My introduction to the Battle of Shrewsbury was at school, when Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part I had to be studied for ‘O’ levels. I didn’t like Henry IV then, and I don’t like him now. He was a usurper who murdered his cousin Richard II in order to plant his Lancastrian backside on the… Continue reading Ten things you should know about the Battle of Shrewsbury….
Tag: errors
Charles I and his Roundheads….?
Um, spot the bloopers in this article. These are the two I came upon, and I’m afraid I didn’t read the rest of the article. As far as I recall Charles I had the Royalist/Cavaliers on his side, and the only time Cromwell “ceased” control of the kingdom was when he turned up his toes!
Margaret of Anjou was married to Henry IV, Bosworth was in 1495 and Edward VI won at Tewkesbury….!
When an article is entitled War of the Roses: A Brief Timeline, subtitled ‘Emily Hewat gives a crash course on the history behind Yorkshire and Lancaster’s epic rivalry and the origin of the Roses Tournament itself’ one rather expects the correct times! But no. What you find is:- “….Our story starts in 1454 with the… Continue reading Margaret of Anjou was married to Henry IV, Bosworth was in 1495 and Edward VI won at Tewkesbury….!
It WASN’T the Battle of Edgecote Moor, it was the Battle of Edgcote….
On Monday, 24th July 1469, was fought the Battle of Edgecote Moor, and 549 years later, on 26th July 2018, I was being informative about it here . Except I had my facts wrong. It wasn’t Edgecote Moor, it was just plain Edgcote or sometimes Edgecote, but just that one word! Apparently I was… Continue reading It WASN’T the Battle of Edgecote Moor, it was the Battle of Edgcote….
Disastermind
On a previous occasion, we posted a case of a quiz show host who really should have known the details of the Wars of the Roses better. Now it has happened again. The second contestant on this episode of Mastermind took Richard III as her specialist subject and did well in a close heat. One… Continue reading Disastermind
Oops, the NY Times claimed Richard wasn’t found in Leicester, but in London….!
Even the New York Times gets it wrong! Apparently an earlier version of a book review had Richard being found in London, not Leicester. Someone advised them, and the error was corrected. Anyway, to read the whole review of A BRIEF HISTORY OF EVERYONE WHO EVER LIVED: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes by… Continue reading Oops, the NY Times claimed Richard wasn’t found in Leicester, but in London….!
murreyandblue 