Richard III (The English Monarchs Series) by Charles Ross

Author:Charles Ross [Ross, Charles]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
ISBN: 9780300079791
Publisher: Yale University Press
Published: 2011-05-27T16:00:00+00:00

1 Winston S. Churchill, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, I (1956), 383–4.

2 Elizabeth Jenkins, The Princes in the Tower (1978), a sober account, summing up against Richard III; Audrey Williamson, The Mystery of the Princes (1978), a fanatical and often purblind defence of Richard III; Jack Lezlau, ‘Did the Sons of Edward IV outlive Henry VII?’, The Ricardian, iv (1978), 2–14 (based upon sup posed ‘hidden messages’ in the paintings of Holbein the Younger), and other articles in The Ricardian (under similar titles), v (1979), 55–60, 24–7; Nigel Balchin, ‘Richard III’, British History Illustrated, i (no. 4, Oct. 1974). These are only some recent examples. For fresh air, see the healthy scepticism of Charles T. Wood, ‘Who Killed the Little Princes in the Tower?’, Harvard Magazine (January–February 1978), 35–40.

3 To quote only a selection of recent professional opinions deciding against Richard III: V. H. H. Green, The Later Plantagenets (1955), 361; E. F. Jacob, The Fifteenth Century (1961), 623–5; G. A. Holmes, The Later Middle Ages, 1272–1485 (1962), 225; A. R. Myers, ‘Character of Richard III’, 123–5, and his article on Richard III in Encyclopaedia Britannica (1964 edn); S. B. Chrimes, in History, xlviii (1963), 23, and in Lancastrians, Yorkists and Henry VII (1964); B. Wilkinson, Constitutional History of England in the Fifteenth Century (1964), 165; J. R. Lander, The Wars of the Roses (1965), 246–7, and in Government and Community: England 1450–1509 (1980), 318–19; M. M. Keen, England in the Late Middle Ages (1973), 485.

4 The walled-up room theory was accepted as plausible by S. B. Chrimes (History, xlviii, 1963), partly because it fits with the suggestion made by the contemporary French chronicler, Molinet, as to the manner in which the princes met their death. There is, however, no evidence that the fifteenth century practised this particular form of cruelty. The report of the discovery is contained in an appendix to Tanner and Wright’s article: see following note. On the whole question of the bones, see Appendix I.

5 L. E. Tanner and W. Wright, ‘Recent Investigations regarding the Fate of the Princes in the Tower’, Archaeologia, lxxxiv (1934), 1–26.

6 See Appendix I.

7 (Edward II): T. F. Tout, ‘The Captivity and Death of Edward of Carnarvon’, Collected Papers, III (1920), 145–90; M. McKisack, The Fourteenth Century, 94; (Thomas duke of Gloucester): A. Steel, Richard II, 238–9, and the articles there cited; (Richard II): Steel, op. cit., 238–9; J. L. Kirby, Henry IV of England, 94–5; (Humphrey duke of Gloucester): B. Wilkinson, Constitutional History of England in the Fifteenth Century, 24–8 (as with 1483, foreign writers, who could speak more freely; are unanimous in saying the duke had been murdered); (Henry VI and Clarence): Gairdner, Richard III, 16–19; Kendall, 451–2; Ross, Edward IV, 175–6, 241–5.

8 GC, 234; Mancini, 92–3.

9 Above, pp. xli–xlvi.

10 Even in the Great Chronicle, the marginal notes, ‘Innocents’, and ‘Death of the Innocents’, were written in the hand of the chronicler who wrote the portion ending in 1496 (GC, 234, 236, and intro. xxii).

11 Mancini (Armstrong’s introduction), 22–3.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.