(no subject)

[lareinenoire]

I really hope the Bod gets a copy of Michael Hicks' Anne Neville: Queen to Richard III because I am growing less and less inclined to purchase it, and I really need to read it.

Not that I'm looking forward to that. I had some spare time so I started flipping through it in Borders today and he succeeded in annoying me within about twenty pages by referring to Richard III as a paedophile because he married Anne Neville when she was fifteen.

If he's a paedophile, what does that make Edmund Tudor? He married Margaret Beaufort when she was twelve and she gave birth to Henry Tudor at thirteen. Not to mention the fact that Anne had already been married once before. Does that make Edward of Lancaster a paedophile too? Oy.

Seriously. This was normal. I'm not saying it was a good thing -- it probably wasn't -- but it was what people did.

I appreciate that *someone* is taking the time to write something about Anne Neville. It's about time someone did. That being said, maybe we could stop with the crazy conspiracy theories and weird statements that make no sense in context?

Comments

[lareinenoire.livejournal.com]

I know a lot of people in English mediæval history regard her as not much better than a historical novelist

Not to mention treating her own opinions like they're gospel. I'm not especially fond of her, as you can probably tell.

I had actually planned to ask if anyone on plantagenesta had read Hicks' book. I believe I shall.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

Good idea. I liked his original Richard book, but I do wonder what's going on with this one...