Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
JessFrom: 'Doug Stamate' destama@... []
Sent: 30/09/2015 21:33
To:
Subject: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Hilary wrote: Which when you think about it begs the question whether Richard would have bothered to send them abroad as they would never have any legal entitlement to the throne anyway, unless they took it back by conquest. If he was going to send anyone it should have been Warwick and auntie Margaret would have liked having him, since George had been her favourite brother. Yet he didn't deem it necessary to do that. Far better to have sent them somewhere quiet in the country here? But of course what happened in the aftermath of Bosworth could have been a different thing. Doug here: FWIW as it's only an opinion, I would think Warwick was the only one Richard had to fear as all that stood between Warwick and the throne was Clarence's Attainder something that could easily be amended so as to *not* apply to his son. The same, to some extent, would also apply to Edward V; only in his case it would be more due to the confusion around just what Titulus Regius actually said, as opposed to what some thought it said and the fact that Edward had been proclaimed king, even if never crowned. On the other hand, Richard of Shrewsbury was, if you will, distanced from the throne first by illegitimacy and second, should the first be overcome or ignored, by his elder brother; thus he represented the *least* danger, IMO anyway, to Richard and thus the most likely to have been sent overseas. Hilary continued ": I do think there's still stuff to be found here. My daughter has just moved to a school dating from before the Conquest and there are loads of Latin documents stuffed in the roof above a classroom. The 'archivist' is the ex Head of Biology who can't read Latin! There must be quite a few more places like this who don't realise what they've really potentially got. Doug here: Stuffed in the roof above a classroom ! A biologist as the archivist'' ! If you hadn't written that the school dated from before the Conquest, my first question would have been if Henry had established it to use as a repository of unwanted documents with the school as a cover ! Doug PS: apologies for the lateness in replying I've been having problems with sending emails.
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
The school is linked to a cathedral so it's an example of how 'archivists' probably aren't looking for things that would help us. For instance, they're interested in famous old pupils. We're probably more interested in how or why our people attended services there (they supply the choristers). And that's the problem with archivists generally, no disrespect at all. If they see the name of a king or famous person, that's fine it leaps out, but what would Lovell, or Stillington or even Reggie Bray let alone Radcliffe mean to most of them and how could they assess significance? That simple statement about Stillington's 'inheritance' in 1468 is a bog-standard document but actually it prevents some speculative tome being written claiming that Stillington received bribes from Edward (or Richard). Until we get more stuff online so that more people can look we'd need squads of researchers out there. But, hopefully, there is more out there!
Re Edward's sons, Doug, my reasoning was that it was much easier to reverse a flimsy attainder (and actually there's Margaret too since the Yorkists used inheritance through women as part of their original claim) than to restore them. Yes they could be legitimised, like the Beauforts, but again, like the Beauforts, giving them a claim to the throne or any restored inheritance would be nigh on impossible. Why not do that to John of Gloucester, after E of Middleham's death if it's so easy? I think again we're actually saying more or less the same thing. Good to have you back! H
From: "'Doug Stamate' destama@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 1 October 2015, 2:15
Subject: Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote: Shouldn't a biologist be able to read Latin?= Doug here: Except I don't know how often there's a need to decline the Latin for frog ...
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
I used to work in a school where Latin was taught and that was what they told the girls anyway!
Jess= From: 'Doug Stamate' destama@... []
Sent: 01/10/2015 02:15
To:
Subject: Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote: Shouldn't a biologist be able to read Latin?= Doug here: Except I don't know how often there's a need to decline the Latin for frog ...
Re: Stillington and a possiblecharitable foundation
On Oct 1, 2015, at 5:00 AM, Janjovian janjovian@... [] <> wrote:
I always thought biology and botany were all delineated by Latin names.
I used to work in a school where Latin was taught and that was what they told the girls anyway!
Jess=
From:
'Doug Stamate' destama@... []
Sent:
01/10/2015 02:15
To:
Subject:
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote: Shouldn't a biologist be able to read Latin?= Doug here: Except I don't know how often there's a need to decline the Latin for frog ...
Re: Stillington and a possiblecharitable foundation
From: "Pamela Bain pbain@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 1 October 2015, 12:47
Subject: Re: Stillington and a possiblecharitable foundation
When I was in n college, a long time ago, yes, we had to learn the Latin names of all flora and fauna. Rana Pippin........foggies. I may not be able to find my car keys, but that I remember!
On Oct 1, 2015, at 5:00 AM, Janjovian janjovian@... [] <> wrote:
I always thought biology and botany were all delineated by Latin names.
I used to work in a school where Latin was taught and that was what they told the girls anyway!
Jess= From: 'Doug Stamate' destama@... []
Sent: 01/10/2015 02:15
To:
Subject: Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote: Shouldn't a biologist be able to read Latin?= Doug here: Except I don't know how often there's a need to decline the Latin for frog ...
Re: Stillington and apossiblecharitable foundation
I must admit I thought it was essential to further study of history, medicine, biology, botany, and English.
(I don't think the school I went to even succeeded in teaching the pupils English)
JessFrom: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []
Sent: 01/10/2015 13:05
To:
Subject: Re: Stillington and apossiblecharitable foundation
Life here is not like that now! Latin Literature at A level is in its English translation - says she who remembers having to do seventeenth century French literature - in French of course. Ever so useful :) H
From: "Pamela Bain pbain@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 1 October 2015, 12:47
Subject: Re: Stillington and a possiblecharitable foundation
When I was in n college, a long time ago, yes, we had to learn the Latin names of all flora and fauna. Rana Pippin........foggies. I may not be able to find my car keys, but that I remember!
On Oct 1, 2015, at 5:00 AM, Janjovian janjovian@... [] <> wrote:
I always thought biology and botany were all delineated by Latin names.
I used to work in a school where Latin was taught and that was what they told the girls anyway!
Jess=
From:
'Doug Stamate' destama@... []
Sent:
01/10/2015 02:15
To:
Subject:
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote:
Shouldn't a biologist be able to read Latin?=
Doug here:
Except I don't know how often there's a need to decline the Latin for frog ...
Re: Stillington and a possible charitable foundation
Jess wrote:
I always thought biology and botany were all delineated by Latin names.
I used to work in a school where Latin was taught and that was what they told the girls anyway!
Marie here:
Yes, the names are Latin, and yes, back in our schooldays Latin teachers would bring that out as a good reason for learning Latin.
In fact, however, you can learn the scientific terms derived from Latin perfectly easily without understanding where they come from, and that is what generally happens these days because Latin went off the curriculum at most schools a couple of generations back and certainly hasn't been required for university entrance in the sciences - I don't think it was even in our time. So I sympathise with the biology teacher - knowing rana means frog is not going to help her read an old Latin document - she probably couldn't cope with the handwriting back past about 1700.
