A Suggestion, why don't we provide and extremely thorough and detail
A Suggestion, why don't we provide and extremely thorough and detail
2012-10-23 13:33:35
A suggestion whose time may have come: why don't we provide and publish an extremely thorough and detailed annotated version of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Richard III. Finally settling issues like was Thomas More's History of Richard the Third, actually Lancastrian Cardinal Morton's History of Richard III. What does the contemporary manuscript
from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
Re: A Suggestion, why don't we provide and extremely thorough and de
2012-10-24 19:04:45
Good idea. Carry on!
PS: actually the best in the genre is Gardner's "The Annotated Alice", although any brother of Mycroft's can't be TOO bad I admit...
:p
--- In , "bkohatl" <bkohatl@...> wrote:
>
> A suggestion whose time may have come: why don't we provide and publish an extremely thorough and detailed annotated version of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Richard III. Finally settling issues like was Thomas More's History of Richard the Third, actually Lancastrian Cardinal Morton's History of Richard III. What does the contemporary manuscript
> from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
> Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
>
> Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
> One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
>
PS: actually the best in the genre is Gardner's "The Annotated Alice", although any brother of Mycroft's can't be TOO bad I admit...
:p
--- In , "bkohatl" <bkohatl@...> wrote:
>
> A suggestion whose time may have come: why don't we provide and publish an extremely thorough and detailed annotated version of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Richard III. Finally settling issues like was Thomas More's History of Richard the Third, actually Lancastrian Cardinal Morton's History of Richard III. What does the contemporary manuscript
> from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
> Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
>
> Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
> One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
>
Re: A Suggestion, why don't we provide and extremely thorough and de
2012-10-25 02:18:12
Slightly off topic, but I have to insert here: if you are a fan of Mycroft's brother and Baring Gould's annotated, please take a look at the updated annotated edited by Leslie Klinger. Great stuff!
Margie
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 24, 2012, at 11:04 AM, "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
> Good idea. Carry on!
>
> PS: actually the best in the genre is Gardner's "The Annotated Alice", although any brother of Mycroft's can't be TOO bad I admit...
>
> :p
>
> --- In , "bkohatl" <bkohatl@...> wrote:
> >
> > A suggestion whose time may have come: why don't we provide and publish an extremely thorough and detailed annotated version of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Richard III. Finally settling issues like was Thomas More's History of Richard the Third, actually Lancastrian Cardinal Morton's History of Richard III. What does the contemporary manuscript
> > from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
> > Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
> >
> > Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
> > One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
> >
>
>
Margie
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 24, 2012, at 11:04 AM, "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
> Good idea. Carry on!
>
> PS: actually the best in the genre is Gardner's "The Annotated Alice", although any brother of Mycroft's can't be TOO bad I admit...
>
> :p
>
> --- In , "bkohatl" <bkohatl@...> wrote:
> >
> > A suggestion whose time may have come: why don't we provide and publish an extremely thorough and detailed annotated version of Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Richard III. Finally settling issues like was Thomas More's History of Richard the Third, actually Lancastrian Cardinal Morton's History of Richard III. What does the contemporary manuscript
> > from the Ashmolean Museum mean when it says that Edward V was murdeered "be the vise" of the Duke of Buckingham. A thorough explanation of every possible reason why Henry Tudor did not prosecute Sir James Tyrell until 1501. And a complete expose of the character and behavior of Lord Stanley and Sir William Stanley. Certainly their whole life story, does not fit their popular heroic portrayal at Bosworth. If they receieved rewards for their actions at Bosworth, were these offered before or after the battle?
> > Since Shakespeare is the main source for most people's opinion of King Richard III, this is where writing the complete story begins. A detailede annotated version seems only logical, to me.
> >
> > Detailed notes on what everyone was doing when Edward IV died, then "minute by minute" accounts of their actions afterwards. There has never been enough context, generally available, for Richard's actions. Once you read what contemporaries said of Richard and then compare it to what Tudor Historians wrote, people will realize that something isn't right.
> > One of my favorite books is William Baring Gould's The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. To me, it is the best thing which ever happened to Sherlock Holmes. Richard deserves as much.
> >
>
>
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.