Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
"Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"

A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:

"My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
vilification."

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029

I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.

The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
without citing sources.

This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.

~Weds

Oh dear, Wednesday, that doesn't sound very good. I haven't read Hicks either but from what is said here he certainly isn't dispassionate. Have you suggested Paul Murray Kendal?

Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
wednesdaymac . <wednesday.mac@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Mon, Dec 23, 2013 5:27:00 PM

 
Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
"Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"

A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:

"My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
vilification."

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029

I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.

The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
without citing sources.

This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.

~Weds

Jan here. Try David Baldwin. PMK & M Hicks are not neutral.Sent from my iPad On 23 Dec 2013, at 17:35, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
Oh dear, Wednesday, that doesn't sound very good. I haven't read Hicks either but from what is said here he certainly isn't dispassionate. Have you suggested Paul Murray Kendal?

Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
wednesdaymac . <wednesday.mac@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Mon, Dec 23, 2013 5:27:00 PM

Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
"Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"

A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:

"My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
vilification."

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029

I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.

The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
without citing sources.

This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.

~Weds

Wednesday.What is the Straight Dope message board?(I am going to try and see the web page ) Being a newbie I would love somewhere to ask questions(which may have already been discussed) and a formal discussion board(?)sounds like a very good idea.Not being an academic and fairly new to computers it would be helpful to me if there was a good manners for beginners guide as well!x
Kathryn x


--- In , "wednesdaymac ." <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
>
> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
>
> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> vilification."
>
> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
>
> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
>
> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> without citing sources.
>
> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
>
> ~Weds
>

Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
than look at things properly.
Avoid.
Paul

On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
>
> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
>
> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> vilification."
>
> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
>
> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
>
> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> without citing sources.
>
> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Jan here.Try D Baldwin & also C Ross who enjoyed high academic status & wrote a highly rated biog of E4. C Ross is a "traditionalist" but not as acid as Hicks & I think he's worth a read, being more recent than PMK. JAH 's "Last Days" also makes very good points. You will see how they work on different aspects of the king's life & career & then form your own opinion. There is an awful lot to read & there are always the primary sources!Season's greetings. On 24 Dec 2013, at 09:33, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
than look at things properly.
Avoid.
Paul

On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
>
> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
>
> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> vilification."
>
> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
>
> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
>
> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> without citing sources.
>
> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--
Richard Liveth Yet!

I have asked my daughter to buy me the C Ross for Christmas, Jan. I hope to enjoy it, but probably not as much as the Kendal, which I loved. JAH was the starting point for me, even though I did read it first on a flight across the Atlantic!
I tend to trust JAH's opinion because he is such a careful researcher, and as far as finding Richard is concerned has proved to be right.
Merry Christmas to you all,
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Tue, Dec 24, 2013 11:02:39 AM

 
Jan here.Try D Baldwin & also C Ross who enjoyed high academic status & wrote a highly rated biog of E4.  C Ross is a "traditionalist" but not as acid as Hicks & I think he's worth a read, being more recent than PMK. JAH 's "Last Days" also makes very good points. You will see how they work on different aspects of the king's life & career & then form your own opinion.  There is an awful lot to read & there are always the primary sources!Season's greetings.On 24 Dec 2013, at 09:33, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
 
Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
than look at things properly.
Avoid.
Paul

On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
>
> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
>
> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> vilification."
>
> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
>
> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
>
> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> without citing sources.
>
> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Too true Paul, I would go so far as to say for some reason he seems to hate our Richard, bit like Weir, as if Richard had done something personally to them.
Loyaulte me Lie.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
> He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
> than look at things properly.
> Avoid.
> Paul
>
> On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> > Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> > "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
> >
> > A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
> >
> > "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> > this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> > the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> > vilification."
> >
> > http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
> >
> > I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> > haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
> >
> > The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> > with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> > without citing sources.
> >
> > This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> > subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

Ye, they do behave as if it were personal Hicks and Weir.
I would recommend Annette Carson's The Maligned King to everyone,
remembering that when she began working on her Richard book she was
neutral. The facts, and her humanity in interpreting them, opened her
eyes to the truth, and made her a strong supporter of Richard's.
Paul



On 24/12/2013 12:24, christineholmes651@... wrote:
> Too true Paul, I would go so far as to say for some reason he seems to hate our Richard, bit like Weir, as if Richard had done something personally to them.
> Loyaulte me Lie.
> Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
>> He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
>> than look at things properly.
>> Avoid.
>> Paul
>>
>> On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
>>> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
>>> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
>>>
>>> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
>>>
>>> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
>>> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
>>> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
>>> vilification."
>>>
>>> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
>>>
>>> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
>>> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
>>>
>>> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
>>> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
>>> without citing sources.
>>>
>>> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
>>> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
>>>
>>> ~Weds
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Richard Liveth Yet!
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Yes Paul, I would recommend Annette's book to all especially newcomers to Richard, also her book Richard III, A Small Guide to the Great Debate which sets out the facts concisely.
Loyaulte me Lie
Christine

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Ye, they do behave as if it were personal Hicks and Weir.
> I would recommend Annette Carson's The Maligned King to everyone,
> remembering that when she began working on her Richard book she was
> neutral. The facts, and her humanity in interpreting them, opened her
> eyes to the truth, and made her a strong supporter of Richard's.
> Paul
>
>
>
> On 24/12/2013 12:24, christineholmes651@... wrote:
> > Too true Paul, I would go so far as to say for some reason he seems to hate our Richard, bit like Weir, as if Richard had done something personally to them.
> > Loyaulte me Lie.
> > Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >> Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
> >> He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
> >> than look at things properly.
> >> Avoid.
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> >>> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> >>> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
> >>>
> >>> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
> >>>
> >>> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> >>> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> >>> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> >>> vilification."
> >>>
> >>> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
> >>>
> >>> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> >>> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
> >>>
> >>> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> >>> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> >>> without citing sources.
> >>>
> >>> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> >>> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
> >>>
> >>> ~Weds
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Richard Liveth Yet!
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

Jan here. Annette Carson's book is excellent & I just lent her Small Guide to a friend. The thing is, there are lots of things to read & ponder. On 24 Dec 2013, at 12:57, "christineholmes651@..." <christineholmes651@...> wrote:


Yes Paul, I would recommend Annette's book to all especially newcomers to Richard, also her book Richard III, A Small Guide to the Great Debate which sets out the facts concisely.
Loyaulte me Lie
Christine

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Ye, they do behave as if it were personal Hicks and Weir.
> I would recommend Annette Carson's The Maligned King to everyone,
> remembering that when she began working on her Richard book she was
> neutral. The facts, and her humanity in interpreting them, opened her
> eyes to the truth, and made her a strong supporter of Richard's.
> Paul
>
>
>
> On 24/12/2013 12:24, christineholmes651@... wrote:
> > Too true Paul, I would go so far as to say for some reason he seems to hate our Richard, bit like Weir, as if Richard had done something personally to them.
> > Loyaulte me Lie.
> > Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >> Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
> >> He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
> >> than look at things properly.
> >> Avoid.
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> >>> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> >>> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
> >>>
> >>> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
> >>>
> >>> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> >>> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> >>> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> >>> vilification."
> >>>
> >>> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
> >>>
> >>> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> >>> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
> >>>
> >>> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> >>> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> >>> without citing sources.
> >>>
> >>> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> >>> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
> >>>
> >>> ~Weds
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Richard Liveth Yet!
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

I read JAH first then Annette Carson's Maligned King, but my sympathies had already been stirred by the Channel 4 documentary. I think perhaps Annette's concise guide would have been better to have read first as a complete newcomer to this period of history.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Tue, Dec 24, 2013 1:40:10 PM

 
Jan here. Annette Carson's book is excellent & I just lent her Small Guide to a friend. The thing is, there are lots of things to read & ponder.On 24 Dec 2013, at 12:57, "christineholmes651@..." <christineholmes651@...> wrote:
 


Yes Paul, I would recommend Annette's book to all especially newcomers to Richard, also her book Richard III, A Small Guide to the Great Debate which sets out the facts concisely.
Loyaulte me Lie
Christine

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Ye, they do behave as if it were personal Hicks and Weir.
> I would recommend Annette Carson's The Maligned King to everyone,
> remembering that when she began working on her Richard book she was
> neutral. The facts, and her humanity in interpreting them, opened her
> eyes to the truth, and made her a strong supporter of Richard's.
> Paul
>
>
>
> On 24/12/2013 12:24, christineholmes651@... wrote:
> > Too true Paul, I would go so far as to say for some reason he seems to hate our Richard, bit like Weir, as if Richard had done something personally to them.
> > Loyaulte me Lie.
> > Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to All
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >> Hicks is as dispassionate about Richard as Thatcher was about Soviet Russia!
> >> He is blinkered and makes or invents facts to fit his theories rather
> >> than look at things properly.
> >> Avoid.
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On 23/12/2013 17:27, wednesdaymac . wrote:
> >>> Over on the Straight Dope message board, someone is asking:
> >>> "Please suggest a dispassionate bio of Richard III"
> >>>
> >>> A "Ms Boods" is recommending Michael Hicks, saying:
> >>>
> >>> "My head of department is considered a leading authority on R3, and in
> >>> this biography he re-examines contemporary sources to get past both
> >>> the adoration the Ricardians bestow on the king as well as the
> >>> vilification."
> >>>
> >>> http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=711029
> >>>
> >>> I've done what I can, which isn't much. I don't know Mr. Hicks,
> >>> haven't read his work. Know only what's been said of him here.
> >>>
> >>> The discussion has moved on, with the usual Machiavellian suggestions,
> >>> with one poster saying many current scholars think H7 did it, but
> >>> without citing sources.
> >>>
> >>> This is why I wish there was a formal discussion board organized into
> >>> subject sections to answer newbies when they come a-calling.
> >>>
> >>> ~Weds
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Richard Liveth Yet!
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

Jan wrote:"Try D Baldwin & also C Ross who enjoyed high academic status & wrote a highly rated biog of E4. C Ross is a "traditionalist" but not as acid as Hicks & I think he's worth a read, being more recent than PMK. JAH 's "Last Days" also makes very good points. You will see how they work on different aspects of the king's life & career & then form your own opinion. There is an awful lot to read & there are always the primary sources!Season's greetings."Carol responds:Hicks was, I believe, a pupil of Ross, who is not nearly as objective as he pretends to be. Anyone who reads those books should read Annette Carson's "Richard III: The Maligned King" and John Ashdown-Hill's "Last Days of Richard III" as an antidote. PMK's "Richard III," though dated, is also essential reading. "Objective" biographies of Richard inevitably end up saying, in essence, "He wasn't the monster of Tudor propaganda but a man of his times who almost certainly ordered the murder of his nephew." The only way to get a neutral or objective picture is to balance the moderate traditionalist approach of Hicks with the moderate revisionist approach of Carson et al. and form your own tentative conclusions (or keep your mind open). It's essential to be familiar with Mancini and the Croyland Chronicle, the combined basis for the moderate traditionalist view (know thine enemy), and with Titulus Regius, Richard's claim to the crown, and his legislation. If possible, find primary sources, such as the Harleian manuscripts and York records. What hope we have to discover the truth lies there, not in secondary sources. Nevertheless, the secondary sources will give you an idea of the various positions and arguments--and of the game of telephone that Marie mentioned: the same statements endlessly repeated as fact though they started out as speculation (or propaganda). Annette's most recent little book, "Richard III: A Small Guide to the Great Debate" is very useful for beginners. The original poster might want to start there.Carol

Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.Mary

Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?Happy New Year!Sent from my iPad On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:
Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.Mary

HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM

 
Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?Happy New Year!Sent from my iPadOn 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:
 
Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.Mary

The same to all.....must be midnight or more in Britain. It is just after 6:00 in Texas.
Happy 2014...

On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:19 PM, "Jessie Skinner" <janjovian@...> wrote:


HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;

To: <>;

Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

Sent: Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM



Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
Happy New Year!

Sent from my iPad

On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:


Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
Mary

A very happy New year when it gets to you! Midnight here and fireworks everywhere.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Wed, Jan 1, 2014 12:20:54 AM

 

The same to all.....must be midnight or more in Britain. It is just after 6:00 in Texas. 
Happy 2014...

On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:19 PM, "Jessie Skinner" <janjovian@...> wrote:

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;

To: <>;

Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

Sent: Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM


 

Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
Happy New Year!

Sent from my iPad

On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:

 

Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
Mary

A very happy New year when it gets to you! Midnight here and fireworks everywhere.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Wed, Jan 1, 2014 12:20:54 AM

 

The same to all.....must be midnight or more in Britain. It is just after 6:00 in Texas. 
Happy 2014...

On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:19 PM, "Jessie Skinner" <janjovian@...> wrote:

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;

To: <>;

Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

Sent: Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM


 

Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
Happy New Year!

Sent from my iPad

On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:

 

Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
Mary

Jan ...I'm coming to the end if it now,,,will get back to you as I do have a couple of comments to make...in the meantime.....DO not buy...get it from a library if you must read it...Hope this helps...Eileen
--- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
> Happy New Year!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:
> >
> > Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
> >
> > Mary
> >
> >
>

Not a ringing endorsement then, Eileen.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Wed, Jan 1, 2014 11:50:49 AM

 

Jan ...I'm coming to the end if it now,,,will get back to you as I do have a couple of comments to make...in the meantime.....DO not buy...get it from a library if you must read it...Hope this helps...Eileen
--- In , Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...> wrote:
>
> Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
> Happy New Year!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:
> >
> > Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
> >
> > Mary
> >
> >
>

On the whole this book is so boring I begun to lose the will to live...however only the last two chapters left which hopefully will cover the period of the disappearance of the boys.
Onwards and upwards...:0/ Eileen
--- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
>
> Not a ringing endorsement then, Eileen.
>
> Jess
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>

A tad late but happy new year indeed to all of you and let's hope Richard is laid to rest with appropriate pomp and ceremony at last.
Liz From: Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> To: "<>" <> Sent: Wednesday, 1 January 2014, 0:30 Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

A very happy New year when it gets to you! Midnight here and fireworks everywhere.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:
Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
Sent:
Wed, Jan 1, 2014 12:20:54 AM

The same to all.....must be midnight or more in Britain. It is just after 6:00 in Texas.
Happy 2014...

On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:19 PM, "Jessie Skinner" <janjovian@...> wrote:

HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;

To: <>;

Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??

Sent: Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM


Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
Happy New Year!

Sent from my iPad

On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:

Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
Mary

Here,here, Liz and a very happy new year to you as well.
Kathryn

--- In , liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...> wrote:
>
> A tad late but happy new year indeed to all of you and let's hope Richard is laid to rest with appropriate pomp and ceremony at last.
>  
>  
> Liz
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...>
> To: "<>" <>
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 January 2014, 0:30
> Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A very happy New year when it gets to you! Midnight here and fireworks everywhere.
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pamela Bain <pbain@...>;
> To: <>;
> Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
> Sent: Wed, Jan 1, 2014 12:20:54 AM
>
>
>  
> The same to all.....must be midnight or more in Britain. It is just after 6:00 in Texas. 
> Happy 2014...
>
> On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:19 PM, "Jessie Skinner" <janjovian@...> wrote:
>
>
>  
> >HAPPY NEW YEAR, Ricardians!
> >Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> > From: Jan Mulrenan <janmulrenan@...>;
> >To: <>;
> >Subject: Re: Michael Hicks, Dispassionate biographer??
> >Sent: Tue, Dec 31, 2013 11:37:27 PM
> >
> >
> > 
> >Jan here. Has anyone read Hicks' "Edward V" & found anything of interest in it?
> >Happy New Year!
> >
> >Sent from my iPad
> >
> >On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:08, <maryfriend@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 
> >>Agree Paul. The best invention was in Richard III, the Man and The Myth. He says " there was no Woodville plot " that, coupled with the secondary sources that he used, made me give up on it and donate it to a charity shop.
> >>Mary
>