European Royalty discussion

49 views
Other Discussions > Any Ricardians out there?

Comments Showing 1-22 of 22 (22 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Misfit (new)

Misfit | 696 comments Just for fun I've started a Richard III discussion group (since there wasn't one). Any one who wants to talk all things Richard feel free to stop by,

http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/1...


message 2: by Sara W (new)

Sara W (sarawesq) | 2153 comments Cool, thanks for letting us know!


message 3: by Donald (new)

Donald (donroc) | 49 comments If Inspector Grant concluded that Richard III was innocent of the princes' murders, then he must be innocent.


message 4: by Sara W (new)

Sara W (sarawesq) | 2153 comments Ha, who is Inspector Grant? I was so convinced of Richard's guilt (of course, I started reading about him in Alison Weir's books first, and she's thoroughly convinced he did it), but then I read a lot of sympathic, well-researched historical fiction about him, and now I'm not so sure.


message 5: by Donald (new)

Donald (donroc) | 49 comments He appears in Tey's Daughter of Time and "solves" the mystery 500 years later. A great read.


message 6: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) Sara wrote: "Ha, who is Inspector Grant? I was so convinced of Richard's guilt (of course, I started reading about him in Alison Weir's books first, and she's thoroughly convinced he did it), but then I read a..."

Weir is a cherry-picker. She chooses to believe only those indications that Richard was the most wicked of uncles. Unfortunately, she seems to be most people's first encounter with the subject. *sigh*




message 7: by Misfit (new)

Misfit | 696 comments I've heard some interesting comments on Weir and her research. While we mere mortal readers and book purchasers think she's the be-all to end-all of historians I gather she's not that well regarding among the serious historians, and that she does come to whatever conclusion she wants to come to.


message 8: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) From my own research it would appear that she is continually being discredited by those who try to follow her reasoning. I have seen printed examples of her excerpting part of a quote and omitting the parts which do not support her conclusion. Sad.


message 9: by Sara W (last edited Jan 12, 2009 03:09PM) (new)

Sara W (sarawesq) | 2153 comments Yeah, I've heard similar things about Weir in other threads here which is why I'm not sure if she's that trustworthy. I enjoy her books, but I'm surprised she was able to write a book about Isabella of France considering there probably isn't much primary source material out there about her (plus I heard her conclusion about Edward II's death came out of left field).


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 378 comments Her theory about Edward II is indeed "out of left field," that's for sure. (I read Queen Isabella last year.)


message 11: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) Wasn't Edward II the one who is reputed to have experienced a very hot enema? Surely Weir does not believe that? Please tell me she is not that credulous. Oy!


Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 378 comments She thinks he became a monk.


message 13: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) I am relieved. I was beginning to think there was no story too fabulous for her to credit. Thank you.


message 14: by Donald (new)

Donald (donroc) | 49 comments Think of the Henry VII and VIII body count of York's and Lancaster's heirs vs. a "measely" two Princes in the Tower. :)


message 15: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) Yes, why do none of the anti-Ricardians never admit to that? All the various persons who might have challenged Richard for the throne lived well and happily during his brief reign. It took the Tudors to make a clean sweep of the remaining possible heirs to Edward IV. Besides, Richard did not even kill the Princes; he was far too merciful for his own good.


message 16: by Sara W (last edited Jan 14, 2009 07:56PM) (new)

Sara W (sarawesq) | 2153 comments Hhmmm, that's a really interesting point Donald. I never thought of it that way. You can totally see the Tudor propaganda wheels spinning - distract people with two lost princes to make the prior guy look bad while you completely wipe out everyone else. Oh, and that poor old woman (can't remember the name - some Duchess or something, mom of that Reginald de la Pole guy) who got hacked so miserably!


message 17: by Ikonopeiston (last edited Jan 15, 2009 04:23AM) (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) If I remember correctly, that was Elizabeth, the Duchess of Suffolk, older sister to Richard and mother to his heir, John de la Pole. The legend was that the headsman had to chase her around after he failed to take a clean blow. And she was not a young woman at that time. One thing of note: the Plantagenets did not kill women; it was left to the Tudors to wipe out both female and very young rivals.


message 18: by Jenna (new)

Jenna | 26 comments I remember having to do lots of research on R3 when I played Lady Anne in the long wooing scene between her and R3 for a Shakespeare class.

I found all the debate around him very interesting, and read many differnet books on him, as well as fiction, such as Josephine Tey.


message 19: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) Jenna, why not join us over at the Richard III group? It would be nice to have a Lady Anne in our little mix. ;)


message 20: by Misfit (new)

Misfit | 696 comments Oh please do. I may be the only person on the planet who is not familiar with the basic outline of Shakespeare's play. Would love to hear about your role as lady Anne.


message 21: by Susan (last edited Jan 18, 2009 05:47PM) (new)

Susan (boswellbaxter) | 96 comments Ikonopeiston wrote: "If I remember correctly, that was Elizabeth, the Duchess of Suffolk, older sister to Richard and mother to his heir, John de la Pole. The legend was that the headsman had to chase her around after..."

Actually, the Duchess of Suffolk died a natural death. The old lady executed by Henry VIII was Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury, who was the daughter of George, Duke of Clarence. She was married to Richard Pole at the arrangement of Henry VII. There's a version of her death stating that she had to be chased around on the scaffold, but there's also a version, which is more consistent with her character, that states that she met a dignified death, albeit at the hands of a clumsy executioner.

It should be noted that she wasn't always treated badly by the Tudors--Henry VII treated her decently, and Henry VIII was the one who made her a countess in her own right. He also appointed her as governess to Mary Tudor. Unfortunately, her relationship with Henry VIII deteriorated when he decided to marry Anne Boleyn, and went downhill from there as Henry VIII's own character deteriorated.

Hazel Bird's biography of Margaret Pole is being reissued this year. (Whoops--that's Hazel Pierce, not Hazel Bird.)


message 22: by Ikonopeiston (new)

Ikonopeiston (Ikon) Thank you for the correction. I get hazy when the light moves off Richard.


back to top