Queen Anne Neville (1456-1485)

A short film about Anne Neville, who was Queen Consort to Richard III.

There are quite a few imitations of my Queen consort videos being created by other youtubers which I guess is quite flattering.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• queen
• consort
• anne
• neville
• king
• richard
• iii
• war
• of
• the
• roses
• house
• york
• lancaster
• tudor
• edward
• iv
• British
• monarchy

[RoyalSnowbird]

Clue: do not confuse the two Richard Plantagenets. . .

[animegirlUK]

I'm not...

[RoyalSnowbird]

Her father, the Earl of Warwick lived in the 15th century NOT the 16th! BIG mistake here!

[animegirlUK]

He is the 16th earl of warwick, meaning he was the 16th person to hold that title. I was not talking about centuries

[zenguy22]

Richard was a devoted and loving husband and dosen't deserve a fraction of the flack he's gotten then or now.

[noff27]

The Tudor Dynasty was made up of a bunch of usurpers. They had NO right to the english throne. Shakespeare with his lies of Richard III, has spread these lies born out of the propaganda master, Thomas More. Richard III was the rightful king of England who loved Anne very dearly. That is the truth and England would of been much better off with the descendents of Richard III.I never, despite many visits to Westminister Abbey, have and never will, visit the tomb of the usurper, Henry VII.

[mainsqueeze1977]

... and was discovered by Sir Thomas Moyle, (the owner of Eastwell), working as a mason on his estate and given a cottage by him, all first appear in print in 1735. There is no evidence that any of this is true, nor that it is untrue. The only other 'fact' we have, that Richard Plantagenet's tomb exists, is certainly not true. This tomb, still in the now ruined Eastwell church, dates from about 1480 and is probably that of Sir Walter Moyle and his wife."

[mainsqueeze1977]

@lovelystrings

Have a look here at the "Richard III Society's Back to basics, #6" (please google it, links not working): Richard's bastard children are given as John, Katherine and, possibly Richard: "The only proven fact we have for this Richard is that in the Parish register of the Kentish parish of Eastwell there is a notice of the burial of 'Rychard Plantagenet' in 1550. The other details usually cited, that he was acknowledged by Richard on the eve of Bosworth ...

[lovelystrings]

@RoyalSnowbird Where is this info coming from that he had a bastard son named Richard? The only two listed are John of Gloucester and Elizabeth. I see you corrected your own mistake on the dates of Edward, Prince of Wales. Oh dear.

[lovelystrings]

@RoyalSnowbird For one thing her name was Lady Anne Neville; there was no Beauchamp in her name. Her son with Richard III's dates were 1473 – 9 April 1484. He died young. As for the Duke of Clarence, George, he only married Isabella. George and Isabella had a Richard of York but he died young as well. His only surviving children were Margaret, Countess of Salisbury and Edward, 17th Earl of Warwick. Your statement makes absolutely no sense at the end.. he married Anne Beauchamp Neville, huh?

[EmzLuvzCatz]

@mainsqueeze1977 Don't feed the trolls.

[TheSassyB]

I think that Clarence deserves the 'maligned' title much more than Richard III.

[kayrisha23]

@noff27 yes love it!

[mainsqueeze1977]

@RoyalSnowbird

Your confusing Richard's and Anne's only son Edward, who died 1484, with a Richard, that might be a bastard son of the King. However, since he was not acknowledged in the King's lifetime (reportedly he was at the eve of Bosworth and told to stay put should the King lose), it can never be known whether he actually was the King's son.

[Nicollie1062]

@mainsqueeze1977 i'm so glad you said that lol i was just getting ready to say the same thing...especially when the person was being all "BIG mistake there" ..when animegirluk knows what she's talking about. Cheers!

[mainsqueeze1977]

@noff27

Yeah, and look what that usupring dynasty did to England, twisting it beyond recognition, dictacting to people's customs and consciences at whim. The worst dynasty in English history by far.