A
History of In Memoriam Notices
In The New York Times | in
England | Publishing your own
The first In
Memoriam notice following the death of Richard III appeared in the
next day's council minutes of the City of York: "Wer assembled
in the counsaill chamber, where and when it was shewed...that king
Richard late mercifully reigning upon us was thrugh grete treason...piteously
slane and murdred to the grete hevynesse of this citie..."
We
gratefully acknowledge the hard work of American Branch member
Mary Donermeyer in conducting the initial microfilm search of
The New York Times for the predecessor of this
Web document. Portions of this document were published in the
Summer 1993 issue of The Ricardian
Register
The earliest
references we have found in the U.S. press was an article in The
New York Times citing an In Memoriam in the August 22, 1953
London Times: "At Battle Bosworth August 22, 1485,
there fell, fighting bravely, Richard III of England. King. Statesman.
Soldier. Gentleman. Deeply mourned. 'From distant shores, pale
dusty ghost. One grain of sand salutes your memory.'"
The ad was
placed by The Company of Memories, headed by Dr. Eugene Horsfall-Ertz,
tutor at the Colebrook School, Bognor Regis, Sussex. It piqued
the interest of both The New York Times (August 30, 1953)
and Time Magazine (September 14, 1953). Additional information
on the Company of Memories would be welcome.
Richard's
next August appearance in The New York Times was in the
form of a news article on theatrical doings, not on Bosworth.
An August 19, 1955 article reported on a rumor that Maxwell Anderson's
new play would have as its central character Richard III. "Instead
of depicting him as the bloody king of popular conception,"
the article continues, "he emerges in the untitled script
as a maligned hero."
Possibly
the first New York Times In Memoriam was placed by C.
Dewar Simons, a New York member of the Fellowship of the White
Boar. His notice read: "Richard Plantagenet - Duke of York
and king of England, who died in battle on this date at Bosworth,
A.D. 1485, Founder of the College of Arms, Patron of Caxton, of
Cambridge University and a great benefactor of the Church."
The notice sparked an article in the August 22, 1960 issue in
which the notice appeared.
The next
three years -- 1961, 1962, and 1963 -- each saw the publication
of two notices. Interestingly, 1963 carried notices from both
the Fellowship of the White Boar (C. Dewar Simons) and the Friends
of Richard III (L. Stanley Kahn, the financier who provided the
reference material for Maxwell Anderson's Richard and Anne.)
The year
1964 saw the beginnings of the proliferation of NYT Ricardian
notices, with five for Richard himself, and one for Sir Robert
Brackenbury, placed by one of Brackenbury's descendants and reading
"BRACKENBURY - Sir Robert. Died, beside his King on Bosworth
Field. His memory maligned by Henry Tudor." The year 1964
also marked the In Memoriam debut of the elusive "Junior
Brands Society," who continued to place pro-Richard notices
until the early 1970s, and then vanished as mysteriously as they'd
appeared.
The eight
notices in 1965 included a poignant triple In Memoriam. "PLANTAGENET
-- Richard. Betrayed at the Battle of Bosworth, 22d August 1485.
There fell bravely Richard III, King, soldier, statesman, gentleman.
This notice is placed in memory of Maxwell Anderson and L. Stanley
Kahn, who were dedicated to clearing his name." The New York
Times carried seven In Memoriam notices for Richard in 1966 and
eight in 1967. From then until 1979, the last year an in-memoriam
appeared until 1991, the In Memoriam section carried between three
and seven Ricardian notices.
In 1974,
the five Plantagenet notices included this provocative anti-Richard
entry: "PLANTAGENET -- Edward (King Edward V); Richard, Duke
of York; Stafford, Henry, Duke of Buckingham; Hastings, William,
Lord; St. Leger, Thomas, Sir; Grey, Richard, Lord; Woodville,
Anthony, Earl Rivers; Vaughn, Thomas, Sir; Colynbourne, William."
The advertisement,
unsigned, had been placed by a resident of the East Side, not
far from Tudor City, according to a report in the next day's paper.
An indignant New York Ricardian, Marta Orbach, called the classified
ad department, who referred her to the news department. The article
continued, "William Hogarth... former chairman of the American
branch...was more philosophical about it. 'It must be somebody
who had a bit of devilment,' he said. 'I wish it had been signed...We've
had people riding on our coattails before, with ads like ours,
but never anything like this.'"
Perhaps
the most famous of the NYT In Memoriam notices was the one written
by noted crime writer Rex Stout for the American Branch that appeared
in the August 22, 1970 edition: "PLANTAGENET -- Richard,
great king and true friend of the rights of man, died at Bosworth
Field on August 22, 1485. Murdered by traitors and, dead, maligned
by knaves and ignored by Laodiceans, he merits our devoted remembrance."
Jeremy Potter explains further, in Good King Richard?
"As every schoolboy no longer knows, the Laodiceans were
members of one of the seven early Christian churches of Asia,
condemned in the Book of Revelation for being lukewarm. They were
to be spewed out because they were neither hot nor cold."
During these
years, it appears The New York Times had viewed the Society
with some warmth, as sympathetic news coverage coincided with
our annual notices in 1960, 1961, 1965, 1966, 1974, and 1976.
After 1979, though, the climate at the New York Times
changed, and a policy was instituted that the In Memoriam section
would only carry notices for "recently deceased real people."
Twelve years later, unaware of the policy, the American Branch's
new publicity chairman placed a neutrally-worded notice. It was
accepted without comment, and appeared in the August 22, 1991
issue. The following year it was rejected, but in 1993 the New
York Times relented "as long as you people don't let
it get out of hand," and the American Branch's modest notice
has appeared every year since then.
According to
Elizabeth Nokes, secretary of the parent Richard III Society in
England, the In Memoriam appears in what are considered the four
"quality" English papers -- the Times, Telegraph,
Guardian, and Independent. This has been done, as
Miss Nokes puts it, "since time immemorial -- at least since
Isolde Wigram's days" as Hon. Secretary [1956-1965, 1966-1968
according to the late George Awdry's 1975 account of the history
of the Society].
The problems
the parent Society has had are relatively minor, such as typos
like "Richard II" for "Richard III," for which
the Society immediately demands (and gets) a make-good repeat.
The last serious problem, Miss Nokes recalls, was the year the
Times insisted on placing Richard in the "In Memoriam - War"
column.
The official
Society In Memoriam text is: " PLANTAGENET, Richard. Remember
before God, Richard III, King of England, and those who fell at
Bosworth Field, 22nd August 1485, having kept faith. Loyaulte
me Lie." This is followed by "The Richard III Society,"
with Elizabeth Nokes' address. The wording, which also appears
on the Society's memorial plaque at Sutton Cheney church near
the battlefield site, was suggested by the late George Awdry,
a long-time Ricardian and author of the Society's first history.
The inclusion of the phrase "having kept faith" pays
tribute to the fallen on both sides, as Isolde Wigram points out
in her memorial tribute to George Awdry in the March 1995 Ricardian
Bulletin.
A Ricardian Activity Open to All
In Memoriam
notices aren't restricted to the Society's "official"
publications or official wording, of course. We would be immeasurably
impoverished as a society if they were.
The annual
placing of In Memoriam notices by individual Ricardians is one
of the most endearing traits of our members. It is a spontaneous
expression of warmth and sympathy on the parts of individuals
around the country, as well as an important binding ritual and
recruitment tool for area chapters.
If you are
considering placing an In Memoriam notice in your local paper,
American Branch publicity chair Margaret Gurowitz recommends avoiding
inflammatory language which may be offensive to the more recently
bereaved. "Some of the notices from the old days included
wording such as 'treacherously slain by the agents of a man too
cowardly to face him in battle,'" she observes. "If
you bend over backwards to make sure your wording is dignified
and in good taste, you increase the chances of acceptance. Read
your notice and ask yourself, 'If I weren't a Ricardian, would
I like to see this notice on the same page as one I placed for
a beloved family member?'"
Gurowitz,
who works in the Public Relations office of a Fortune 500 company,
also remarks that some people are confused about the First Amendment
and its relationship to advertising. "In Memoriam notices
are paid advertising space," she explains. "The publication
is under no obligation to accept your money and print your notice
if they feel it violates their acceptability standards."
She suggests that, if your notice is rejected, you write or call
the advertising manager. Express sympathy for the sensibilities
of the recently bereaved; offer to re-word the advertisement to
conform to the paper's notion of appropriate expression. You can
also cite some of the newspapers which have accepted
our notices -- including The Boston Globe, The Philadelphia
Inquirer, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and The Los
Angeles Times as well as The New York Times and
the English papers.
If you do
place an In Memoriam notice, we'd like to know about it. Send
an e-mail with the text, the name of the publication, and the
date of publication to feedback@r3.org.
Deprived
of the focus of a final resting place by the tragic circumstances
of Richard's death and the posthumous indignities heaped on his
body, we use our In Memoriams as a way to reach out across the
centuries to say, "rest in peace."
Send us feedback!