Horace Walpole expressed a specific historical interpretation of Richard III

Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17411.html.images

Great Britain -- History -- Richard III, 1483-1485; Great Britain -- Kings and rulers -- Biography -- Early works to 1800; Richard III, King of England, 1452-1485 -- Early works to 1800 The Project Gutenberg eBook of Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third, by Horace Walpole HISTORIC DOUBTS OF THE LIFE AND REIGN OF KING RICHARD THE THIRD. by MR. HORACE WALPOLE. L'histoire n'est fondee que sur le tomoignage des Auteurs qui nous l'ont transmisse. Il importe donc extremement, pour la scavoir, de bien connoitre quels etoient ces Auteurs. If I do not flatter myself, I have unravelled a considerable part of that dark period. Whether satisfactory or not, my readers must decide. Nor is it of any importance whether I have or not. The attempt was mere matter of curiosity and speculation. If any man, as idle as myself, should take the trouble to review and canvass my arguments I am ready to yield so indifferent a point to better reasons. Should declamation alone be used to contradict me, I shall not think I am less in the right. Nov. 28th, 1767. HISTORIC DOUBTS ON THE LIFE AND REIGN OF KING RICHARD III. Whoever can believe that a butt of wine was the engine of his death, may believe that Richard helped him into it, and kept him down till he was suffocated. But the strong evidence on which Richard must be acquitted, and indeed even of having contributed to his death, was the testimony of Edward himself. The change of government in the rehearsal is not effected more easily by the physician and gentleman usher, "Do you take this, and I'll seize t'other chair." (10) This is confirmed by the chronicle of Croyland, p. 566. In what manner Richard assumed or was invested with the protectorate does not appear. or, if ignorant, where is his competence as an historian? And how egregiously absurd is his romance of Richard's assuming the crown inconsequence of Dr. Shaw's sermon and Buckingham's harangue, to neither of which he pretends the people assented! Dr. And though the partizans of the Stuarts may exult at my comparing king William to Richard the Third, it wil be no matter of triumph, since it appears that Richard's cause was as good as King William's, and that in both instances it was a free election. The art used by Sir Thomas More (when he could not deny a pre-contract) in endeavouring to shift that objection on Elizabeth Lucy, a married woman, contrary to the specific words of the act of parliament, betrays the badness of the Lancastrian cause, which would make us doubt or wonder at the consent of the nobility in giving way to the act for bastardizing the children of Edward the Fourth. That very act was sufficient to point out what Richard desired to, and did, it seems, transact so covertly. (22) It appears from the Foedera that Brakenbury was appointed Constable of the Tower July 7th; that he surrendered his patent March 9th of the following year, and had one more ample granted to him. But though Richard's son did not walk at his father's coronation, Edward the Fifth probably did, and this is my third proof. I conceive all the astonishment of my readers at this assertion, and yet it is founded on strongly presumptive evidence. I have insinuated that it is not impossible but Henry the Seventh might find him alive in the Tower.(33) I mention that as a bare possibility—but we may be very sure that if he did find Edward alive there, he would not have notified his existence, to acquit Richard and hazard his own crown. Buck says that the queen was in a languishing condition, and that the physicians declared she could not hold out till April; and he affirms having seen in the earl of Arundel's library a letter written in passionate strains of love for her uncle by Elizabeth to the duke of Norfolk, in which she expressed doubts that the month of April would never arrive. What is there in this account that looks like poison; Does it not prove that Richard would not hasten the death of his queen? The tales of poisoning for a time certain are now exploded; nor is it in nature to believe that the princess could be impatient to marry him, if she knew or thought he had murdered her brothers. Of the issue of Clarence, whom she had contributed to have put to death, or in favour of an impostor? There is not common sense in the supposition. No; she certainly knew or believed that Richard, her second son, had escaped and was living, and was glad to overturn the usurper without risking her child. Perkin Warbeck was not heard of before 1495, when duke Richard would have been Twenty-one. Margaret of York, duchess dowager of Burgundy, and sister of Edward the Fourth, is said by lord Bacon to have been the Juno who persecuted the pious Aeneas, Henry, and set up this phantom against him. Richard, who was slender and not tall, had one shoulder a little higher than the other: a defect, by the magnifying glasses, of party, by distance of time, and by the amplification of tradition, easily swelled to shocking deformity; for falsehood itself generally pays so much respect to truth as to make it the basis of its superstructures. I have two reasons for believing Richard was not well made about the shoulders. Among the drawings which I purchased at Vertue's sale was one of Richard and his queen, of which nothing is expressed but the out-lines. The lives and actions of our monarchs, and the great events of their reigns, seemed to the author to deserve little place in a history of England. The lives of Henry the Sixth and Edward the Fourth, though the author lived under both, take up but two pages in octavo, and that of Richard the Third, three. That the ambition of the queen, who attempted to usurp the government, contrary to the then established custom of the realm, gave the first provocation to Richard and the princes of the blood to assert their rights; and that Richard was solicited by the duke of Buckingham to vindicate those rights.

Wikisource: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Edward V.. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclopædia_Britannica/Edward_V.

Both these views, however, have been traversed by James Gairdner, and there seems little doubt that Sir Thomas More’s story is substantially correct. See Richard III.; and in addition, Sir Thomas More, History of Richard III., edited by J. R. Lumby (Cambridge, 1883); Horace Walpole, Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of Richard III. (London, 1768); J. Gairdner, Richard III. (Cambridge, 1898); J. Gairdner and C. R. Markham in the English Historical Review, vol. vi. (London, 1891); Sir C. R. Markham, Richard III. (1907). In June 1471 he was created prince of Wales. When Edward IV. died in April 1483 a struggle for power took place between the young king’s paternal uncle, Richard, duke of Gloucester, who had been appointed as his guardian by Edward IV., and his maternal uncle, Richard Woodville, Earl Rivers. Gloucester obtained possession of the king’s person, and, having arrested Rivers and some of his supporters, assumed the crown himself after a very slight and feigned reluctance, on the ground that the marriage of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville was invalid, and consequently its issue was illegitimate. At this time Edward and his brother Richard, duke of York, were living in the Tower of London. Shortly afterwards a movement was organized to free them from captivity, and then it became known that they were already dead; but, though it was the general conviction that they had been murdered, it was twenty years before the manner of this deed was discovered. According to the narrative of Sir Thomas More, Sir Robert Brackenbury, the constable of the Tower, refused to obey Richard’s command to put the young princes to death; but he complied with a warrant ordering him to give up his keys for one night to Sir James Tyrell, who had arranged for the assassination. Two men, Miles Forest and John Dighton, then smothered the youths under pillows while they were asleep. The murder was committed most probably in August or September 1483. Horace Walpole has attempted to cast doubts upon the murder of the princes, and Sir C. R. Markham has argued that the deed was committed by order of Henry VII. Both these views, however, have been traversed by James Gairdner, and there seems little doubt that Sir Thomas More’s story is substantially correct. See Richard III. ; and in addition, Sir Thomas More, History of Richard III. , edited by J. R. Lumby (Cambridge, 1883); Horace Walpole, Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of Richard III. (London, 1768); J. Gairdner, Richard III. (Cambridge, 1898); J. Gairdner and C. R. Markham in the English Historical Review , vol. vi. (London, 1891); Sir C. R. Markham, Richard III. (1907).   Retrieved from " https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=1911_Encyclopædia_Britannica/Edward_V.&oldid=12057822 " Category : EB1911:People:Individuals:Europe:Britain:Royalty Hidden categories: Subpages Headers applying DefaultSort key Search Search 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Edward V. Add languages Add topic

Integrity and Historical Research. 2012. https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=B8CoAgAAQBAJ&source=gbs_api

... Richard III has suffered at the hands of many writers. Josephine Tey, in The Daughter of Time, provides evidence of ... Horace Walpole wrote his Historic Doubts and rattled the cages of the traditionalists. That debate is not yet ... There have been serious debates between historians, novelists and filmmakers as to how best present historical narratives. When writers and filmmakers talk of using historical research with integrity, what exactly do they mean? Integrity and Historical Research examines this question in detail. The first chapter discusses the concept of integrity. The chapters that follow reflect on this philosophical treatment in the light of fiction and film that deals with history in a number of ways. How should writers and filmmakers use lives? Can, and may, people who are now dead and who may have lived long ago, be defamed? The authors include academics, historians, social historians, medievalists, oral historians, literary theorists, historical novelists and script writers. They examine the theoreti Integrity and Historical Research by Tony Gibbons, Emily Sutherland - Books on Google Play Integrity and Historical Research Tony Gibbons · Emily Sutherland Mar 2012 · Routledge Ebook 220 Pages family_home Eligible info Rp 1.195.424 Rp 956.336 Buy Free sample Add to wishlist There have been serious debates between historians, novelists and filmmakers as to how best present historical narratives. When writers and filmmakers talk of using historical research with integrity, what exactly do they mean? Integrity and Historical Research examines this question in detail. The first chapter discusses the concept of integrity. The chapters that follow reflect on this philosophical treatment in the light of fiction and film that deals with history in a number of ways. How should writers and filmmakers use lives? Can, and may, people who are now dead and who may have lived long ago, be defamed? The authors include academics, historians, social historians, medievalists, oral historians, literary theorists, historical novelists and script writers. They examine the theoretical influences and practical choices that involve and concern writers and filmmakers who rely on historical research. The desire to be accurate may often conflict with the need to produce a work that goes beyond the mere depiction of events in order to excite the interest of readers and to hold that interest. At the same time there is a developing emphasis on historians, to write well in clear, accessible prose, which may involve using the novelists’ techniques. How much license may be given to writers of fiction and filmmakers in their depiction of historical characters and events? This book begins to answer this question, while inviting further discussion. There have been serious debates between historians, novelists and filmmakers as to how best present historical narratives. When writers and filmmakers talk of using historical research with integrity, what exactly do they mean? Integrity and Historical Research examines this question in detail. T... See more about this book History Tony Gibbons gained his LL.B. at the University of Adelaide, his Masters at Manchester University and his PhD at Flinders University. At present he is Adjunct Senior Lecturer at the University of South Australia. He is the author of On Reflection (2004), Reflection, Science and the Virtues (2009), co-editor of The Process of Research in Education (2009), and a number of papers in the field of philosophy. Emily Sutherland is Research Fellow at Flinders University, South Australia, where she completed her PhD, and taught in the Department of Humanities. Her special research focus is historical novels, and, in particular, the depiction of historical characters in works of fiction. She is also a published novelist and poet. Her latest novel is The Paraclete Conundrum (2010) depicting an imaginary meeting between Heloise, Hildegard of Bingen and Eleanor of Aquitaine. Tony Gibbons gained his LL.B. at the University of Adelaide, his Masters at Manchester University and his PhD at Flinders University. At present he is Adjunct Senior Lecturer at the University of South Australia.