A new (to me) magazine has come to my attention. Salon Privé Magazine was founded in 2008 and very definitely “coffee table material”.
Anyway, the publication came to my attention when an article about George of Clarence popped into my inbox. The article was factual and impartial, which made a pleasant change. And Richard, Duke of Gloucester, did not get the blame!
Next came Cecily Neville, who racks up the usual well-deserved admiration.
When it comes to Richard of Shrewsbury Salon Privé Magazine is once again very fair, sticking to the facts and pointing out that although Uncle Richard is usually thought to be guilty of the heinous murders of his little nephews, there are others who could just as easily have done it. [And had more motive!] There is even a reference to the bones in the urn perhaps not being what they’re supposed to be.
Finally (for me thus far) we have Edward Of Westminster. There was a mention of whether or not he really was Henry VI’s son, but the conclusion was that if Henry acknowledged him, then he was. Which, legally, was true, however it seems to me highly unlikely that after all that time and with Henry’s mental condition often rendering him incapable of anything at all, let alone what he was supposed to do in the marriage bed, he finally managed to produce an heir. I think Margaret of Anjou’s fingers were crossed behind her back when she convinced her gullible hubby the child was his!
The article also goes through the various versions of how Edward of Westminster died at Tewkesbury, one of which was new to me. “[When asked why he had taken up arms against Edward IV] The prince replied defiantly, ‘I came to recover my father’s heritage.’ The king then struck the prince across his face with his gauntlet hand, and his brothers killed the prince with their swords. However, none of these accounts appears in any of the contemporaneous sources, which all report that Edward died in battle.”
Well, I will now diverge from what is said in the Magazine article. In my opinion Edward of Westminster was an unpleasantly bloodthirsty little maggot who died in battle, or while fleeing from it. Full stop. He certainly wasn’t skewered in cold blood by George and Richard! Nor was he a darling little diddums in a cute bobble hat as suggested by the well-known illustration above. He was 17 not 7! And he ordered the death of the two brave Yorkist knights who’d stayed to protect the prisoner Henry VI after the second battle of St Albans in 1461. Sir Thomas Kyriell and Lord Bonville were promised their safety by Henry VI, but were summarily executed two days later at the instigation of Margaret of Anjou and the final decision of the Prince of Wales. The prince was going on 9 at that time, so I think we can thank the Lord he didn’t eventually ascend the throne. We might have had Henry VIII the Prequel!
Back to Salon Privé Magazine. Under the heading ‘Royals’ there are other articles in which Yorkist readers may find interesting: Geoffrey Plantagenet, Isabel Neville, Jane Shore, Jasper Tudor and Arthur Prince of Wales. How they all fare I do not as yet know, because I’ve only read the four I discuss above.
The mentions of Richard III, and the House of York in general, are even-handed, stating known facts without embellishing them with Tudor fairytales or nudge-nudge that if it was something bad, then Richard III woz the villain wot dunnit!
So give Salon Privé a go!
murreyandblue 
1 comment