|
"History is bunk." But If we don't understand the past we can't understand the present. |
This is a page for links. Those who are interested in the history of Richard III and the Princes in the Tower have a great deal of material to choose from, I only touch on a fraction of it here.
The works of Sir Thomas More and Sir George Buck are amongst the first in point of time and are referred to, with links, in The Necromancer. Those links are repeated here. Before giving them again I would just like to make a simple but important point:
It is possible to so cram your head with facts that true Awareness and Choice are excluded.
It isn't just that once you know a thing is true it is very difficult to know that thing is untrue, this simple inhibition to learning accounts for a great deal of error and delusion on any subject; much worse, facts are the building blocks of understanding, if you accept too many facts from other people you will find the reality built up around you belongs to others, not yourself.
You see, facts can never be True. They are real, and they contain aspects of Truth, but they never give a completely accurate picture in any ultimate sense. Not only are facts partial and incomplete, but by selecting facts which support each other it is possible to create a world-view which is misleading and ultimately toxic. Sadly, this is something all humans do, even you and I. That is not to say there is any validity in the lies about Richard III and the Princes. If you are going to construct a valid deception, based on facts, the facts must agree with each other without contradiction. If you achieve this, the reality you make may be unpleasant and unhelpful but it will stand up. The popular picture of Richard III and the Princes is full of contradictions and the assertion of demonstrable untruths: as such it cannot stand up as reality and should have been blown away even before it caused England to turn against Richard.
That Tudor lies were not blown away is testimony that other forces have been at work; it is not evidence of the validity or skilfulness of Tudor story telling in constructing a reality.
The truth is, I am offended that such a shoddy, dishonest and incompetent job of framing reality should have deceived human understanding for so long and, even more, I am frightened that humanity has so easily departed from reality into a delusion created out of self-seeking lies, treason, dishonour and, frankly, madness.
My greatest concern is that contradictions eventually stress a story to destruction. The speed of change in our modern world is such that we can already see the breakdown of major systems, in government, commerce and society, which have grown out of the Tudor period, caused by contradictions at least partly traceable to the Great Tudor Lie.
My immediate concern is that so much 'history' writing has accepted or honoured the lie that any student may stand in danger of being washed away by the sheer volume of it.
I therefore enjoin you, step carefully amongst the facts, discard opinion and assertion as most likely untrue, use your own good sense and judgement. Create your own understanding of reality, and let no-one else do it for you.
So then, the links:
The History of King Richard the Thirde... by Sir Thomas More
Whether this was written by Sir Thomas More or, as some think, by John Morton, either way, it must be understood as Tudor propaganda. There is the added danger of More's irony and 'cleverness.' For all of that, this book must be the starting point for any serious student: http://www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/r3.html
The History of the life and reigne of Richard the Third, by Sir George Buck
By way of contrast this book was written after the end of the Tudor despotism by a man whose sympathies lay more with York than Tudor. Nevertheless, Buck held office under Elizabeth I, he went on to be 'Master of the Revels' and had access to then secret and now lost papers. It must be said the quality of the Google PDF is poor, but if you want a better copy it may be expensive:
http://books.google.co.uk/books/download/The_history_of_the_life_and_reigne_of_Ri.pdf?id=ZiFEAAAAcAAJ&hl=en&capid=AFLRE70NJBaJv5ft2WQ1Yq18ncjHcPc_MyUB19S2N8G5SDlww8SzJngqysuotouGkM4RJ_9MRyQoVkMC2jGUjsOOP4muv7kn4w&continue=http://books.google.co.uk/books/download/The_history_of_the_life_and_reigne_of_Ri.pdf%3Fid%3DZiFEAAAAcAAJ%26output%3Dpdf%26hl%3Den
Anglica Historia, by Polydore Vergil
Try this link for a review of Vergil's work. Aside from the errors, this is more Tudor propaganda, in this case official. Polydore Vergil is nevertheless often regarded as the first English historian: http://www.r3.org/bookcase/polydore.html
Various materials
A number of comments should be made on materials accessible through the following link, let me just make two: first the Croyland Chronicle was written with at least one eye on the approval of the lord of the manor of Crowland - Margaret Beaufort, second, the Titulus Regius closely followed Buckingham’s speech, referred to in The Necromancer. Still, for convenient access to a number of materials concerning Richard III in general and the Princes in particular it's worth trying the Richard III Society: http://www.r3.org/bookcase/index.html
Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third, by Horace Walpole
For many people this was the first challenge to the Shakespearian version of Richard III. As such its place in History is assured, you can download it on this link:
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17411
Richard III: His Life & Character Reviewed in the light of recent research, by Clements E. Markham
Sir Clements wrote in the 1890s, he remains a major modern authority. I will not offer others since there are already quite enough here to make a start. As we come further up to date we enter into copyright, competition and fashion. After this let you make up your mind what is useful and what not; first the link to Sir Clements:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/36451/36451-h/36451-h.htm
Bones in the Tower: A Discussion of Time, Place and Circumstance, by Helen Maurer
Concerning the bones discovered at the Tower, and referred to in the Necromancer, there is no final 'proof' and a number of claims have been inaccurately stated or are simply wrong. Nevertheless, here is an attempt to consider the evidence: http://www.richardiii.net/PDFS/maurer_bones_part2.pdf
Again apologies these links are only a fraction of what has been written. Nevertheless, if you peruse them, you may conclude the simplest answer to the mystery of the Princes in the Tower and the story of Richard III is contained in the pages of 'The Necromancer.'
The works of Sir Thomas More and Sir George Buck are amongst the first in point of time and are referred to, with links, in The Necromancer. Those links are repeated here. Before giving them again I would just like to make a simple but important point:
It is possible to so cram your head with facts that true Awareness and Choice are excluded.
It isn't just that once you know a thing is true it is very difficult to know that thing is untrue, this simple inhibition to learning accounts for a great deal of error and delusion on any subject; much worse, facts are the building blocks of understanding, if you accept too many facts from other people you will find the reality built up around you belongs to others, not yourself.
You see, facts can never be True. They are real, and they contain aspects of Truth, but they never give a completely accurate picture in any ultimate sense. Not only are facts partial and incomplete, but by selecting facts which support each other it is possible to create a world-view which is misleading and ultimately toxic. Sadly, this is something all humans do, even you and I. That is not to say there is any validity in the lies about Richard III and the Princes. If you are going to construct a valid deception, based on facts, the facts must agree with each other without contradiction. If you achieve this, the reality you make may be unpleasant and unhelpful but it will stand up. The popular picture of Richard III and the Princes is full of contradictions and the assertion of demonstrable untruths: as such it cannot stand up as reality and should have been blown away even before it caused England to turn against Richard.
That Tudor lies were not blown away is testimony that other forces have been at work; it is not evidence of the validity or skilfulness of Tudor story telling in constructing a reality.
The truth is, I am offended that such a shoddy, dishonest and incompetent job of framing reality should have deceived human understanding for so long and, even more, I am frightened that humanity has so easily departed from reality into a delusion created out of self-seeking lies, treason, dishonour and, frankly, madness.
My greatest concern is that contradictions eventually stress a story to destruction. The speed of change in our modern world is such that we can already see the breakdown of major systems, in government, commerce and society, which have grown out of the Tudor period, caused by contradictions at least partly traceable to the Great Tudor Lie.
My immediate concern is that so much 'history' writing has accepted or honoured the lie that any student may stand in danger of being washed away by the sheer volume of it.
I therefore enjoin you, step carefully amongst the facts, discard opinion and assertion as most likely untrue, use your own good sense and judgement. Create your own understanding of reality, and let no-one else do it for you.
So then, the links:
The History of King Richard the Thirde... by Sir Thomas More
Whether this was written by Sir Thomas More or, as some think, by John Morton, either way, it must be understood as Tudor propaganda. There is the added danger of More's irony and 'cleverness.' For all of that, this book must be the starting point for any serious student: http://www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/r3.html
The History of the life and reigne of Richard the Third, by Sir George Buck
By way of contrast this book was written after the end of the Tudor despotism by a man whose sympathies lay more with York than Tudor. Nevertheless, Buck held office under Elizabeth I, he went on to be 'Master of the Revels' and had access to then secret and now lost papers. It must be said the quality of the Google PDF is poor, but if you want a better copy it may be expensive:
http://books.google.co.uk/books/download/The_history_of_the_life_and_reigne_of_Ri.pdf?id=ZiFEAAAAcAAJ&hl=en&capid=AFLRE70NJBaJv5ft2WQ1Yq18ncjHcPc_MyUB19S2N8G5SDlww8SzJngqysuotouGkM4RJ_9MRyQoVkMC2jGUjsOOP4muv7kn4w&continue=http://books.google.co.uk/books/download/The_history_of_the_life_and_reigne_of_Ri.pdf%3Fid%3DZiFEAAAAcAAJ%26output%3Dpdf%26hl%3Den
Anglica Historia, by Polydore Vergil
Try this link for a review of Vergil's work. Aside from the errors, this is more Tudor propaganda, in this case official. Polydore Vergil is nevertheless often regarded as the first English historian: http://www.r3.org/bookcase/polydore.html
Various materials
A number of comments should be made on materials accessible through the following link, let me just make two: first the Croyland Chronicle was written with at least one eye on the approval of the lord of the manor of Crowland - Margaret Beaufort, second, the Titulus Regius closely followed Buckingham’s speech, referred to in The Necromancer. Still, for convenient access to a number of materials concerning Richard III in general and the Princes in particular it's worth trying the Richard III Society: http://www.r3.org/bookcase/index.html
Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third, by Horace Walpole
For many people this was the first challenge to the Shakespearian version of Richard III. As such its place in History is assured, you can download it on this link:
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17411
Richard III: His Life & Character Reviewed in the light of recent research, by Clements E. Markham
Sir Clements wrote in the 1890s, he remains a major modern authority. I will not offer others since there are already quite enough here to make a start. As we come further up to date we enter into copyright, competition and fashion. After this let you make up your mind what is useful and what not; first the link to Sir Clements:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/36451/36451-h/36451-h.htm
Bones in the Tower: A Discussion of Time, Place and Circumstance, by Helen Maurer
Concerning the bones discovered at the Tower, and referred to in the Necromancer, there is no final 'proof' and a number of claims have been inaccurately stated or are simply wrong. Nevertheless, here is an attempt to consider the evidence: http://www.richardiii.net/PDFS/maurer_bones_part2.pdf
Again apologies these links are only a fraction of what has been written. Nevertheless, if you peruse them, you may conclude the simplest answer to the mystery of the Princes in the Tower and the story of Richard III is contained in the pages of 'The Necromancer.'