The Mythology of Richard III Quotes

“Unsurprisingly, the earliest written accusation that Richard III stole the throne was penned by the self-styled Earl of Richmond (later Henry VII) in 1484. In a circular seeking support in England, he called for assistance in the ‘furtherance of my rightful claim, due and lineal inheritance of that crown, and for the just depriving of that homicide and unnatural tyrant which now unjustly bears dominion over you’.17 This is the first known instance of any such public assertion of Henry’s alleged ‘rightful claim’ to the crown worn by Richard III, and the first description of Richard in such malicious language.”
― John Ashdown-Hill, The Mythology of Richard III

“Thus, when the documents of 1483 and 1484 refer to Edward IV’s ‘precontract’ with Eleanor Talbot, they definitely mean his contract of marriage (which later became ‘pre-’ due to his bigamy with Elizabeth Woodville). As we have seen, the way in which Richard, Duke of Gloucester, handled the astonishing revelation made by Bishop Stillington was absolutely open and above-board. Nothing was done in secret. Since a formal Parliament had not yet been opened, the evidence was presented to ‘the three estates of the realm’, namely those members of the lords spiritual and temporal and the commons who had already gathered in London to form the projected 1483 Parliament at its planned opening. After considering the evidence, the three estates of the realm set aside Edward V as king on the grounds of his illegitimacy, and offered the throne to the next Prince of the Blood in the legal line of succession, namely Richard, Duke of Gloucester. This was how Gloucester became King Richard III. Moreover, the decision of the three estates was subsequently endorsed by a full Parliament. It is extremely difficult to see how this can possibly be described as a ‘usurpation’.”
― John Ashdown-Hill, The Mythology of Richard III

“The term ‘precontract’ can (and could) only ever be used retrospectively. In other words, one could never make something called a ‘precontract’. The sole possibility was to make a contract – the contract in question being a contract of marriage. It only became possible to refer to such a marriage contract as a ‘pre-contract’ in retrospect, when one of the two contracting partners went on to make a second – and bigamous – contract of marriage. Thus, when the documents of 1483 and 1484 refer to Edward IV’s ‘precontract’ with Eleanor Talbot, they definitely mean his contract of marriage (which later became ‘pre-’ due to his bigamy with Elizabeth Woodville).”
― John Ashdown-Hill, The Mythology of Richard III