Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anne Neville and the murder of the Princes.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • marktwain
    replied
    both wealth, power, and land were craved by the triumvirate of Richard duke of York, Neville, and Warwick. |Richard would have barely known father}Land grabbed in turbulent times - and retained in landholdings of incredible size. England was recoveringroorm the plague, and wages were being artificially held down- hence Jack Cade's rebellion.
    I have some sympathy for Henry VI- a gentle soul in a grab & brawl world...

    Richard, duke of York's rapacity made boss tweed look like Ghandi.
    Fascinating reading. A rather gifted, but flawed family. Richard the Third didn't get the best in
    parental guidance .

    Last edited by marktwain; 09 Jan 19, 13:57.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dibble201Bty
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
    Saw a program on him. They reckoned his deformity wasn't so extensive that it would have been a real encumbrance. He would have still have been able to ride, wear armour and fight as he did at Bosworth. However the bones did reveal he had let himself go a bit in the last couple of years of life - too much feasting and drinking after he became king.
    Well of course not! But his description by Shakespeare is pretty accurate as to how 'Dickey' looked. And the look on that dickeyIII fanfem, 'expert's' teary face at the skeletal autopsy was priceless. The best tiny piece of TV I have ever seen. Has anyone heard or read much of what she thought of the findings?

    https://www.smithsonianchannel.com/v...ack-king/20656
    Last edited by Dibble201Bty; 31 Dec 18, 20:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuck's Luck
    replied
    Just got a biography of Anne Neville out of the Library. Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but if it sheds any insights to this thread will report back.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    for a medevial woman to have wielded that much power behind the Throne
    Originally posted by BELGRAVE View Post

    Surely her presence at the executions does not,of itself, implicate her in the murders,even assuming she was. What, after all ,would she gain ? She could just have been the dutiful wife.

    We've seen the last of good King Richard
    Roll out the past - the dude got shanked!

    Put down your swords & pull up your pitchers
    Raise up your glass
    to Good King Hank!
    Last edited by marktwain; 31 Dec 18, 21:52. Reason: full APOLOGIES TO STEELEY DAN

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick the Noodle
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
    Was Anne Neville behind the murders of the Princes in the Tower?
    It appears PG or, more probably, the producers of The White Queen, made a false assertion. Shouldn't trust telly.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    I was nineteen when I read Tay's " the Daughter of Time", and thought that she was really on to something by blaming Henry the Seventh......Now I realize that it was , mostly, conjecture...

    Leave a comment:


  • Dibble201Bty
    replied
    Originally posted by marktwain View Post

    THAT is rather neutral , Now tell us how you really feel.......

    With my fingertips.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post

    Yeah! And I'll crap and pee on her (Tey) ectoplasma, clean it up and flush it down the pan of bullshit, fictional history.
    THAT is rather neutral , Now tell us how you really feel.......


    Leave a comment:


  • Surrey
    replied
    Saw a program on him. They reckoned his deformity wasn't so extensive that it would have been a real encumbrance. He would have still have been able to ride, wear armour and fight as he did at Bosworth. However the bones did reveal he had let himself go a bit in the last couple of years of life - too much feasting and drinking after he became king.

    Leave a comment:


  • BELGRAVE
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

    Executions were not just common in medieval Britain, they were extremely prevalent and often instant. You need to know when the trial actually happens to attend, and executions were often minutes after sentence. If Anne was at a trial, she was also there for a sentence. Further, if a queen was at a medieval trial, and if she wanted a particular sentence, we can be fairly sure her wishes would be carried out. People these days do not realise how much power royalty had in the medieval period.
    Yes, but it's one hell of an extrapolation to conclude that, therefore, Queen Anne must have been herself homicidal: let alone being responsible for the death of the Princes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick the Noodle
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

    Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



    The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

    Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

    If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

    ..........


    I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?



    Executions were not just common in medieval Britain, they were extremely prevalent and often instant. You need to know when the trial actually happens to attend, and executions were often minutes after sentence. If Anne was at a trial, she was also there for a sentence. Further, if a queen was at a medieval trial, and if she wanted a particular sentence, we can be fairly sure her wishes would be carried out. People these days do not realise how much power royalty had in the medieval period.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

    Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



    The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

    Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

    If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

    ..........


    I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?



    In Merrie Olde England, public executions were the finest form of live entertainment & it was de rigeur for the Haute Polloi to attend each performance....

    Medieval people had a different attitude to blood, gore, and dismemberment than we finicky post Victorian ones.
    Last edited by marktwain; 05 Dec 18, 14:16.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuck's Luck
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

    You've highlighted the whole sentence when 'unless' was the most important criteria in that statement.
    Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



    The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

    Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

    If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

    ..........


    I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?




    Leave a comment:


  • Nick the Noodle
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

    "I'll bite.

    I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is."




    You most certainly did say she is a 'prime candidate' and I have quoted your post above.
    You've highlighted the whole sentence when 'unless' was the most important criteria in that statement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuck's Luck
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post


    While I agree Philippa Gregory may be more fiction than fact, she has studied the period enough to have more insights into the period than most. If Amme Meville was at every execution of the Queens relatives, she is a prime candidate imho.
    "I'll bite.

    I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is."




    You most certainly did say she is a 'prime candidate' and I have quoted your post above.
    Last edited by Tuck's Luck; 04 Dec 18, 19:13.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X