of Latin Christendom; and why, in a West that has become increasingly doubtful of religion's claims, so many of its instincts remain irredeemably Christian. The aim is twofold: to make the reader appreciate just how novel and uncanny were Christian teachings when they first appeared in the world; and to make ourselves, and all that we take for granted, appear similarly strange in consequence. We stand at the end-point of an extraordinary transformation in the understanding of what it is to be human: one that can only be fully appreciated by tracing the arc of its parabola over millennia.

Also one for Cass


There’s Something About Marie

Going beyond the clichés to reveal Marie-Antoinette as a political operator with real influence.

https://www.historytoday.com/reviews/there%E2%80%99s-something-about-marie

Thorin wrote:

Thorin wrote:Looking to get this next, which I think Fred would like




Christianity is the most enduring and influential legacy of the ancient world, and its emergence the single most transformative development in Western history. Even the increasing number in the West today who have abandoned the faith of their forebears, and dismiss all religion as pointless superstition, remain recognisably its heirs. Seen close-up, the division between a sceptic and a believer may seem unbridgeable. Widen the focus, though, and Christianity's enduring impact upon the West can be seen in the emergence of much that has traditionally been cast as its nemesis: in science, in secularism, and yes, even in atheism.

That is why Dominion will place the story of how we came to be what we are, and how we think the way that we do, in the broadest historical context. Ranging in time from the Persian invasion of Greece in 480 BC to the on-going migration crisis in Europe today, and from Nebuchadnezzar to the Beatles, it will explore just what it was that made Christianity so revolutionary and disruptive; how completely it came to saturate the mind-set of Latin Christendom; and why, in a West that has become increasingly doubtful of religion's claims, so many of its instincts remain irredeemably Christian. The aim is twofold: to make the reader appreciate just how novel and uncanny were Christian teachings when they first appeared in the world; and to make ourselves, and all that we take for granted, appear similarly strange in consequence. We stand at the end-point of an extraordinary transformation in the understanding of what it is to be human: one that can only be fully appreciated by tracing the arc of its parabola over millennia.

Also one for Cass


There’s Something About Marie

Going beyond the clichés to reveal Marie-Antoinette as a political operator with real influence.

https://www.historytoday.com/reviews/there%E2%80%99s-something-about-marie

Thanks Didge. I’ll put it on the list. I agree with the synopsis in the article. A very misunderstood woman.

Good thread.  
Cass, you can use forumotion's inbuilt "shrink image" facility to get your images to the size you want.
I use it often. One of their best software features imo.

JulesV wrote:Good thread.  
Cass, you can use forumotion's inbuilt "shrink image" facility to get your images to the size you want.
I use it often. One of their best software features imo.

Thanks! It’s my passion and profession.

I forgot since I had not posted a picture in a while plus I’m still coming to terms with my new eyes and it’s all still a bit skewwiffy

Another one for you Cass




https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-brothers-york/thomas-penn/9781785177408

Thorin wrote:Another one for you Cass




https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-brothers-york/thomas-penn/9781785177408

Oooohhhh lovely! Thanks Didge!

Cass wrote:

JulesV wrote:Good thread.  
Cass, you can use forumotion's inbuilt "shrink image" facility to get your images to the size you want.
I use it often. One of their best software features imo.

Thanks! It’s my passion and profession.

I forgot since I had not posted a picture in a while plus I’m still coming to terms with my new eyes and it’s all still a bit skewwiffy

Ah no probs luv.
It's weird that some images are so huge in the 1st place. Do they think we project them on to walls when we view them? Just at the time when most people are using devices barely larger than ciggie packs.

Didge, can’t remember if we talked about this one or not. I’m up to Katherine Parr. It’s fairly good but probably not teaching me or you anything new.




Next up is The Anarchy by William Dalrymple about the East Indies Company.

I put aside The Anarchy as I’ve been a bit blah so I’m took up Erik Larson’s Dead Wake and his new one. Jolly good reads both. Nicko you will like them and Didge and Vintage too. Not too in-depth but I like the personal stories.

Hmmm I don’t know what happened to this post.

Thanks me Lady for the heads up on the books

I've just finished Dan Brown's Wars of the Roses - prompted by a visit to Bosworth field and Richard 111's magnificent tomb in Leicester Cathedral - and have now just started on some sheer escapism stuff as an antedote to all the doom and gloom; re-visiting my old book club collection of the works of Dennis Wheatley.

The Devil Rides Out is a good one . I'v been reading Books by Simon Scarrow, he writes Fiction about the Romans .Just finished " Traitors of Rome",one of a Dozen I'v read !

nicko wrote:The Devil Rides Out is a good one .    I'v been reading Books by Simon Scarrow, he writes Fiction about the Romans .Just finished " Traitors of Rome",one of a Dozen I'v read !

Nicko have you tried:
Steve Berry
Preston & Child
Vince Flynn
Don Winslow
Douglas Preston
James Rollins
Daniel Silva
Brad Thor

I also recommend the websites Fantastic Fiction and Goodreads as they can help you find authors that are similar to ones you like.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I've just finished Dan Brown's Wars of the Roses - prompted by a visit to Bosworth field and Richard 111's magnificent tomb in Leicester Cathedral - and have now just started on some sheer escapism stuff as an antedote to all the doom and gloom; re-visiting my old book club collection of the works of Dennis Wheatley.

Hey Lord M

Is it Dan Jones The Hollow Crown?


Ps how is the onion factory? Still smelly?

Thorin wrote:Thanks me Lady for the heads up on the books

No worries.

Have you read The Anarchy? It looks great but I dunno, I can’t get in the right frame of mind for it.

I’ve started Say Nothing by Patrick Keene. Very good so far.

Cass, thanks for the list, I'l start at the top and work down , ta muchly !

nicko wrote:Cass, thanks for the list, I'l start at the top and work down , ta muchly !

No worries. Oh and I have a feeling you might like CJ Box. He has a whole bunch too. Happy reading