SearchMy library
← Table of contents
The Paston Letters, A.D. 1422-1509. Volume 1 (of 6)

Note 291.4 — INTRODUCTION (continued 7)

Reading edition

No. 875.

291.5 Nos. 854, 855, 856.

291.6 No. 851.

291.7 No. 845.

292.1 No. 856.

292.2 Our authority is very particular as to the time, and gives not only the day but the hour: ‘Inter horam post nonam et horam ante horam secundam, viz., fere dimidiam horam ante horam secundam, luna curren., et erat clara dies.’

292.3 Mother of the Lady Margaret Beaufort, Countess of Richmond, who was the mother of King Henry VII.

292.4 So according to Sandford’s Genealogy of the Paston family in Mr. Worship’s communication to the Norfolk Archæology. But who was Anne, Countess of Beaumont? I find no Earl Beaumont in the peerage, but there was a William, Viscount Beaumont, who succeeded his father in that title in 1459. According to Dugdale, he had two wives, the first of whom was named Elizabeth, and the second Joan. His mother, who may have been living at this time, was also named Elizabeth, but I can find no Anne.

292.5 No. 857.

293.1 No. 856.

293.2 Nos. 857, 862, 863.

293.3 No. 875.

294.1 Nos. 916, 917.

294.2 No. 864.

294.3 No. 873.

294.4 Nos. 875, 876.

295.1 No. 877.

295.2 No. 879.

295.3 No. 881.

296.1 Sir John’s letter is distinctly dated Wednesday the 17th January, 15 Edward IV. (1476), and he says the event took place ‘this night about midnight.’ It is scarcely probable, however, that he wrote within an hour of the occurrence, as he mentions having spoken after it with the duke’s council about furnishing cloth of gold for the funeral. I suppose therefore that the death took place on the night between the 16th and the 17th, and that Sir John wrote on the following morning. The date given in the Inquisition post mortem (17 Edw. IV., No. 58) is, strange to say, erroneous; for it was found in twelve different counties that the duke died on Tuesday after Epiphany, in the fifteenth year of Edward IV., which would have been the 9th January instead of the 16th. These inquisitions, however, were not taken till more than a year and a half after the event, and it is clear the date they give is wrong by a week; but they may, nevertheless, be taken as additional evidence that the duke died on a Tuesday and not on a Wednesday.

296.2 No. 883.

296.3 No. 884.

296.4 No. 881.

296.5 No. 882.

297.1 No. 882.

297.2 No. 885.

297.3 Nos. 891, 892.

298.1 Inquisition post mortem, 17 Edw. IV., No. 58.

Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)Return to INTRODUCTION (continued 7)
Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.
ChatGPTPerplexityGrok

Reading settings