Little did I guess when I was able to concentrate on history full-time what a minefield I was walking into and none more so than when Richard III is concerned. Thanks goodness my late husband was an Army man so I know all about logistics getting from A-B as safely as it is possible to do so though even he might blench at some of the landmines I’ve encountered.
Add to logistics logic particularly when finds oneself confronted with an epidemic of all those dogs who for some reason or other failed to bark in the night. If there’s one thing that really annoys me it is to discover time and again that this or that historian has failed to question anomalies and contradictions and this particular period of history is full of them.
I am neither pro nor anti Richard III but for months now whether I’ve been reading up in the British Library or elsewhere the same question continually nags me. ‘What am I reading, historical facts or propaganda dressed up as historical facts or a personal take on the historical facts?’ And I have encountered some lulus about personal takes, both biased and prejudiced.
So time to get objective rather than objectionable.
