Discussion Forums - Historical Fiction

Topic: August Read Along part two

Club rule - Please, if you cannot be courteous and respectful, do not post in this forum.
  Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership.
Subject: August Read Along part two
Date Posted: 7/31/2012 10:26 PM ET
Member Since: 3/14/2009
Posts: 9,174
Back To Top
Date Posted: 8/12/2012 11:07 AM ET
Member Since: 8/17/2009
Posts: 1,588
Back To Top

So ... the author's theory about the Princes.  What do you all think?

Summarizing, Richard got them out of the Kingdom to Aunt Margaret.  Before Elizabeth and the girls even came out of Sanctuary.  And then the Tudor forces manage to give Edward an "accident" and Richard goes on the run in fear for his life.  And presumably, that Perkin Warbeck might have been Richard, although that's left open. 

My reaction: maybe.  I have no doubt they were alive when Elizabeth came out of sanctuary, but no opinion as to whether they'd been moved from the Tower.  And I think that by Bosworth they were outside of Richard's control, whether dead or because he'd sent them out of the country.  (And Margaret is a likely choice for that 

But the added contemplation about "intelligence" overall has increased my opinion as to the odds that the Tudors had opportunity, beyond teaming with Buckingham. 

Oh, one more thought.  The author's take on Hastings is a good one, I think.  Most other books/authors (pro-Richard, that is) go with: Hastings was a traitor and deserved it, but he should have been "tried" before execution.  This one thinks Hastings wasn't guilty, merely "going along with" the attempted recruitment so as to investigate it and expose it. And it was a frame and Richard provoked to act IMMEDIATELY so as to avoid Hastings getting out of the frame.  That makes more sense, I think.

 

 

 



Last Edited on: 8/14/12 9:58 PM ET - Total times edited: 2
Date Posted: 8/14/2012 7:59 PM ET
Member Since: 3/8/2009
Posts: 6,035
Back To Top

Finished it yesterday.  Not knowing anything about the history, I wasn't sure how much of the book, and the bit about the princes in particular, was known fact, how much was the author's theory, and how much was just satire.  So Sharla's post was helpful on that point.  It seems plausible that someone got them out of there.

I think I'd like to read this one again after I've read a couple of more straight-up books about the time period.  Not sure about a favorite one-liner, but one expression caught my eye....she said something about the expression "striking gold" being from the archers.  Am I just clueless or is this usually associated with the California gold rush?  But since the bulls eye is yellow (was the bulls eye yellow in the 14th century??) .....  a tangled web!

Date Posted: 8/17/2012 1:16 PM ET
Member Since: 5/3/2008
Posts: 10,333
Back To Top

By this part of the book, I found that the writing was sounding a bit more serious - and with good cause. So many theories on what happened to the princes - I suppose the scenario put forward here would work as good as any. Unfortunately, life seems to have been so "cheap" in those times that my suspicion is that they were killed in the tower - but not necessarily under the orders of Richard......

Date Posted: 8/17/2012 1:29 PM ET
Member Since: 8/17/2009
Posts: 1,588
Back To Top

I still think that's more likely than not, myself, but not by quite as big a margin as I used to.