The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?)
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
John Brandon
The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?)
For what it's worth ...
Ethel Seaton, _Sir Richard Roos (c. 1410-1482), Lancastrian Poet_
(London, 1961), pp. 353-55:
[Richard Roos's] Legend III, 'Dido', an elaborate and ambitious
tale, has not won ungrudging praise, chiefly because its flavour is
medieval and non-Virgilian. It affords a very interesting and novel
set of anagrams. Those of the introduction set the stage within the
Chaucerian period, with John of Gaunt, Catherine Swinford, and their
son, Henry Beaufort, the future cardinal. As the names that are
further revealed are not familiar, this piece of secret family history
should first be explained.
The Elizabethan antiquary, Rice Merrick, in his _Morganiae
Archaiographia_ of 1578 (ed. J. A. Corbett, 1887), in the course of a
detailed pedigree of the Stradlings of St. Donat's, Glamorganshire,
tells the following of Sir Edward Stradling, twelfth of the line, who
was knighted in 1421-22:
This Sir Edward marryed with Jane, Daughter to Henry Beauford (after
Cardinall) begotten before he was [ ] upon Alice, one of the
Daughters of Richard, Earle of Arundell.
The Alice FitzAlan in question must have been Alice, daughter of the
fifteenth Earl of Arundel (executed 1397), and of Elizabeth Bohun. She
in 1392 married John Cherleton, Lord of Powys; he died in 1401 without
children. The date of Sir Edward Stradling's marriage to Jane
(FitzAlan) is not given; he died in 1452-3, according to his
_Inquisitio post Mortem_.
This odd piece of family history is supported by the anagrams of
'Dido'; all these names Swinford, Henry Beaufort, Alis FisAlan Arundel,
Cherleton, Powys, Joan Stradling, recur throughout. With them at
beginning and end is a fifteenth-century name, a lady who might well
learn this story, and even take a hand in its later developments,
Margaret Beaufort, nee Beauchamp, wife (c. 1442) of Joan Beaufort,
third Duke of Somerset, nephew, like Edmund Beaufort of Mortain, of the
Cardinal. She and her husband will recur in these anagrams. The story
may help to explain the embittered enmity between Henry Beaufort and
Archbishop Arundel, who was Alice's uncle. It must be remembered that
Roos had marriage connexions on both sides: with the FitzAlan-Arundels
through his mother, who was a first cousin of this Alice; and with the
Beaufort-Somersets through his sister-in-law, Eleanor Beauchamp, wife
of Edmund Beaufort.
----------
Some of the anagrams Seaton finds are:
GAV(N)T IOHAN
CATHErIn SWInFOR(D)
HEN_(Y) BeWForT
(P)OW(YS)
(M)A-(G)A-(ET) B-A(VC)HAM
A(L)IS Ar(V)N(D)., FISALAn, CHE--TO., POWIS
ALIAN. B-W-HAM
ALis, JOAn ST-A.
HeN. BeA(V)ForT
HEN. BEWFOrT
ALIS FIsA-AN A-UN(D)E.
IOAN
Al-S ArU-(DE)., POWIS
-OAn STRA-Li-G
Ethel Seaton, _Sir Richard Roos (c. 1410-1482), Lancastrian Poet_
(London, 1961), pp. 353-55:
[Richard Roos's] Legend III, 'Dido', an elaborate and ambitious
tale, has not won ungrudging praise, chiefly because its flavour is
medieval and non-Virgilian. It affords a very interesting and novel
set of anagrams. Those of the introduction set the stage within the
Chaucerian period, with John of Gaunt, Catherine Swinford, and their
son, Henry Beaufort, the future cardinal. As the names that are
further revealed are not familiar, this piece of secret family history
should first be explained.
The Elizabethan antiquary, Rice Merrick, in his _Morganiae
Archaiographia_ of 1578 (ed. J. A. Corbett, 1887), in the course of a
detailed pedigree of the Stradlings of St. Donat's, Glamorganshire,
tells the following of Sir Edward Stradling, twelfth of the line, who
was knighted in 1421-22:
This Sir Edward marryed with Jane, Daughter to Henry Beauford (after
Cardinall) begotten before he was [ ] upon Alice, one of the
Daughters of Richard, Earle of Arundell.
The Alice FitzAlan in question must have been Alice, daughter of the
fifteenth Earl of Arundel (executed 1397), and of Elizabeth Bohun. She
in 1392 married John Cherleton, Lord of Powys; he died in 1401 without
children. The date of Sir Edward Stradling's marriage to Jane
(FitzAlan) is not given; he died in 1452-3, according to his
_Inquisitio post Mortem_.
This odd piece of family history is supported by the anagrams of
'Dido'; all these names Swinford, Henry Beaufort, Alis FisAlan Arundel,
Cherleton, Powys, Joan Stradling, recur throughout. With them at
beginning and end is a fifteenth-century name, a lady who might well
learn this story, and even take a hand in its later developments,
Margaret Beaufort, nee Beauchamp, wife (c. 1442) of Joan Beaufort,
third Duke of Somerset, nephew, like Edmund Beaufort of Mortain, of the
Cardinal. She and her husband will recur in these anagrams. The story
may help to explain the embittered enmity between Henry Beaufort and
Archbishop Arundel, who was Alice's uncle. It must be remembered that
Roos had marriage connexions on both sides: with the FitzAlan-Arundels
through his mother, who was a first cousin of this Alice; and with the
Beaufort-Somersets through his sister-in-law, Eleanor Beauchamp, wife
of Edmund Beaufort.
----------
Some of the anagrams Seaton finds are:
GAV(N)T IOHAN
CATHErIn SWInFOR(D)
HEN_(Y) BeWForT
(P)OW(YS)
(M)A-(G)A-(ET) B-A(VC)HAM
A(L)IS Ar(V)N(D)., FISALAn, CHE--TO., POWIS
ALIAN. B-W-HAM
ALis, JOAn ST-A.
HeN. BeA(V)ForT
HEN. BEWFOrT
ALIS FIsA-AN A-UN(D)E.
IOAN
Al-S ArU-(DE)., POWIS
-OAn STRA-Li-G
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Thanks for posting that - there's certainly some interesting (if
obscure) material out there!
obscure) material out there!
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Dear John ~
Your post is fascinating! Thanks so much for taking the time to post
this information on the newsgroup. Using anagrams as genealogical
evidence is definitely a creative approach to medieval research. I
believe you're onto something here.
Again, thanks for sharing this information with us.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
John Brandon wrote:
Your post is fascinating! Thanks so much for taking the time to post
this information on the newsgroup. Using anagrams as genealogical
evidence is definitely a creative approach to medieval research. I
believe you're onto something here.
Again, thanks for sharing this information with us.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
John Brandon wrote:
For what it's worth ...
Ethel Seaton, _Sir Richard Roos (c. 1410-1482), Lancastrian Poet_
(London, 1961), pp. 353-55:
[Richard Roos's] Legend III, 'Dido', an elaborate and ambitious
tale, has not won ungrudging praise, chiefly because its flavour is
medieval and non-Virgilian. It affords a very interesting and novel
set of anagrams. Those of the introduction set the stage within the
Chaucerian period, with John of Gaunt, Catherine Swinford, and their
son, Henry Beaufort, the future cardinal. As the names that are
further revealed are not familiar, this piece of secret family history
should first be explained.
The Elizabethan antiquary, Rice Merrick, in his _Morganiae
Archaiographia_ of 1578 (ed. J. A. Corbett, 1887), in the course of a
detailed pedigree of the Stradlings of St. Donat's, Glamorganshire,
tells the following of Sir Edward Stradling, twelfth of the line, who
was knighted in 1421-22:
This Sir Edward marryed with Jane, Daughter to Henry Beauford (after
Cardinall) begotten before he was [ ] upon Alice, one of the
Daughters of Richard, Earle of Arundell.
The Alice FitzAlan in question must have been Alice, daughter of the
fifteenth Earl of Arundel (executed 1397), and of Elizabeth Bohun. She
in 1392 married John Cherleton, Lord of Powys; he died in 1401 without
children. The date of Sir Edward Stradling's marriage to Jane
(FitzAlan) is not given; he died in 1452-3, according to his
_Inquisitio post Mortem_.
This odd piece of family history is supported by the anagrams of
'Dido'; all these names Swinford, Henry Beaufort, Alis FisAlan Arundel,
Cherleton, Powys, Joan Stradling, recur throughout. With them at
beginning and end is a fifteenth-century name, a lady who might well
learn this story, and even take a hand in its later developments,
Margaret Beaufort, nee Beauchamp, wife (c. 1442) of Joan Beaufort,
third Duke of Somerset, nephew, like Edmund Beaufort of Mortain, of the
Cardinal. She and her husband will recur in these anagrams. The story
may help to explain the embittered enmity between Henry Beaufort and
Archbishop Arundel, who was Alice's uncle. It must be remembered that
Roos had marriage connexions on both sides: with the FitzAlan-Arundels
through his mother, who was a first cousin of this Alice; and with the
Beaufort-Somersets through his sister-in-law, Eleanor Beauchamp, wife
of Edmund Beaufort.
----------
Some of the anagrams Seaton finds are:
GAV(N)T IOHAN
CATHErIn SWInFOR(D)
HEN_(Y) BeWForT
(P)OW(YS)
(M)A-(G)A-(ET) B-A(VC)HAM
A(L)IS Ar(V)N(D)., FISALAn, CHE--TO., POWIS
ALIAN. B-W-HAM
ALis, JOAn ST-A.
HeN. BeA(V)ForT
HEN. BEWFOrT
ALIS FIsA-AN A-UN(D)E.
IOAN
Al-S ArU-(DE)., POWIS
-OAn STRA-Li-G
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
In a message dated 9/10/05 8:36:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:
<< The Alice FitzAlan in question must have been Alice, daughter of the
fifteenth Earl of Arundel (executed 1397), and of Elizabeth Bohun. She
in 1392 married John Cherleton, Lord of Powys; he died in 1401 without
children. The date of Sir Edward Stradling's marriage to Jane
(FitzAlan) is not given; he died in 1452-3, according to his
_Inquisitio post Mortem_. >>
The date of their marriage is given at
http://www.stradling.org.uk/docs/Strad_li.htm
as 1423
And Edward's death is given by http://www.genealogics.org as 5 May 1453
While his wife Joan is given by http://www.genealogics.org as 19 Oct 1479
Will Johnson
starbuck95@hotmail.com writes:
<< The Alice FitzAlan in question must have been Alice, daughter of the
fifteenth Earl of Arundel (executed 1397), and of Elizabeth Bohun. She
in 1392 married John Cherleton, Lord of Powys; he died in 1401 without
children. The date of Sir Edward Stradling's marriage to Jane
(FitzAlan) is not given; he died in 1452-3, according to his
_Inquisitio post Mortem_. >>
The date of their marriage is given at
http://www.stradling.org.uk/docs/Strad_li.htm
as 1423
And Edward's death is given by http://www.genealogics.org as 5 May 1453
While his wife Joan is given by http://www.genealogics.org as 19 Oct 1479
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
In a message dated 9/12/05 9:37:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< A recent attempt to debunk Alice as Joan's mother [see Foundations 1
(2004): 246-258] has alleged without foundation that Joan Beaufort was born "no
later than 1408." Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that Joan was
born much earlier than this, she likely being the same approximate age as her
husband, Sir Edward Stradling, who was born about 1389 (aged 22 in 1411).
During the time period, 1388/93, Henry Beaufort was a student at Cambridge and
Oxford Universities and not yet in holy orders (see Emden Biog. Reg. of the Univ.
of Oxford 1 (1957): 139-142). If Henry Beaufort's daughter Joan was born in
that period, it is barely possible that Joan was the daughter of Alice
Arundel. >>
Thank you Doug for these additional details.
Leo state's that Richard Fitzalan, 10th Earl of Arundel was b 1346 and I have
that he married Elizabeth de Bohun 23 Sep 1359. I don't have further
biographical details to tell me at what point they actually lived together in order
to begin having children. But I use a rule-of-thumb to say a father should be
at least 17 at the birth of his first child. This would allow Alice to be
born as early as 1363.
Since Elizabeth de Bohun died 4 Mar 1385 (not sure if this should be 1384/5
or 1385/6) then Alice could be born as late as that date. This gives a rather
large 22 year span in which she could be born.
The Stradling website I posted just now says that Joan Beaufort was married
in 1423 although I only have a few of her children (most likely) the first only
born in 1430.
I'm sure there are more documents out there that can narrow these dates, but
I don't have them.
Just from these, we still have a very large range of years into which both
Joan and her mother could be born.
Will Johnson
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
<< A recent attempt to debunk Alice as Joan's mother [see Foundations 1
(2004): 246-258] has alleged without foundation that Joan Beaufort was born "no
later than 1408." Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that Joan was
born much earlier than this, she likely being the same approximate age as her
husband, Sir Edward Stradling, who was born about 1389 (aged 22 in 1411).
During the time period, 1388/93, Henry Beaufort was a student at Cambridge and
Oxford Universities and not yet in holy orders (see Emden Biog. Reg. of the Univ.
of Oxford 1 (1957): 139-142). If Henry Beaufort's daughter Joan was born in
that period, it is barely possible that Joan was the daughter of Alice
Arundel. >>
Thank you Doug for these additional details.
Leo state's that Richard Fitzalan, 10th Earl of Arundel was b 1346 and I have
that he married Elizabeth de Bohun 23 Sep 1359. I don't have further
biographical details to tell me at what point they actually lived together in order
to begin having children. But I use a rule-of-thumb to say a father should be
at least 17 at the birth of his first child. This would allow Alice to be
born as early as 1363.
Since Elizabeth de Bohun died 4 Mar 1385 (not sure if this should be 1384/5
or 1385/6) then Alice could be born as late as that date. This gives a rather
large 22 year span in which she could be born.
The Stradling website I posted just now says that Joan Beaufort was married
in 1423 although I only have a few of her children (most likely) the first only
born in 1430.
I'm sure there are more documents out there that can narrow these dates, but
I don't have them.
Just from these, we still have a very large range of years into which both
Joan and her mother could be born.
Will Johnson
-
John Higgins
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
See comments below
----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?) of
anagrams
The "recent attempt to debunk" (a crude slamming of a well-written article)
is of course by Brad Verity, whom DR fails to acknowledge in MCA - and, more
importantly, misquotes and mischaracterizes. The article actually says:
"Chronology favors Beaufort having his affair and daughter between 1400 and
1405, probably while he was Bishop of Lincoln."
As to "some evidence to suggest that Joan was born much earlier than this,
she likely being the same approximate age as her husband", DR presents no
EVIDENCE - only the application of the famous Richardson 85-year rule which
conveniently puts Joan at the same age as his husband. So we have two
possible arguments based on chronology - how is one "without foundation"
while the other is acceptable?
If Joan Beaufort was married in ca. 1423, she would have been 30 to 35 by
DR's argument - seems a bit old for a first marriage in that time. The
1400-5 date proposed by Brad Verity would make her 18 to 23 but marrying a
somewhat older husband - not at all uncommon and chronologically more
likely.
It's interesting to see that DR devotes so much space in MCA to attempt to
support a traditionally accepted but questionable parentage for Joan
Beaufort while totally ignoring the serious doubts that have been raised
about the parentage of her supposed daughter Joan/Katherine Stradling, wife
of Maurice Dennis. A more even-handed treatment of both of these cases
would have been of more value to the readers of MCA and would have been a
useful contribution to the genealogical literature.
----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?) of
anagrams
In a message dated 9/12/05 9:37:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
royalancestry@msn.com writes:
A recent attempt to debunk Alice as Joan's mother [see Foundations 1
(2004): 246-258] has alleged without foundation that Joan Beaufort was
born "no
later than 1408." Actually, there is some evidence to suggest that Joan
was
born much earlier than this, she likely being the same approximate age as
her
husband, Sir Edward Stradling, who was born about 1389 (aged 22 in 1411).
During the time period, 1388/93, Henry Beaufort was a student at Cambridge
and
Oxford Universities and not yet in holy orders (see Emden Biog. Reg. of
the Univ.
of Oxford 1 (1957): 139-142). If Henry Beaufort's daughter Joan was born
in
that period, it is barely possible that Joan was the daughter of Alice
Arundel.
The "recent attempt to debunk" (a crude slamming of a well-written article)
is of course by Brad Verity, whom DR fails to acknowledge in MCA - and, more
importantly, misquotes and mischaracterizes. The article actually says:
"Chronology favors Beaufort having his affair and daughter between 1400 and
1405, probably while he was Bishop of Lincoln."
As to "some evidence to suggest that Joan was born much earlier than this,
she likely being the same approximate age as her husband", DR presents no
EVIDENCE - only the application of the famous Richardson 85-year rule which
conveniently puts Joan at the same age as his husband. So we have two
possible arguments based on chronology - how is one "without foundation"
while the other is acceptable?
If Joan Beaufort was married in ca. 1423, she would have been 30 to 35 by
DR's argument - seems a bit old for a first marriage in that time. The
1400-5 date proposed by Brad Verity would make her 18 to 23 but marrying a
somewhat older husband - not at all uncommon and chronologically more
likely.
It's interesting to see that DR devotes so much space in MCA to attempt to
support a traditionally accepted but questionable parentage for Joan
Beaufort while totally ignoring the serious doubts that have been raised
about the parentage of her supposed daughter Joan/Katherine Stradling, wife
of Maurice Dennis. A more even-handed treatment of both of these cases
would have been of more value to the readers of MCA and would have been a
useful contribution to the genealogical literature.
Thank you Doug for these additional details.
Leo state's that Richard Fitzalan, 10th Earl of Arundel was b 1346 and I
have
that he married Elizabeth de Bohun 23 Sep 1359. I don't have further
biographical details to tell me at what point they actually lived together
in order
to begin having children. But I use a rule-of-thumb to say a father
should be
at least 17 at the birth of his first child. This would allow Alice to be
born as early as 1363.
Since Elizabeth de Bohun died 4 Mar 1385 (not sure if this should be
1384/5
or 1385/6) then Alice could be born as late as that date. This gives a
rather
large 22 year span in which she could be born.
The Stradling website I posted just now says that Joan Beaufort was
married
in 1423 although I only have a few of her children (most likely) the first
only
born in 1430.
I'm sure there are more documents out there that can narrow these dates,
but
I don't have them.
Just from these, we still have a very large range of years into which both
Joan and her mother could be born.
Will Johnson
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
The "recent attempt to debunk" (a crude slamming of a well-written article)
is of course by Brad Verity, whom DR fails to acknowledge in MCA - and, more
importantly, misquotes and mischaracterizes. The article actually says:
"Chronology favors Beaufort having his affair and daughter between 1400 and
1405, probably while he was Bishop of Lincoln."
Does Brad's article mention Ethel Seaton's theory about the anagrams?
He obviously knew of Seaton's book. See http://tinyurl.com/dxrty .
-
Brad Verity
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
John Brandon wrote:
I discovered Seaton's book after I had written and submitted the
article, but I found nothing in it to change my opinion. Ms. Seaton
did an admirable job of straightening out the 15th-century Rooses of
Hamlake, and is well worth tracking down for anyone interested in that
family, though there are some errors. She did not do any research in
the Beaufort or Fitzalan families, but relied on the same secondary
sources that I review in my article.
If we are now going to accept 1960/61 anagrams as contemporary 15th
century genealogical evidence, let's break out the Ouija board and ask
Jane Stradling herself who her mother was. She probably has more time
to chat with us than the spirit of Cardinal Beaufort does.
Kudos to Will Johnson for starting a website on corrections to PA3.
I'll send in a correction on the Jane Stradling stuff when I have some
free time.
Cheers, -----Brad
Does Brad's article mention Ethel Seaton's theory about the anagrams?
He obviously knew of Seaton's book. See http://tinyurl.com/dxrty .
I discovered Seaton's book after I had written and submitted the
article, but I found nothing in it to change my opinion. Ms. Seaton
did an admirable job of straightening out the 15th-century Rooses of
Hamlake, and is well worth tracking down for anyone interested in that
family, though there are some errors. She did not do any research in
the Beaufort or Fitzalan families, but relied on the same secondary
sources that I review in my article.
If we are now going to accept 1960/61 anagrams as contemporary 15th
century genealogical evidence, let's break out the Ouija board and ask
Jane Stradling herself who her mother was. She probably has more time
to chat with us than the spirit of Cardinal Beaufort does.
Kudos to Will Johnson for starting a website on corrections to PA3.
I'll send in a correction on the Jane Stradling stuff when I have some
free time.
Cheers, -----Brad
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
If we are now going to accept 1960/61 anagrams as contemporary 15th
century genealogical evidence, let's break out the Ouija board and ask
Jane Stradling herself who her mother was.
I'm not sure you mean by "1960/61 anagrams"--though possibly you mean
to imply that Ethel Seaton invented the anagrams she found.
It might be helpful to check earlier analyses of Roos's poetry to see
if critics prior to Seaton thought, or were aware, that he incorporated
anagrams in his work.
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Fascinating stuff indeed, although a quick googling of the history of
anagrams seems to suggest that anagrams were not used thusly in the
medieval period though perhaps by the Elizabethan period they might
well have been.
I think I'll pop on over to Chaucernet and ask the Chaucer scholars
about the usage, if any, of anagrams in poetry of the period.
I'll report back if I hear anything.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
anagrams seems to suggest that anagrams were not used thusly in the
medieval period though perhaps by the Elizabethan period they might
well have been.
I think I'll pop on over to Chaucernet and ask the Chaucer scholars
about the usage, if any, of anagrams in poetry of the period.
I'll report back if I hear anything.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Dear Newsgroup ~
For those interested in such things, I've copied below a definition of
the word "anagram" from the following website:
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/lit_terms_A. ... ram_anchor
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
ANAGRAM (Greek: "writing back or anew"): When the letters or syllables
in a name, word or phrase are shuffled together or jumbled to form a
new word. For instance, in Tanith Lee's short story, "Bite-Me-Not, or
Fleur De Fleu," the predatory vampire's name is Feroluce--an anagram of
his demonic predecessor, Lucifer. Similarly in the film Angelheart, the
devil travels using the anagram Louis Cipher, i.e., Lucifer as a
moniker, and in film-maker's spin-offs of Bram Stoker's Dracula,
Dracula uses the name Alucard as a disguise. Authors who love wordplay
love using anagrams. For instance, Samuel Butler's utopian satire
Erewhon is an anagram of "Nowhere." An anagram that functions by merely
writing a name backwards is known more specifically as an ananym. END
OF QUOTE.
For those interested in such things, I've copied below a definition of
the word "anagram" from the following website:
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/lit_terms_A. ... ram_anchor
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
ANAGRAM (Greek: "writing back or anew"): When the letters or syllables
in a name, word or phrase are shuffled together or jumbled to form a
new word. For instance, in Tanith Lee's short story, "Bite-Me-Not, or
Fleur De Fleu," the predatory vampire's name is Feroluce--an anagram of
his demonic predecessor, Lucifer. Similarly in the film Angelheart, the
devil travels using the anagram Louis Cipher, i.e., Lucifer as a
moniker, and in film-maker's spin-offs of Bram Stoker's Dracula,
Dracula uses the name Alucard as a disguise. Authors who love wordplay
love using anagrams. For instance, Samuel Butler's utopian satire
Erewhon is an anagram of "Nowhere." An anagram that functions by merely
writing a name backwards is known more specifically as an ananym. END
OF QUOTE.
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Dear Judy ~
Doing a quick google search, I've found a reference to an article on an
anagram in a medieval journal:
"The Verse Inscriptions of the Tympanum of Jaca and the PAX Anagram,"
Mediaevalia 19 (1996), 405-34.
I haven't seen the article, but its appearance in this journal suggests
that anagrams were used in the medieval period. Perhaps someone more
familiar with the history of anagrams as a literary device can
enlighten us about when anagrams came into use.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Katheryn_Swynford wrote:
Doing a quick google search, I've found a reference to an article on an
anagram in a medieval journal:
"The Verse Inscriptions of the Tympanum of Jaca and the PAX Anagram,"
Mediaevalia 19 (1996), 405-34.
I haven't seen the article, but its appearance in this journal suggests
that anagrams were used in the medieval period. Perhaps someone more
familiar with the history of anagrams as a literary device can
enlighten us about when anagrams came into use.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Katheryn_Swynford wrote:
Fascinating stuff indeed, although a quick googling of the history of
anagrams seems to suggest that anagrams were not used thusly in the
medieval period though perhaps by the Elizabethan period they might
well have been.
I think I'll pop on over to Chaucernet and ask the Chaucer scholars
about the usage, if any, of anagrams in poetry of the period.
I'll report back if I hear anything.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
I haven't seen the article, but its appearance in this journal suggests
that anagrams were used in the medieval period. Perhaps someone more
familiar with the history of anagrams as a literary device can
enlighten us about when anagrams came into use.
An anagram, in this context, is not just rearranging the letters of a
word to come up with another word. It involves using the initial
letter (sometimes the first two letters) of a line of poetry to form
the word; also, I think, you have to adhere to the order in which the
lines/ letters occur within the poem. Sometimes not only the initial
letter of the line, but also the first letter after a pause in the
line, is used.
So it's not really as arbitrary as it sounds.
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Dear Douglas,
Yes, I am aware that anagrams were used in the medieval period (and
even earlier than that), but my understanding is that their usage in
the medieval period was primarily religious, and followed Jewish
mystical usage starting about the 13th century IIRC.
But if/when I hear anything back from the Chaucer scholars, I'll let
everyone know.
Thanks!
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
Yes, I am aware that anagrams were used in the medieval period (and
even earlier than that), but my understanding is that their usage in
the medieval period was primarily religious, and followed Jewish
mystical usage starting about the 13th century IIRC.
But if/when I hear anything back from the Chaucer scholars, I'll let
everyone know.
Thanks!
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Nor is it as much an anagram - more a hybrid anagram-acrostic.
Shades of the Bible Code, anyone?
(And how can Louis Cypher be an anagram of Lucifer? It has no 'f' and
various extraneous letters. A witty alias perhaps - though hardly
permitting incognito travel - but not an anagram.)
Shades of the Bible Code, anyone?
(And how can Louis Cypher be an anagram of Lucifer? It has no 'f' and
various extraneous letters. A witty alias perhaps - though hardly
permitting incognito travel - but not an anagram.)
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
(And how can Louis Cypher be an anagram of Lucifer? It has no 'f' and
various extraneous letters. A witty alias perhaps - though hardly
permitting incognito travel - but not an anagram.)
Lou Cypher ...
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
John Brandon wrote:
mjcar@bt...com wrote:
(And how can Louis Cypher be an anagram of Lucifer? It has no 'f' and
various extraneous letters. A witty alias perhaps - though hardly
permitting incognito travel - but not an anagram.)
Lou Cypher ...
Yup, I do get it; it's just not an anagram, viz: "a word formed from
the rearranged letters of another [word]" (Oxford). It doesn't use
the same letters, and - phonetically - nothing is rearranged. It's a
homonym, but it's not an anagram.
It is, however, interesting to note that anagrams are ancient. Perhaps
the oldest anagram of note is the alindromic Latin word square:
SATOR
AREPO
TENET
OPERA
ROTAS
ie it functions additionally as an acrostic on several levels, and
whose significance is still subject to debate; examples were found in
the ruins of Pompeii.
So, there is no question but that anagrams and acrostics are of ancient
provenance. The question is whether their use is a recognised literary
device from 15th century England. I don't know, and therefore I think
the "jury is still out" on this case, but I nevertheless find it an
intriguing hypothesis, and I am very glad you found it - and shared it.
Michael
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
In a message dated 9/13/05 3:53:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
farmerie@interfold.com writes:
<< That, or it means that with a large enough data set and enough degrees
of freedom (in terms of acceptable variation) you can find an 'anagram'
for anything you look for.
taf >>
Toimtwaledsaedofitoavycfaafaylf
to "imt" (empty) wales "aed" (aide) of it[s] o.a. (origin of authority)
"vyc" (which) fa[ils] af[ter] "aylf" (bailiffs)
That is, you can suppress Welsh uprisings by instituting bailiffs throughout
the countryside, instead of allowing local petty princes to rule.
Frankly I'm surprised at you Todd !
Will Johnson
farmerie@interfold.com writes:
<< That, or it means that with a large enough data set and enough degrees
of freedom (in terms of acceptable variation) you can find an 'anagram'
for anything you look for.
taf >>
Toimtwaledsaedofitoavycfaafaylf
to "imt" (empty) wales "aed" (aide) of it[s] o.a. (origin of authority)
"vyc" (which) fa[ils] af[ter] "aylf" (bailiffs)
That is, you can suppress Welsh uprisings by instituting bailiffs throughout
the countryside, instead of allowing local petty princes to rule.
Frankly I'm surprised at you Todd !
Will Johnson
-
Peter Stewart
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126633981.545924.92960@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Quite so - Ethel Seaton established a pattern of these throughout the work
ascribed to Roos. (Some stanzas, but not those in which she claimed to find
the name "Jane Stradling", were attributed by her to Chaucer.)
However, she was wrong to call the devices "anagrams", since the letters
making up the names occur in the right order to spell them out - "anagrams"
are made up of letters rearranged, or literally written anew, whereas the
name games played in the work in question are properly called "logogriphs",
simply meaning word puzzles.
Appendix C in Seaton's book ("A Plea for the Liberty of Anagrammatizing")
touches on a controversy over this between herself and a pair of military
cyptographers who had disputed her findings in French poetry of the same
period. Seaton brushed over the issues, but elsewhere in the book she had
presented more than enough evidence to support the broad principles that she
applied.
Despite this, there is no firm support for reading genealogical evidence
into the alleged occurrences of "Jane" and/or "Stradling".
According to Seaton these are:
(a) over 20 lines separated (into 11 and 9) by 20 more that have nothing to
the purpose, (C)Hir--TO.; ST--(D)-In., F-SA-An, IOAn.
(b) over 30 lines, HEN. BEWFOrT; ALIS FISA-AN A-UN(D)E.; IOAN.
(c) over 13 lines, Al-S ArU-(DE)., POWIS; -OAn STRA-Li-G.
(d) over 21 lines, HEn-Y; A-IS FISA-An. A-UN.; JOAN, ST-AD-IN; FOrFA-T.
(e) over 18 lines, B-AUFOrT; ARUn(D). FYSA-An; (J)OAn ST-A(DL)In.
This is typical of the patterns presented in Seaton's book. The trouble is
that words have to be made up of letters: allowing for the wide spread
across the lines and even without fixed orthography and normal modern
frequencies of letters in 15th-century writing, some of these are much less
convincing than others. Poets can't work miracles of either inclusion or
avoidance, and Roos obviously struggled to concentrate his riddles or to
spell out any of the names in full.
Seaton followed Rice Merrick, so that she set out looking for the names of
Henry Beaufort, Alice Fitzalan-Arundel and Jane Stadling in conjunction.
Given that "g" and "j" are less common than other letters in her name, I
would say that (c) and (d) above are the clearest examples she found. These
still don't tell us plainly that Roos was naming Jane along with her
parents, and for all we know the actual link could have been rather social,
or conspiratorial, or perhaps something else entirely that later misled
Merrick into inventing a blood connection.
As Brad suggested, Seaton's work may be interesting but not conclusive.
Peter Stewart
news:1126633981.545924.92960@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
I haven't seen the article, but its appearance in this journal suggests
that anagrams were used in the medieval period. Perhaps someone more
familiar with the history of anagrams as a literary device can
enlighten us about when anagrams came into use.
An anagram, in this context, is not just rearranging the letters of a
word to come up with another word. It involves using the initial
letter (sometimes the first two letters) of a line of poetry to form
the word; also, I think, you have to adhere to the order in which the
lines/ letters occur within the poem. Sometimes not only the initial
letter of the line, but also the first letter after a pause in the
line, is used.
So it's not really as arbitrary as it sounds.
Quite so - Ethel Seaton established a pattern of these throughout the work
ascribed to Roos. (Some stanzas, but not those in which she claimed to find
the name "Jane Stradling", were attributed by her to Chaucer.)
However, she was wrong to call the devices "anagrams", since the letters
making up the names occur in the right order to spell them out - "anagrams"
are made up of letters rearranged, or literally written anew, whereas the
name games played in the work in question are properly called "logogriphs",
simply meaning word puzzles.
Appendix C in Seaton's book ("A Plea for the Liberty of Anagrammatizing")
touches on a controversy over this between herself and a pair of military
cyptographers who had disputed her findings in French poetry of the same
period. Seaton brushed over the issues, but elsewhere in the book she had
presented more than enough evidence to support the broad principles that she
applied.
Despite this, there is no firm support for reading genealogical evidence
into the alleged occurrences of "Jane" and/or "Stradling".
According to Seaton these are:
(a) over 20 lines separated (into 11 and 9) by 20 more that have nothing to
the purpose, (C)Hir--TO.; ST--(D)-In., F-SA-An, IOAn.
(b) over 30 lines, HEN. BEWFOrT; ALIS FISA-AN A-UN(D)E.; IOAN.
(c) over 13 lines, Al-S ArU-(DE)., POWIS; -OAn STRA-Li-G.
(d) over 21 lines, HEn-Y; A-IS FISA-An. A-UN.; JOAN, ST-AD-IN; FOrFA-T.
(e) over 18 lines, B-AUFOrT; ARUn(D). FYSA-An; (J)OAn ST-A(DL)In.
This is typical of the patterns presented in Seaton's book. The trouble is
that words have to be made up of letters: allowing for the wide spread
across the lines and even without fixed orthography and normal modern
frequencies of letters in 15th-century writing, some of these are much less
convincing than others. Poets can't work miracles of either inclusion or
avoidance, and Roos obviously struggled to concentrate his riddles or to
spell out any of the names in full.
Seaton followed Rice Merrick, so that she set out looking for the names of
Henry Beaufort, Alice Fitzalan-Arundel and Jane Stadling in conjunction.
Given that "g" and "j" are less common than other letters in her name, I
would say that (c) and (d) above are the clearest examples she found. These
still don't tell us plainly that Roos was naming Jane along with her
parents, and for all we know the actual link could have been rather social,
or conspiratorial, or perhaps something else entirely that later misled
Merrick into inventing a blood connection.
As Brad suggested, Seaton's work may be interesting but not conclusive.
Peter Stewart
-
Todd A. Farmerie
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
Your example reminded me of a display from the medieval period, relating
to a King of Asturias:
[non-proportional font]
TICEFSPECNCEPSFECIT
ICEFSPECNINCEPSFECI
CEFSPECNIRINCEPSFEC
EFSPECNIRPRINCEPSFE
FSPECNIRPOPRINCEPSF
SPECNIRPOLOPRINCEPS
PECNIRPOLILOPRINCEP
ECNIRPOLISILOPRINCE
PECNIRPOLILOPRINCEP
SPECNIRPOLOPRINCEPS
FSPECNIRPOPRINCEPSF
EFSPECNIRPRINCEPSFE
CEFSPECNIRINCEPSFEC
ICEFSPECNINCEPSFECI
TICEFSPECNCEPSFECIT
This begins at the center and moves toward any of the corners by any
path, reading "Silo Princeps Fecit".
taf
It is, however, interesting to note that anagrams are ancient. Perhaps
the oldest anagram of note is the alindromic Latin word square:
Your example reminded me of a display from the medieval period, relating
to a King of Asturias:
[non-proportional font]
TICEFSPECNCEPSFECIT
ICEFSPECNINCEPSFECI
CEFSPECNIRINCEPSFEC
EFSPECNIRPRINCEPSFE
FSPECNIRPOPRINCEPSF
SPECNIRPOLOPRINCEPS
PECNIRPOLILOPRINCEP
ECNIRPOLISILOPRINCE
PECNIRPOLILOPRINCEP
SPECNIRPOLOPRINCEPS
FSPECNIRPOPRINCEPSF
EFSPECNIRPRINCEPSFE
CEFSPECNIRINCEPSFEC
ICEFSPECNINCEPSFECI
TICEFSPECNCEPSFECIT
This begins at the center and moves toward any of the corners by any
path, reading "Silo Princeps Fecit".
taf
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Very neat effect - thanks.
MAR
MAR
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
deSpiTe this, theRe is no firm support for reADing geneaLogIcal evideNce
into the alleGed occurrences of "Jane" and/or "Stradling".
S.T.R.A.D.L.I.N.G !!!
Cute, but none of these letters is at the beginning of a word, let
alone a line of poetry ...
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
William Shakespeare:
SONNET 2
WHen forty winters shall beseige thy brow,
And dig deep trenches in thy beauty's field,
Thy youth's proud livery, so gazed on now,
will be a tatter'd weed, of small worth held:
then being ask'd where all thy beauty lies,
where all the treasure of thy lusty days,
TO Say, within thine own deep-sunken eyes,
were an all-eating shame and thriftless praise.
How much more praise deserved thy beauty's use,
if thou couldst answer 'this fair child of mine
shall sum my count and make my old excuse,'
proving his beauty by succession thine!
this were to be new made when thou art old,
and see thy blood warm when thou feel'st it cold.
=
WhAT TosH
SONNET 2
WHen forty winters shall beseige thy brow,
And dig deep trenches in thy beauty's field,
Thy youth's proud livery, so gazed on now,
will be a tatter'd weed, of small worth held:
then being ask'd where all thy beauty lies,
where all the treasure of thy lusty days,
TO Say, within thine own deep-sunken eyes,
were an all-eating shame and thriftless praise.
How much more praise deserved thy beauty's use,
if thou couldst answer 'this fair child of mine
shall sum my count and make my old excuse,'
proving his beauty by succession thine!
this were to be new made when thou art old,
and see thy blood warm when thou feel'st it cold.
=
WhAT TosH
-
John Brandon
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Wouldn't it actually be WhAT WTWToWHo ... etc.?
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Oxford: "tosh: n. (colloq.) rubbish, nonsense [origin unknown]"
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
In a message dated 9/14/2005 1:38:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
p_m_stewart@msn.com writes:
S.T.R.A.D.L.I.N.G !!!
Will Johnson
p_m_stewart@msn.com writes:
deSpiTe this, theRe is no firm support for reADing geneaLogIcal evideNce
into the alleGed occurrences of "Jane" and/or "Stradling".
S.T.R.A.D.L.I.N.G !!!
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Perhaps it would be easier for the rest of us to understand how these
"anagrams" (though they are not anagrams) work if we could see how they
are actually presented in the texts in question.
Are they actually acrostics, or are there spaces between the "words" as
Peter Stewart suggests?
"anagrams" (though they are not anagrams) work if we could see how they
are actually presented in the texts in question.
Are they actually acrostics, or are there spaces between the "words" as
Peter Stewart suggests?
-
Gjest
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
mjcar@btinternet.com writes:
Shorter Oxford suggests that it may have come from "tosher" - an unattached
or non-residential student at a university having residential colleges ca
1892
Compact Oxford gives quotes using tosh from 1892 onwards, including
1892 Oxf Univ Mag "To think what I've gone through to hear that man!
Frightful tosh it'll be too"
from 1898) "Among the recent neologisms of the cricket field is 'tosh',
which means bowling of contemptible easiness"
and Belloc in 1902 wrote "The poor public . . is driven back to toshy novels
about problems, written by cooks"
cheers
Simon
Oxford: "tosh: n. (colloq.) rubbish, nonsense [origin unknown]"
Shorter Oxford suggests that it may have come from "tosher" - an unattached
or non-residential student at a university having residential colleges ca
1892
Compact Oxford gives quotes using tosh from 1892 onwards, including
1892 Oxf Univ Mag "To think what I've gone through to hear that man!
Frightful tosh it'll be too"
from 1898) "Among the recent neologisms of the cricket field is 'tosh',
which means bowling of contemptible easiness"
and Belloc in 1902 wrote "The poor public . . is driven back to toshy novels
about problems, written by cooks"
cheers
Simon
-
Peter Stewart
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
<WJhonson@aol.com> wrote in message news:1c1.30ac5d2f.3059984e@aol.com...
Yes, but it's not in verse, the letters are not forming a pattern in
particular spots, and the name is not found in conjunction with others.
Seaton presents many examples, and the Stradling ones - whether convincing
or not - are of no importance to her case about "anagrams".
Peter Stewart
In a message dated 9/14/2005 1:38:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
p_m_stewart@msn.com writes:
deSpiTe this, theRe is no firm support for reADing geneaLogIcal evideNce
into the alleGed occurrences of "Jane" and/or "Stradling".
S.T.R.A.D.L.I.N.G !!!
Yes, but it's not in verse, the letters are not forming a pattern in
particular spots, and the name is not found in conjunction with others.
Seaton presents many examples, and the Stradling ones - whether convincing
or not - are of no importance to her case about "anagrams".
Peter Stewart
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
And, for anyone interested, I just received an email from my
university's interlibrary loan that the Seaton Roos book as arrived.
I won't be getting back there until mid/late next week (only teach one
day a week and the campus is 75 miles one-way from the house), but I
can either scan or photocopy the relevant sections (one or the other,
depending upon length and the longevity of my scanner) and can
upload/post the info if anyone is interested.
Please let me know if you'd like me to provide this.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
university's interlibrary loan that the Seaton Roos book as arrived.
I won't be getting back there until mid/late next week (only teach one
day a week and the campus is 75 miles one-way from the house), but I
can either scan or photocopy the relevant sections (one or the other,
depending upon length and the longevity of my scanner) and can
upload/post the info if anyone is interested.
Please let me know if you'd like me to provide this.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Dear Judy ~
Thank you for keeping us informed. Much appreciated.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Katheryn_Swynford wrote:
Thank you for keeping us informed. Much appreciated.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Katheryn_Swynford wrote:
And, for anyone interested, I just received an email from my
university's interlibrary loan that the Seaton Roos book as arrived.
I won't be getting back there until mid/late next week (only teach one
day a week and the campus is 75 miles one-way from the house), but I
can either scan or photocopy the relevant sections (one or the other,
depending upon length and the longevity of my scanner) and can
upload/post the info if anyone is interested.
Please let me know if you'd like me to provide this.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
John Higgins
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
One difficulty with the Seaton book is that, while it cites supposed
anagrams in the poems which Seaton ascribes to Sir Richard Roos, it does not
provide the text of the poems themselves so that her conclusions can be
verified. She only cites the line numbers where the anagrams are said to be
located - in some cases, sections thirty or more lines long. It's not clear
(to me, at least) whether the poems in question have actually been
published - Seaton may well have been working from manuscript copies in
various collections, which would be extremely difficult for most researchers
to readily verify. In sections of such length, one might well suspect that
many interesting anagrams could be found - depending on what you were
looking for.
Aside from the anagram question, one of Seaton's premises is that poems
traditionally attributed to authors such as Chaucer and Sir Thomas Wyatt
should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos. I have no idea whether
this has stood up under critical scrutiny, but it is an interesting
hypothesis. She does provide a rather lengthy narrative of the Roos family
in this time period, together with many of its connections, which might be
of interest to genealogists (although I doubt that it breaks any new
ground).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Katheryn_Swynford" <katheryn_swynford@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?) of
anagrams
anagrams in the poems which Seaton ascribes to Sir Richard Roos, it does not
provide the text of the poems themselves so that her conclusions can be
verified. She only cites the line numbers where the anagrams are said to be
located - in some cases, sections thirty or more lines long. It's not clear
(to me, at least) whether the poems in question have actually been
published - Seaton may well have been working from manuscript copies in
various collections, which would be extremely difficult for most researchers
to readily verify. In sections of such length, one might well suspect that
many interesting anagrams could be found - depending on what you were
looking for.
Aside from the anagram question, one of Seaton's premises is that poems
traditionally attributed to authors such as Chaucer and Sir Thomas Wyatt
should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos. I have no idea whether
this has stood up under critical scrutiny, but it is an interesting
hypothesis. She does provide a rather lengthy narrative of the Roos family
in this time period, together with many of its connections, which might be
of interest to genealogists (although I doubt that it breaks any new
ground).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Katheryn_Swynford" <katheryn_swynford@yahoo.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence (?) of
anagrams
And, for anyone interested, I just received an email from my
university's interlibrary loan that the Seaton Roos book as arrived.
I won't be getting back there until mid/late next week (only teach one
day a week and the campus is 75 miles one-way from the house), but I
can either scan or photocopy the relevant sections (one or the other,
depending upon length and the longevity of my scanner) and can
upload/post the info if anyone is interested.
Please let me know if you'd like me to provide this.
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
John (et al):
As for Seaton's premise "that poems traditionally attributed to Chaucer
and Sir Thomas Wyatt should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos,"
it should be noted that the emminent Chaucerian Derek let the following
statement(s) stand with respect to Seaton's take on Roos:
"Ethel Seaton. Sir Richard Roos: Lancastrian Poet (London: Rupert
Hart-Davis, 1961). Valuable literary and social background, especially
in chapters I and II; the authorship attributions (all three poems are
ascribed to Roos) are not to be taken seriously."
--As found in Pearsall (1990): Bibliography, Edited by Derek Pearsall
Originally Published in The Floure and the Leafe; The Assembly of
Ladies; The Isle of Ladies, Kalamazoo, Michigan: Western Michigan
University for TEAMS, 1990; reprinted 1992, and retrievable at
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/pearsbib.htm
HTH,
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
As for Seaton's premise "that poems traditionally attributed to Chaucer
and Sir Thomas Wyatt should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos,"
it should be noted that the emminent Chaucerian Derek let the following
statement(s) stand with respect to Seaton's take on Roos:
"Ethel Seaton. Sir Richard Roos: Lancastrian Poet (London: Rupert
Hart-Davis, 1961). Valuable literary and social background, especially
in chapters I and II; the authorship attributions (all three poems are
ascribed to Roos) are not to be taken seriously."
--As found in Pearsall (1990): Bibliography, Edited by Derek Pearsall
Originally Published in The Floure and the Leafe; The Assembly of
Ladies; The Isle of Ladies, Kalamazoo, Michigan: Western Michigan
University for TEAMS, 1990; reprinted 1992, and retrievable at
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/pearsbib.htm
HTH,
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
Sorry... that should be Derek Pearsall.
Three little chihuahua puppies decided to traipse across my laptop
keyboard and managed to delete the last name :-/
Judy
Three little chihuahua puppies decided to traipse across my laptop
keyboard and managed to delete the last name :-/
Judy
-
Katheryn_Swynford
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
John (et al):
As for Seaton's premise "that poems traditionally attributed to Chaucer
and Sir Thomas Wyatt should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos,"
it should be noted that the emminent Chaucerian Derek let the following
statement(s) stand with respect to Seaton's take on Roos:
"Ethel Seaton. Sir Richard Roos: Lancastrian Poet (London: Rupert
Hart-Davis, 1961). Valuable literary and social background, especially
in chapters I and II; the authorship attributions (all three poems are
ascribed to Roos) are not to be taken seriously."
--As found in Pearsall (1990): Bibliography, Edited by Derek Pearsall
Originally Published in The Floure and the Leafe; The Assembly of
Ladies; The Isle of Ladies, Kalamazoo, Michigan: Western Michigan
University for TEAMS, 1990; reprinted 1992, and retrievable at
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/pearsbib.htm
HTH,
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
As for Seaton's premise "that poems traditionally attributed to Chaucer
and Sir Thomas Wyatt should instead be attributed to Sir Richard Roos,"
it should be noted that the emminent Chaucerian Derek let the following
statement(s) stand with respect to Seaton's take on Roos:
"Ethel Seaton. Sir Richard Roos: Lancastrian Poet (London: Rupert
Hart-Davis, 1961). Valuable literary and social background, especially
in chapters I and II; the authorship attributions (all three poems are
ascribed to Roos) are not to be taken seriously."
--As found in Pearsall (1990): Bibliography, Edited by Derek Pearsall
Originally Published in The Floure and the Leafe; The Assembly of
Ladies; The Isle of Ladies, Kalamazoo, Michigan: Western Michigan
University for TEAMS, 1990; reprinted 1992, and retrievable at
http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/pearsbib.htm
HTH,
Judy
http://www.katherineswynford.net
-
John A Rea
Re: The maternity of Joan (Beaufort) Stradling: The evidence
mjcar@btinternet.com wrote:
"published" under the pseudonym of Alcofribas Nasier. Charles Dodgeson
was a more recend gamesman with letters, and the author of Lolita went
occasionally by the name of Vivian Darkbloom. Sorry to be out of date
posting, I've been off-line for both maching and fleshly reasons.
John
Nor is it as much an anagram - more a hybrid anagram-acrostic.
Shades of the Bible Code, anyone?
(And how can Louis Cypher be an anagram of Lucifer? It has no 'f' and
various extraneous letters. A witty alias perhaps - though hardly
permitting incognito travel - but not an anagram.)
Francois Villon used anagrams, of one sort and another, and Rabelais
"published" under the pseudonym of Alcofribas Nasier. Charles Dodgeson
was a more recend gamesman with letters, and the author of Lolita went
occasionally by the name of Vivian Darkbloom. Sorry to be out of date
posting, I've been off-line for both maching and fleshly reasons.
John