"Portrait of an Unknown Woman"

Finished reading this book a week ago and really enjoyed it and yes,
there is a Richardian undertow. Some of you will be pleased to know
that the sainted Sir Thomas Moore is painted a bit darker than usual;
if you want to cross-reference to non-fiction, then pick up the
biography "Hans Holbein: Portrait of an Unknown Man" by Derek Wilson
who goes into the hidden meanings of objects contained in Holbein's
paintings, especially the odd man in the Moore family portrait.
The author, Vanora Bennett, is also quite willing to respond to e-mail
and sites "The Ricardian" as one of the sources for information on
Richard III and the Plantagenets in the section at the end of the book
where additional readings are suggested.

"Meek"

I hope you don't mind the late response, but I just finished reading
the book. I enjoyed it. It's certainly a fast read.

Of course, the princes-in-the-tower theory is imaginative if
incredulous. But I have trouble with accepting the portrayal of the
characters, John Clement and Meg Gibbs. Gibbs seems too modernized and
Clement much too unassuming and accepting to have been a "hothead" in
his youth.

What do others think?

--- In , "L. Miller"
<pvtmeek@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Finished reading this book a week ago and really enjoyed it and yes,
> there is a Richardian undertow. Some of you will be pleased to know
> that the sainted Sir Thomas Moore is painted a bit darker than usual;
> if you want to cross-reference to non-fiction, then pick up the
> biography "Hans Holbein: Portrait of an Unknown Man" by Derek Wilson
> who goes into the hidden meanings of objects contained in Holbein's
> paintings, especially the odd man in the Moore family portrait.
> The author, Vanora Bennett, is also quite willing to respond to e-mail
> and sites "The Ricardian" as one of the sources for information on
> Richard III and the Plantagenets in the section at the end of the book
> where additional readings are suggested.
>
> "Meek"
>