Richard III Society, Inc. Volume XXI No. 4 Winter, 1996

Shepard, othe State of Indiana; Chief Justice Rehnquist;

Honorable William H. Rehnquist,Chief Justice of the United States

Professor Susan Williams,Indiana Univ. School of Law, Bloomington

October 27, 1996, Mock Trial of Richard Ill,Indiana Univ. School of Law, Bloomington

III: NOT GUILTY!

R E G I S T E R S T A F F

EDITOR: M. Rike4702 Dryades St. New Orleans, LA 70115 (504) 897-9673

FAX (504) e-mail:

REA DING EDITOR: Myrna SmithRt. 1 Box 232B . Hooks, ‘I-X 75561

(903) 547-6609 FAX: (903) 547-6866

ARTIST: Susan Dexter1510 Delaware Avenue New Castle, PA 16105 -2674

E X E C U T I V E B O A R D

Dr. Compton ReevesDept. of History Bentley Hall

Ohio University Athens, OH 45701-2979e-mail:

VICE CHAIRMAN: Laura Blanchard2041 Christian St. Philadelphia, PA 19146 (215 985-1445

FAX (215) 985-1446 E-Mail:lblanchard@aol.com

Judith A. 1248 Regent St. . Alameda, CA 94501 (510) 421-0487

TREASURER : Peggy Allen1421 Metairie, LA 70005 (504) 837-0974

Carole M. Rike 0. Box 13786 New Orleans, LA 70185-3786 ! (504) 827-0161

FAX (504)

IMMEDIATE Roxane C. Murph3501 Medina Avenue Fort Worth, TX 76133 (817) 923-5056

CH A I R M E N

Jeffrey &Toni CollinsP. 0. Box 344 Douglassville, PA (610) 385-3119

COORDINATOR: Cheryl6033 Sam Smith Road Birchwood, TN 37308 ! (423) 961-2515

Fax: (423) 961-2519 e-mail: CIS:

LIBRARIAN : Audio/Visual: Yvonne Saddler2603 Madison Street ! Seattle, WA 98112 (206) 328-2407

Advertise in The Ricardian Register

LIBR A RIAN: Fiction: 2215 Westmoreland Falls Church, VA 22043 !

LIBRARIAN: Research &Non-Fiction: Helen Maurer24001 Lane ! Mission CA 92691 ! (714) 768-0417

LIBRARIES COORDINATOR: Melinda K. KnowltonP. 0. Box 10 ! Chauncey, OH e-mail:

D. Michalove309 Gregory 810 Wright St. Urbana, IL (217) 333-4145

e-mail:

Your ad in the Register will reach an audience ofdemonstrated mail buyers and prime prospects for booksrelating to the late medieval era, as well as for gift itemsand other merchandise relating to this period. They arealso prospects for lodging, tours and other servicesrelated to travel in England on on the continent.Classified advertising rates for one-time insertions:

Full Page: $100Half Page: $50

Page: $25

For annual rates, pay for only 10 months. copy withyour remittance payable to Richard III Society, P. 0.Box 13786, New Orleans, La 70185.

P UBLIC R ELATIONS O F F I C E R: V a c a n t Copy Deadlines:

SALES O F F I C E R: John 7726 53rd Place Gainesville, FL 32608 e-mail:

FE L L O W SH I P: Laura2041 Christian St. . Philadelphia, PA 19146 !

FAX (215) 985-1446.

SCH OOLS C OORDINATOR: Anne Vineyard4014 Broken Bow Lane Garland, TX 75044

TOUR COORDINATOR: Dale Summers218 Varsity Circle Arlington, TX 76013 . (817) 274-0052

199 7 Society, Inc., American Branch. No partnay be reproduced or in any form or by any

mechanical, electrical recording or storage retrieval- without

Society. Articles submitted by members remain of author. The Ricardian Register ispublished

times per year. Subscriptions are at $18.00

The Richard III Society is a non-profit, educational D u e s , grants and contributions are

to the extent allowed by law.

Dues are $30 annually for U.S. Addresses; $35 fornternational. Each additional family member is $5.Members of American Society are also of:he English Society. Members also receive the English

All Society publications and items for salenay be purchased either direct at the U.K.

or via U.S. Society when available. Papers may borrowed from the English Librarian, but books arc sent overseas. When a U.S. Member visits the U.K.,

meetings, expeditions and other activities arc open, the AGM, U.S. Members are welcome

to cast a vote.

SpringSummerFallWinter

February 25May 25

August 25November 25

Society Internet address:

Changes of address and dues payments to.

P. 0. Box 13786 ! New Orleans, LA

Winter, 996 Ricardian Register

D. Schechter of Springfield, IL e-mailed that she andher husband travelled in November to London and theCotswalds “had a great time but was tremendouslydisappointed when we found that Crosby Place had beensold to a wealthy London financier who is adding on! Heis building a style residence which willincorporate Crosby Hall.” The workmen quizzed by theSchecters relayed that the owner intends to maintain theHall as a museum, which will be open to the public. Theyfurther confided that the new owner, unnamed, paidthrough the nose for the place and is spending a lot ofmoney to make sure the house he is building is asauthentic as possible. Fellow Ricardians travelling inLondon may wish to check out what is going on at theirnext opportunity. If so, please keep the rest of ushomebodies updated.

Joan wrote from Sun City, Arizona, to advise:“On October 2, the local oldies but goodies radio stationhere announced at the beginning of the birthday list thatthis was the natal day of Richard III of England, now notgenerally held to be the monster Shakespeare hadpainted, but thought (perhaps) to be a good king!”

Word from England is that Chairman ofthe English Society for many years, has died; we hope tohave more information on this for the next issue. Patrickwas a very special person.

Continuing thanks to all those who contribute and keepthe Register in print: Myrna Smith, Laura Blanchard,and feature contributors such as Jeanne Faubell in thecurrent issue. We need all of your help and input!

Daphne was a college student of Paul MurrayKendall, who was a contributor to her interest in Richard III.

A member of the New England Society, she wasartistic in many different areas, drawing, sewingand refinishing furniture. After she was taken ill,according to Mary Donermeyer, she attended afew meetings and was coping bravely with theeffects.

Your editor spoke to her when we were preparingthe issue of the Register which featured PaulMurray Kendall. Daphne agreed to share herexperiences of her college professor, b,ut askedthat we wait until she was in better health, as shehas just experienced a relapse of the cancer whichresulted in her death.

Our sympathies to her family and the NewEngland Chapter.

Richard III: Not Guilty

Mock Trial of Richard HI, JeanneThe Little Known History of Shakespeare in Philadelphia, Michael Ryan

Scenes from 1996 Philadelphia Annual General Meeting

Site Traffic Triples, LauraRicardian Reading, Myrna SmithRicardian PostSchallek Scholar Report, SharonBudget Committe Reports, AGMMinutes, AGM

Looking for Richard, SummersChapter Contacts

46

12

171921

252629333436

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

October 2 Press Release

RICHARD III GUI L T Y"

A three-judge panel chaired by the Honorable WilliamH. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States, todayfound King Richard III not guilty of the murder of hisnephews, the famous “Princes in the Tower.”

The Trial of Richard III took place before an over-flow crowd as part of the Chief Justice of the UnitedStates’ four-day visit to the Indiana UniversitySchool of Law, Bloomington. The trial featured ap-pellate-style briefs and arguments by students andgraduates of the Law School.

The case for the prosecution was argued by promi-nent Washington attorney James F. Fitzpatrick.Fitzpatrick, a partner at Arnold Porter and agraduate of the IU Law School, has representedmany noteworthy clients including the chairs of theHouse Judiciary and Energy and Commerce Com-mittees, the Commissioner of Baseball, former Sena-tor Robert and former White HouseCounsel Bernard Nussbaum. Fitzpatrick was joinedby Paige Porter, a third-year law student and a mem-ber of last year’s winning student moot court team.

The prosecution argued that the evidence of con-temporary writers, the accounts of Thomas More andWilliam Shakespeare, the known facts concerningthe character of Richard III and forensic evidenceconcerning the two sets of bones found in the Towerin the constituted, in the words ofFitzpatrick’s opening statement to the Court, the“pieces of a mosaic” which show that Richard III tookthe lives of his nephews in order to secure his hold onthe crown.

Richard III was represented by John Walda, also agraduate of the Law School, a partner in the FortWayne, Indiana law firm of Barrett andPresident of the Indiana University Board of Trus-tees. He was joined by Dennis Long, a third-year lawstudent and a retired Colonel in the United StatesArmy.

The defense sought to cast doubt on the prosecu-tion’s evidence and to show that others, such asHenry VII who killed Richard III on Bosworth field,had a better motive and opportunity to commit thecrime. Walda noted that the case took place in theeyes of “500 years of pretrial publicity” and he arguedthat “relying on William Shakespeare’s plays as to anyelement of the state’s case is a little like relying onOlive&one’s movie to prove the Kennedy assassina-tion. At least Stone was there,” Walda said.

Delivering his opinion at the conclusion of themock trial, Chief Justice William Rehnquist found

Honorable William H.Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the

United States.

that there was too much “ambiguity as to when themurders took place” to convict Richard III. “There isa sufficient lapse of time even the evi-dence most favorable to the State as to put it beyondthe time when Richard III was in control of thingsand into the time when Henry VII was in control ofthings,” the Chief Justice said.

The Chief Justice also found that the “contempo-rary accounts, which tend to incriminate RichardIII, “are not worth much in a trial of this sort because

they are not made with first-hand knowledge;they are kind of rumor on rumor

The Chief Justice of the United States was joinedin his opinion by Professor Susan Hoffman Wil-liams, a member of the Law School’s faculty.

The Chief Justice and Professor Williams notedthe high burden of proof the prosecution faced, undercontemporary criminal law, of having to prove theircase “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Even modify thatstandard to “beyond a reasonable historical doubt,”however, the majority found that the prosecution hadnot proved its case.

“If you had to choose between Richard and theDuke of Buckingham and Henry VII as potentialculprits in the case, we would pick Richard,” theChief Justice said, “but,” he continued, “it is just notenough in a case like this to say that the person ismore likely to have done it than two others Thatdoes not meet the beyond a reasonable doubt test.And so for that reason the Court by a majority votefinds for the respondent, Richard III.”

Winter, Register

The Court’s decision was not unanimous. Thethird member of the three-judge panel, the Honor-able Randall T. Shepard, Chief Justice of the State ofIndiana, found that “as a matter of historical judg-ment,” many of the contemporary writers had “accessto actual participants in the drama of the time.” ChiefJustice Shepard also noted that “the defense has had500 years to evidence, actual evidence, as opposedto speculation, that somebody other than Richard IIIwas responsible for these deaths and by and largethere isn’t any.”

As a result, Chief Justice Shepard said, this “leadsme to the conclusion that he is guilty, guilty, guilty.”

Introducing the trial, Dean Alfred C. Jr.said that “The Law School is sponsoring this mootnot only because of its historical significance, but alsobecause of the lawyering skills that it demonstrates.”

Speaking at the conclusion of the trial, the ChiefJustice of the United States said, “I speak for all of uswhen I say that we thought not only the briefs wereoutstanding, but that the arguments are also out-standing.

The close verdict suggests that “The Trial of Rich-ard III” will not be the chapter in the debateconcerning the fates of the Princes in the Tower, asJustice Williams noted in her concurrence with theChief Justice’s opinion. “For me,” Justice Williamssaid, “the most salient fact is not Richard’s guilt orinnocence, but the sense that history is always in themaking, that it is in fact a constant work in progress.”

The continuing interest in this enduring mysterywas reflected in the considerable press attention giventhe moot court. “The Trial of Richard III” was carriedlive on public television station WTIU and is beingbroadcast on C-SPAN.

Editor’s Note:

The University plans to publish thee briefs, the theeJustices’ opinions, andperhaps some materialas a

press or even popular press book.

The Law School has posted versions of thearguments on Internet. You can it at

Included is a version of the audio files needed toplay the recording on your own computer.

And don’t forget to watch for re-runs of thebroadcast.

T HE

B O U G H T

As many Ricardians may already know, it took amassive fund-raising effort to keep The MiddlehamJewel, the late fifteenth-century amulet found nearMiddleham Castle, in England after it was purchasedby a private collector reputed to be an American.American Ricardians dug into their pockets in 1 9 9 1and contributed more than $1,000 to help keep theJewel in England.

It may give comfort to know that “the American”is Canadian millionaire David Thomson, son of LordThomson of Fleet. His latest purchase is ThomasBecket’s casket. So far, he has been unable to obtainan export license.

To keep the Middleham Jewel in England, it waspurchased from Thomson, who paid El.4 million atauction for the object, for the sum million. Itis speculated that he hopes to make a similar profitfrom Becket’s casket. It’s nice, though, to know thatthis medieval greedhead is not from the U.S.

Look whocame to the

Philadelphia

Safes John Gainesville FL, hasvolunteered to fill this important position. He has of the inventory and the rest will be shipped to himonce he has moved pursue a second as a gradstudent in medieval studies.

Fiction Librarian. Miller is moving (again) andwill not have space house the library. Happily, JeanneFaubell (Falls Church, VA) will assume this position inearly 1997. As a trained librarian, Faubell is sure tocatalog that library within an inch of its life.

Audio- Visual Library. Sandra Giesbrecht found itdifficult to ship effectively from Canada to the U.S.;Yvonne Saddler (Seattle, Washington) has offered to beher replacement. Like Faubell, Saddler is also a trainedlibrarian.

Register Winter, 996

Form and Substance of the in Support or In Opposition to, the “Indictment”of Richard the Murder of “Princes in the Tower”

OF R ICHARD I I I

he “mock trial” of Richard III held on October27, 1996 at the Indiana School of Law before

Chief Justice of the United States William H.Rehnquist constituted an engaging mixture of his-torical controversy and legal analysis demonstrat-ing, in the words of “Justice” Susan HoffmanWilliams, that “history is always in the tha tit is in fact a constant work in progress. Thepurpose of this article is to elucidate the form inwhich the “mock trial” appears to have taken place,the relevant “law”, and the application of the his-torical facts (such as they are understood to be) tothe law as defined2 in hopes of putting some ofthe language of the briefs into layperson’s terminol-ogy. My discussion is based only on the three docu-ments made available to me by Professor Fred H.Cate of the Indiana School of Law: Post-Trial Brieffor Petitioners, Post-Trial Brief for the Defendant,and the Bench The Justices’ opin-ions, the trial record, and any other ancillary docu-ments have not yet been made available. Therefore,my knowledge of the mock trial is limited to thesethree documents and the Law School press release.

The “Mock Trial” Was Not A TrialIn The Normal Sense

The term “mock trial” is something of a misnomer.The legal exercise in fact took the form of argumentsto a higher court, in this case the Supreme Court ofthe State of Historia, in support of or in opposition toan indictment by a Grand Jury of the State of Historiato which the grand jury was “impanelled” (i.e. answer-able). The indictment accused the defendant RichardIII of “knowingly and intentionally [killing], or [caus-ing] to be killed, Prince Edward (King Edward V),Prince of Wales, and Prince Richard, Duke of York,human A grand jury does not decide theguilt or innocence of the accused (as, for example, inthe O.J. Simpson trial) but instead decides whether acrime has occurred, committed by this person, andwhether there is sufficient evidence under the law tobring the accused to trial before a jury of his peers, orpetit jury, The grand jury accusation is the “indict-ment.“’ The indictment does not require proof of theoffense beyond a reasonable doubt; the subsequentcriminal trial does.

The Indiana Law School event does not resemblethe BBC-TV trial which occurred in the the

Jeanne Trahan

transcript of which is set forth in Drewett’s and Red-head’s 1984 book, The Trial of Richard III,’ althoughboth legal proceedings used a number of the samefactual arguments. In the earlier proceeding the deci-sion as to guilt or innocence was made by a jury ofBritish citizens following a British form of trial. In theIndiana proceeding, arguments were made to a judi-cial panel asking it to give a “decision on the trial

(Petitioner’s Brief at 3) as to the validity ofthe indictment. Thus, the proceeding was not truly atrial nor solely an appellate hearing but was, in thewords of a phrase attorneys love, sui or stand-ing by itself in a peculiar category of its own.

The suigeneris proceeding designed by the IU LawSchool apparently had to meet two goals: first, anappellate type moot court procedure had to occur topermit law students and alumni to practice their oraladvocacy and brief writing skills in a non-jury-trialvenue. Since an appellate court hears argument basedupon a certified lower court record, it is thereforelimited in its independent fact-finding ability andconfined to deciding questions of law. Conversely, toachieve a certain interest level, the facts arising out of(or causing) this historical controversy hadto be brought into play, and therefore the faculty in-vented a way to achieve both goals. The SupremeCourt was given “original jurisdiction”’ in the case byacting as “High Stewards” on behalf of “Parliament”which was stated to have the power to try peers ac-cused by an indictment (Petitioner’s 1). So, ineffect, the Supreme (appellate) Court was acting as atrial court in applying the standard of proof to theindependently examined facts used to secure theoriginal indictment.

Who Are The Parties andWhat Are The Documents?

The parties to the case are identified in the briefs asPetitioners and Defendant. The term “Petitioner”seems odd at first. Petitioners are the prosecutors whorepresent the people of the “State of Historia.” I be-lieve they are called Petitioners because we are toassume they had earlier petitioned the Supreme Courtfor a “writ of certiorari” to bring the indictment beforeit in order to try the Defendant pursuant to the indict-ment, A writ of certiorari is a discretionary order fromthe higher court to the lower body to send up therecord for a determination as to any irregularities. The

Winter, 1996 Ricardian Register

Defendant is obviously Richard III, who throughcounsel must defend himself from the charges con-tained in the indictment.

The briefs for Petitioners and Defendant substan-tially followed the rules for brief form and organiza-tion used by the United States Supreme Court (Rules33 and In part, briefs set forth the applicablestatutes and other governing law, identify the ques-tions of law or fact which the court must examine,and then argue convincingly why the law and thefacts support that party’s position. In our case, theparties’ different Statements of the Case (i.e. factsconsidered material for argument and decision) arequite different in shading, emphasis, and inclusion.How persuasive one party’s “established factual basis”(Defendant’s Brief at 2) is can really affect theCourt’s approach to the case. The Bench Memoran-dum, prepared before argument, “digests the factsand arguments of both sides, highlighting the mat-ters about which [the may want to questioncounsel

indictment is and massive fact Princes view after be assumed throne and were neveragain reported to have been seen alive. This fact is

far more telling any indications have been assembled and it weighs heavily against

ns of his innocence have just beensurveyed.

Summary of Arguments

Readers of the Register would be familiar withmany of the factual assertions, both for and againstRichard’s guilt with respect to the deaths of his neph-ews. Both briefs chronicle the events of Richard’s lifeleading up to events of 1483, with not too muchdifference in characterizations of Richard’s life there-tofore (although there are some historical inaccura-cies, such as the statement in the prosecution brief at5 that Richard received his knightly training at West-minster, where he was surrounded by Woodvilles;“the time Richard spent with [them] kindled filled feelings towards the family that grew ever stronger

Definition of Alleged Crime

The indictment King Richard “didknowingly and intentionally or cause to be killed,Prince Edward and h u m a nbeings. King Richard would be guilty of the offenseof murder on two different levels as defined by thecriminal code of the State of Historia (the “HistorianCode”): actually murdering the Princes himself (firstdegree murder) or by complicity that is, by beingan accomplice. There are two ways in which Richardcould have been an accomplice: first, by the kind ofconduct which would cause an innocent or irrespon-sible person to commit the crime; and second, ifRichard were the accomplice of the actual murdererby soliciting the action, by aiding the person in thecrime’s commission; or by having a legal duty to pre-vent the commission of the offense and failing tomake the effort to do so. In addition, as ably pointedout by defense counsel, element of the offensemust be proved beyond a reasonable doubt Defen-dant argued that there was not sufficient proof that amurder in fact had occurred.

In fact, Richard was raised in the household of hiscousin, the Earl of Warwick.). As with the historicalcontroversy to date, the parties very differently char-acterize the events of April-August 1483, as well asRichard’s motives and actions.

The Court relaxed the burden of proof the prose-cution faced, due to the passage of 500 years, from“beyond a reasonable doubt” to “beyond a historicaldoubt.” To be honest, I doubt that after 500 years, anyburden of proof could be met, since all we have aresecond-hand accounts of rumors and even disagree-ment as to “the facts” related to Richard’s assumptionof the throne. To find him guilty according to amodern standard, one would be forced to borrow thetort law theory of ipsa (“the thing speaksfor itself’). Paul Murray Kendall does this when hestates in Appendix I of his biography:

Prosecution The prosecution uses thecomplicity theory in arguing that Richard is guilty underthe Historian Code (and some additional common lawincorrectly cited because outside of the moot courtconstraints) of ordering and conspiring in planning hisnephews’ deaths, for three reasons: 1) he solicited SirJames Tyrell to commit the murders; 2) he aided in theplanning of the murders; and 3) as King of England andProtector of the young King he had a legal duty toprevent the commission of the crime. Proof is adducedthrough three categories of circumstantial evidence: 1)Richard’s actions April-August, 1483; 2) “contemporaneous

accounts; and 3) Professor Wright’s 1933conclusion that the 1674 bones were those of the Princesand of an appropriate age to indicate death in 1483.However, the prosecution does not state that forensicevidence proves death by murder, but only that “thebones represent the third and tier of evidencecompiled against Richard III” (Petitioner’s Brief at 36).

What was the alleged conduct which “made clear[Richard’s] intent to murder the Princes to preservehis power and authority His seizure of the Prince atStony Stratford and arrest of Rivers and Grey; hisexecution of Lord Hastings who “was beginning toquestion the defendant’s imprisonmentof both Princes in the Tower of London to “allow forsimultaneous destruction of the children,” and thespreading of rumors that both the Princes and Ed-ward IV were illegitimate (obviously, the prosecution

Register Winter, 1996

Mock Trial of Richard III (continued)

assumes that the story of the was though no effort was made to rebut it and that Rich-ard indeed alleged the bastardy of his brother). Aswith Mancini, the Chronicle author, andMore, the prosecution reads backward from the finalresult (Richard’s coronation) to impute evil and ambi-tious motives to Richard from the moment he heardof Edward IV’s death (in fact, the prosecution pur-ports to have been able to read Richard’s mind”). TheProsecution claims:

As evidence indicates, Richard responded to anyattempts to his progress to throne with lies,threats, intimidation, and repeated murders. Thistrail of blood shows Richard’s character, his forpower, and is directly relevant to Court’s decision.

The contemporaneous writers and historians theprosecution relied on are Dominic Mancini, the land Chronicle author (assumed to be John Polydore Vergil, and Thomas More. In addition, refer-ence is made to accusations contained in the GreatChronicle of London, the Divisie chronicle, laume de Rochefort’s accusation in the_ States-Gen-eral, the Fabyan Chronicle and Commines. Theprosecution asserts (p. 21) that value of thisdocumentation is substantial because it effectivelyconveys what English society perceived in 1483 andthereafter.” They further assert (p. 10) that “they pro-vide confirmation and descriptions of the defendant’sknowledge, intent, and involvement Enough hasbeen written on the various inaccuracies or weak-nesses of the various texts to preclude repetition hereof the criticisms covered in part in both the defensebrief and bench memorandum. Suffice it to say thatthe writers (several not contemporaneous) repeat onlywhat people believed may have happened. The Jus-tices found that the contemporary accounts “are notworth much in a trial of this sort because they arenot made with first hand knowledge; they are kind ofrumor on rumor.”

To prove the element of complicity, the prosecutionrelied almost exclusively on Thomas More’s famous(or infamous, depending on one’s viewpoint) accountof the murders of the Princes by Tyrell, Dighton, andForest, with which the reader should be familiar.Richard ordered or enticed Tyrell to do the deed, whothen recruited his accomplices to aid and abet him.Two indications of the account’s accuracy are offered:first, the discovery of a set of bones beneath the stair-well in 1674, and second, that More accurately re-ported the custom of a knight of the body (i.e. Tyrell)lying on a pallet outside the king’s door (a customwhich should have been known to anyone reasonablyconversant with court custom such as More). Fur-

ther, the argument relies heavily on Tyrell’s purportedconfession while awaiting execution in 1502 and theseeming corroboration by Vergil in his less specificaccount.

In sum, the prosecution relied on the cumulativeweight of circumstantial evidence to prove the ele-ments of intent and complicity. Unfortunately, thearguments did not tie the evidence offered as specifi-cally to the statutory elements of the offense of mur-der by complicity as they could have done. Inaddition, other elements such as sole opportunity interms of access to the Tower by Richard and his offi-cers was not covered, although the bench memoran-dum picked up on that point.

The defense brief on the other handfocused on each element required for proving themultiple stages of murder by complicity. Thus,Defendant argued that the prosecution must prove threedifferent charges: first, that a murder occurred, that is,that Dighton in fact killed the Princes; second, thatTyrell was Dighton’s accomplice; and third, that Richardwas Tyrell’s accomplice. Defense further argued thatwhere circumstantial evidence is offered, the prosecutionmust show that the evidence is not consistent with anyother reasonably probable innocent explanation. TheDefense more clearly differentiates between theProsecution’s “direct” and “indirect” evidence: the 1674Tower bones and Tyrell’s purported confession are thedirect evidence. Since the direct evidence fails of proof,then the prosecution case rests solely on discretecircumstantial evidence. In short,

present an array of evidence which is besetwith ambiguity, suggests a wide range of possibleevents, and, in end proves absolutely nothingbeyond a reasonable doubt. skeletonsfound in Tower of London have been discreditedin modern times. Tbepurportedconfession of

is riddled with badges of inconsistency andunreliability. writings of contemporaneouschroniclers report no facts but merely rumor opinion.

People are with no support save knownfacts and circumstances of times. tosupport conviction, because are more consistentwith Defendant’s innocence with his guilt.In end People have only evidence of rumorsand [which] cannot overcome presumption of Defendant’s innocence. 14)

The order of the concise arguments is as follows.Later scientific examination of Professor Tanner’s

forensic examination of the bones render the meaning

Winter, Ricardian Register

of the bones totally ambiguous, not probative, andconsistent with other explanations of their origin including consistency with the possible murder of thePrinces in the reign of Henry VII. There is consider-able doubt that Tyrell made his confession at all, andif made, to doubt that it was reported accurately: “wecan only speculate about whose memories, whoseprejudices, whose motives, and whose honesty stoodbetween the actual event (if it even happened) andMore’s reporting” (p. 20). More’s History is analyzedand heavily criticized for its factual implausibility.Thus, asserts that there is no proof that amurder with Tyrell, Dighton and Richard asaccomplices. And with no confession, there is noevidence that Richard knew in advance of a murder,had the requisite then solicited, aided orfailed to prevent it.

Further indications of Richard’s are thelack of motive due to their disinheritance on the basisof illegitimacy; Elizabeth Woodville’s emergencefrom sanctuary and placement of her daughters inRichard’s care; and the lack of any direct accusationsof Richard by Henry VII.

Even assuming that a murder did in factoccur (the Princes could have died a natural deathafter having been concealed during Richard’s reign),the evidence could point to other guilty parties. I nparticular, the defense examines the possibility ofHenry Tudor’s guilt. Indications would be motivewith the repeal of Titulus Regius, Henry VII’s inex-plicable treatment of Tyrell during his reign (wealth,honors, and pardons) until arrest; and Tudorcontrol of the Tower following 1485. I was very sur-prised that more attention was not given to the pos-s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e D u k e o f B u c k i n g h a m w a sresponsible for the Prince’s alleged murders; I per-sonally think him the strongest candidate. It was thebench memorandum instead which argued the casefor Buckingham’s guilt. I was also surprised by theDefendant’s reliance on Alison Weir’s book T h ePrinces in Tower which takes a strong “traditional-ist” stance on the entire issue.

The Defendant strenuously pleads:

There is little doubt the majority of millions in world wbo know of history of

young Princes believe the Defendant bad them killed.More and have made sto y famous,and witb successors have convinced publicopinion this is so shouldin no way influence of case. Publicopinion can be wrong.

The any deserves to believe him

Ricardian Register

say about him set aside. He deserves to have hisinnocence presumed until People bring forward

a weight of supportable fact applied to eachelement of rational mind canaccept no reasonable explanation but be isguilty. People simply failed in endeavor.

Ruling of The Supreme Court of HistoriaTwo of the three Justices (Rehnquist and Hoff-

man) found King Richard not guilty in the murder ofthe Princes. Delivering his opinion at the conclusionof the mock trial, Chief Justice Rehnquist found thatthere was too much ambiguity as to when the mur-ders took place to convict Richard III, saying there isa sufficient lapse of time even considering the evi-dence most favorable to the State as to put it beyondthe time when Richard III was in control of thingsand into the time when Henry VII was in control ofthings. Contemporary accounts simply reported ru-mor and are not probative. Even under the relaxedstandard of beyond a reasonable historical doubt, theprosecution failed to meet its case.

The two judges did not entirely clear Richard III,however. The verdict was akin to the Scottish verdictof “not proven.” The Chief Justice stated that “if youhad to choose between Richard and the Duke ofBuckingham and Henry VII as potential culprits inthe case we would pick Richard. It is just not enoughin a case like this to say that the person is more likelyto have done it than two others That does notmeet the beyond a reasonable doubt test.” tions are taken from the press release.)

The third Justice, Chief Justice (Indiana) Sheparddeclared Richard “guilty, guilty, guilty.” He concludedthat the historical writers had access to participantsin the events of the time whose beliefs should begiven weight. In addition, in 500 years nothing otherthan speculation points to other possibly guilty par-ties (although, really, nothing more than speculationpoints to Richard’s guilt either).

Conc lus ion

The briefs and memorandum, despite some minorhistorical inaccuracies, were impressive in their graspof the complexities of the historical debate. The ap-plication of legal theory to historical context trulydemonstrated lawyering skills. The continuationof historical debate in a new context reveals the fasci-nation the events of the Protectorate, the mystery ofRichard’s character and motives, and the inthe known or guessed-at facts have had for manypeople, including Ricardians, over the years. Cer-tainly in my case, depending upon which events Iemphasize, or the interpretations I place upon them,or the historians whose judgments I rely on at any

Winter, 996

Mock Trial of Richard III (continued)

given time, my opinion as to Richard’s innocence orguilt veers back and forth. Ricardians can only hopethat events such as these will serve to encourage thegeneral public to reject the popular Shakespeareancharacterization of Richard in favor of a more accu-rate historical conception.

8.

Jeanne a member of the Society, is a 1977graduate of Duke University Law School where she was amoot court participant. A former practicing attorney,

is now a reference librarian at CityRegional Libra Fairfax., Virginia.

2.

3.

4.

include the transcript of the arguments aswell as the record developed, we will not know the

of the record relied upon.

*Moot Court” is an exercise used in law schooleducation to help students learn oral advocacy andpersuasive brief writing skills. At least from myexperience, the proceedings use a self-containedlower court record of fact, pre-defined applicablestatutory and case law, and some agreement as to thequestions of law or fact presented. Briefs must takethe form prescribed by the rules of the relevantappellate court, and the participants, following

Footnotes: submission of the briefs and other ancillary

Press Release, “Chief justice William H. Rehnquist documents, orally argue the case before the “judges.”

Finds King Richard III Not Guilty in the Murder of The attorneys may be peppered by a barrage of

the Princes in the Tower,” October Susan questions designed to further refine the legal and

Hoffman Williams is a Professor of Law at Indiana factual arguments.

University Law School. The other Justices were Original jurisdiction is the power vested in a court toChief Justice of the United States William H. hear the case the first time and to determineRehnquist and Chief Justice of the State of Indiana questions of both law and fact. Law Dictionary.Randall Shepard. A good layman’s explanation of brief content andIn discussing the parties’ factual arguments below, I am organization set out in Supreme Court at Work,assuming a certain degree of familiaritywith the facts Washington, D. C.: Congressional Quarterly, pp.on the part of the reader. 70-71.

Explication of what these documents are and of who Former Justice William Brennan, quoted in Supremethe players are will be given below. Court at Work, supra at page 70.

The case has been brought before the Supreme Court Paul Murray Kendall, Third (New York:of Historia on a “writ of certiorari.” This writ is [an W. W. Norton p. 486.order from the Supreme Court directing that thecase and the lower court record be sent up to it for

The Prosecution incorrectly stated that Hastings’

further argument on certain questions of law or factthree co-conspirators were also executed, unless they

that the court deems important enough for itsmeant to refer to Rivers, Grey and Vaughan.

examination.] T he prosecution brief does refer to the 1484 Titulus

In United States criminal practice, the 5th amendmentRegius as giving official credence to the precontract

to the United States Constitution forbids holding astory, and merely states (p. 18) that “Tudor’s

person for a capital or infamous crime without aparliament reversed Titulus Regius and legitimized

grand jury indictment. Under the Federal Rules ofthe Princes.“m This is a good example of how

Criminal Procedure, an infamous crime is one thatunderstatement can be used to alter the tenor of the

would impose a sentence of imprisonment longerfacts. Henry VII ordered all copies of Titulus Regius

than one year.destroyed unread in addition to its real eventswhich could be argued to support the validity of the

This book can be checked out from the Society’s precontract.Research Library. For example, the prosecution’s brief offers what theIt is unclear from the briefs and bench memorandum defense brief called fictional formulations of whatjust what the trial record consisted of. There appears was in mind five ago (p. 28). Theto have been some testimony (for example, the following passage is the most glaring example:defense brief refers to the testimony of a universitylecturer Jeffrey Michael Richards); in addition it While Richard III traveled North, be recalled twoappears to have included the Chronicle, Sir important lessons be bad English history.Thomas More’s History of Richard III, Polydore First be remembered importance ofgaining control of

history, Kendall’s biography, Alison Weir’s Princes Richard knew of two previous Dukes ofThe Princes in Tower, and perhaps Audrey Gloucester disposed of after nephews reachedWilliamson’s The Mystery of Princes. Until the maturity. . Second, Richard realized importance ofLaw School publishes its forthcoming book, which liquidating thepredecessor wbom one deposes 20)

Winter, 1996 Ricardian Register

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

5.

6.

15.7.

Mock Trial (continued)

16.

17.

The reading backwards of motive, of course, receivedits highest form in Shakespeare’s Richard III andHenry VI, part 3.

The follows the earlier assumption(Richard first made it) that the author wasRichard’s Chancellor John Russell a telling pointagainst Richard if a member of his Council madesome of the accusations contained herein. However,it is now believed that the author of the continuationmay have been the more lowly placed clerical civilservant Dr. Henry Sharp, Protonotary of Chancerynot sitting in Council, whose knowledge of theevents of Richard’s reign was sketchier and morebiased than that of the end of Edward IV’s reign. Heappears to have had a personal hatred for Richard. Infact there is an

decline in quality ofpolitical information,which seemed. a more distant vantagepoint before, and a corresponding decline in the

with wbicb be is writing. it is only duringRichard? reign that be makes actual errors

Nicholas &John Cox, editors, Chronicle Continuations 1459-1486 (London: AlanSutton Pub. p. 82.

In fact, the prosecution brief itself admits an elementof reasonable doubt on this issue when they admit

defendant was an accomplice to these murdersin that he solicited another person, probably SirJames Tyrell . to commit the murders.” (p. 8)

BA C K?

Richard III has returned to Middleham Castle, and he’sbrought a few friends.

A statue of Richard III, jointly funded by TheMiddleham Key Partnership and English Heritage,has been placed in front of the keep. The work ofLinda Thompson from Wath near shows theking standing on a white boar.

Visualizing Richard was a problem for the sculptor.“There are no validated contemporary portraits sur-viving, only later works based on originals and theseshowing only a three quarter view. The portraitswhich do exist are hardly helpful, as the features varyfrom one to another. the existence and extent of hishunchback or the disparity of his shoulders is anotherdebatable point.”

Curled around Richard’s shoulders is the tail of thebasilisk, a mythical beast invoked by Shakespeare’sRichard in Henry VI Part III, and behind him is also ademon representing both Richard’s alleged night-mares the night before Bosworth and the politicaldemons that plagued his accession and reign. “Theyrepresent the twin of legend and imaginationwhich are a vital component of the history of the nowmute and explains Thompson.

English Heritage’s Sue Constantine, says there hadbeen no reminder of Richard for Middleham’s 30,000visitors a year to see. “ T his wonderful sculpture recti-fies that omission. It refuses to take sides in the cen-turies-old dispute, which has seen the king reviled byShakespeare and praised by his supporters. Visitorscan make up their own minds.”

Geoffrey Wheeler, who forwarded this i tem,promises photos at a later date.

RICHARD III AT

Compton Reeves, Sharon Michalove, and Laura Blanchard will be demonstrating the Society’s web site at a sessionat the American Historical Association January 4, 1997.

Titled “Teaching Richard in an Interdisciplinary and Multimedia Context,” it will encourage high school teachers,in particular, to consider Richard III as a topic for a combined literature/history session, drawing on audiovisualand on-line resources as a supplement or substitute for some printed texts.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Michael Ryanof Pennsylvania

hiladelphia is known for many things: historicbuildings and sites; Ben Franklin, Betsy Ross,

and the Liberty Bell; quaint neighborhoods andnarrow, Dickensian streets; the and thePlain Folks; hoagies and cheesesteaks; BookbindersRestaurant and the Philadelphia Orchestra; and theone and only Philly Phanatic to list but a few.But Philadelphia has other trademarks which serveto obscure its interesting but not well known his-tory. Nestled as it is between New York and Wash-ington, Philadelphia h as come to be seen as anAmtrak stop or a place to be from rather than a placeto go to. It is the quintessentially private city inward looking, domestic, content to keep its lightunder a bushel. When Benjamin Franklin left Bos-ton in the early to escape his familyand the claustrophobia of Puritanism, he made abee-line for Philadelphia. It was then the greatmetropolis of the New World, a city of diversity:

Mennoni tes , and Catholics; Germans, Swedes, and even a handful of free Blacks.

Philly was where it was at; the city of opportunityfor the opportunist. Indeed, the century was the city’s high-water mark. By the

it was still important, but increasinglyless so. The canals and the railroads brought thingsand people to the city but they took more out thanthey brought. And America slowly forgot aboutthis, the home of its political birth.

There are many forgotten histories of Philadelphiathat I would love to share with you, but one in particu-lar bears a special relationship to our gathering today:the story of Philadelphia’s role in the history ofShakespeare in America. I appreciate that this is notan obvious connection. In this country, when we asso-ciate Shakespeare with places it is with New York andits theatres, the Folger Shakespeare Library in DC,and perhaps Ashland, Oregon and its annual festival.But Philadelphia? The virtuous folks who foundedPhiladelphia were not ardent theatre-goers. In fact,like many Protestant sects, they were positively hostileto the theatre and its pernicious effects on publicmorals. For them, the stage tended to be “X-rated.” Butover time, laxer souls seized the initiative, and the tre was accepted as a routine part of the rhythms of citylife. There were, after all, worse ways to pass time.

So, I ask you to consider the following. Philadel-phia is probably the only major American city to offer

Director of Collections, of delivered the

address

a statue of the brooding Hamlet in one of its maincivic squares. It was cast by Alexander Sterling Calder,son of the Calder who gave us the giant statue ofWilliam Penn perched atop City Hall. Calder hasgiven us a pensive, soulful Hamlet; lost in thought, heis oblivious to the hustle and bustle of the city aroundhim. An inscription at the base of the statue quotessome familiar lines which seem deliberately mockingin their urban context: “All the world’s a stage/ And allthe men and women merely players.” It is, I suppose,at once an odd and an apt choice for a piece of publicsculpture in Philadelphia: for me it’s an emblem of acity which sees itself as wise and withdrawn, apartfrom the world and wary of its ways.

Hamlet’s presence in our town was the direct resultof Philadelphia’s spectacular celebration of the tercen-tenary of the Bard’s decease in 1916. Never mind thewar in Europe, Philadelphia put on the grandest bashof all, an extraordinary array of exhibits, perform-ances, readings, and lectures not to be found anywhereelse. Chaired by the redoubtable Felix Schelling of theUniversity of Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia Shake-speare Committee organized an extravaganza of Bardevents, planned by a series of committees which in-cluded urban elites, academics, school teachers, clubmen, and city officials. Anyone who was anything wason one committee or another, as the city mobilized itsresources in ways hard to imagine today. FelixSchelling proudly trumpeted the fact that whereasexhibits of Shakespeariana in Boston and New Yorkwere narrow and institutionally based, the Philly show

Winter, 1996 Register

brought together the best in the city and its environs.Here was civic pride manifested in a coming togetherrare in the city’s history. As part of the celebration,the oversight committee announced a fundraisingcampaign to erect an appropriate piece of sculpture inhonor of the Bard. They succeeded and then some.

Or consider that Philadelphia has what must bethe oldest extant Shakespeare Society in the country.Founded in 1852 by a small group of lawyers whocalled themselves the Shakspere (sic) Apostles, theShakspere Society of Philadelphia met regularly afterthe workday to read through the plays of the Bard.When the readings and discussion were finished, thegentlemen (no women, please) indulged in crackersand ale. It was, fittingly, this group which sponsoredthe statue of Hamlet in Logan Square. first learnedof the group’s ongoing life from a member of Penn’sHistory Department whose specialty is ColonialAmerica but whose real passion is Shakespeare. revealed to me one day his membership in this small,elite group, still made up of busy professionals including women all of whom take the Bard astheir avocation.

Philadelphia has a number of Shakespeare “firsts”to its credit. Hamlet and -saw their firstAmerican performances in Philadelphia, and the firstAmerican edition of the Bard’s plays was printed inthis city in 1796. Most important for my remarkstoday, Philadelphia can lay legitimate claim to beingthe birthplace of modern Shakespeare criticism.And, until the twentieth-century, it was the site oflargest collection of Shakespeariana in America. Be-ginning in 1805, Philadelphian Joseph Denniebrought out the “American Shakespeare,” the firstcritical edition of the Bard in the States. Others builton these foundations. Before Henry Clay Folger andHenry Huntington, before the rise of academicShakespeare scholarship, there was a remarkableman: Horace Howard Furness, a Philadelphia lawyerwho turned a disability into an asset and an avocationinto a profession. Educated at Harvard and trained asa lawyer, Furness lost much of his hearing just as heset out to practice law. Thus, he diverted his energiesfrom the bar to the Bard. He single-handedly pro-duced what he baptized the New Variorum Shake-speare. He was referred to by contemporaries as an“American Immortal,” and from about 1876 up to thefirst World War, whenever one mentioned Shake-speare, Furness was often not far behind. Now generallyforgotten, except by specialists in universities, Furnessis someone worth knowing. In his own day he was acelebrity in a way that contemporary scholars can onlyregard with envy and nostalgia. He rode the crest of thelast great wave of popular enthusiasm for Shakespearein this country. Had he lived in New York or Boston oreven Chicago we might still remember him. But he

was a and so suffered the fate of thosewho choose to remain here: oblivion. But allow me tointroduce you briefly to him and to his importancefor Shakespearians everywhere.

Furness was not born in Philadelphia but in Bos-ton. He was the son of William Henry Furness, anoted Unitarian minister who was closely connectedwith Ralph Waldo Emerson and the New EnglandTranscendentalists. In other words, Furness wasraised in the highest cultural traditions of early century America. Each of his brothers and went on to successful careers in the arts and letters,though today we remember only his youngest brotherFrank, the noted architect who trained Louis Sulli-van and whose marvelously quirky buildings still aweand inspire us. The Museum of American Art the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts) is probablyhis best known construction, but the Fine Arts Li-brary at the University of Pennsylvania is also wellworth seeing.

The Unitarians tended to be the intellectuals andartists of the early Republic. When Furness’s fatherrelocated the family in Philadelphia to accept a posi-tion at the main Unitarian Church, he found himselfwith a small but distinguished congregation, whichincluded the artist Thomas Sully, and the actressFanny Kemble. It was through Kemble that youngHorace developed an early passion for Shakespeare.He avidly attended her public readings as a youngman, and the actress even gave private readings in theFurness home. Kemble awakened in Furness not onlyan abiding appreciation of the Bard but also of theimportance of performance in understanding hisplays. To study Shakespeare was to do so via thetheatre and in the company of the great Shakespear-ian interpretors of the day: Edwin Booth, HenryIrving, Ellen Terry, Helena Theodore Martin,Julia Marlowe, E. Sothern, and others includ-ing, of course, Kemble. These were only some of themore important theatrical figures whom Furnesswatched, listened to, and corresponded with for overa period of forty years.

Furness’s beginnings as a scholar were consider-ably more modest. He was elected to the ShakspereSociety of Philadelphia in 1860, and during the dec-ade of the 60’s he began to study Shakespeare inearnest. His auditory impairment ruled out a promis-ing legal career, leaving him a man with time on hishands and a large horn for his left ear. Furness de-cided not to squander the precious gift of misfortuneand so threw himself into his work on Shakespeare.Attendance at the Shakspere Society meetings lefthim and others increasingly frustrated at thecumbersomeness of laying out dozens of volumes ofcriticism to determine t tion grew the idea for a “newvariorum” Shakespeare that would bring together in

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Little-Known of in (continued)

d r e w t o i t s a p p o i n t e d c l o s e . cats accompanied him on his daily

one place the wealth of variant readings and criticismon individual plays. This is one of those massive,quintessentially Victorian projects that stupefy us to-day. Not very exciting; perhaps not even terriblyimaginative. Just important for the establishment of thetext very basic stuff, vital to all editing. Exhaustiveand exhausting, especially in the age before the machine and the computer. Furness did his scholarshipthe old fashioned way: with quill and thousands of bitsof paper. It was indeed, “love’s labor.”

To accomplish this formidable task required morethan energy and tenacity: Furness needed a library.Thus he began building his own collection of Shake-speare, which over time grew to around 12,000 vol-umes the largest such aggregation of its kind todate in America. It included precious rare editions early quartos, all the folios, odd editions

foreign language editions, and the latest in criti-cism from England, the Continent, and North Amer-ica. In addition it had all manner of memorabilia fromthe theatre: playbills, prompt books, costumes, andprops (including a human skull, borrowed whenneeded from an apothecary in Philadelphia near theForrest Theatre). Drawings and photographs of actorsand actresses bedecked the walls of the library. In-deed, in the eyes of contemporaries, the FurnessShakespeare library was a kind of temple to which thelearned and the curious went to worship the Bard.The holiest object in the entire collection was a pair ofgloves reputed to have belonged to the man himself,descending to David Garrick in the andFanny Kemble in the who in turn presentedthem to Furness. While it is unlikely that the glovesbelonged to Shakespeare, the awe in which Furnessand contemporaries held them is hard to recapture fora more skeptical audience today. There is some ironyin the fact that this man of simple Unitarian faithshould have amassed such a treasury of holy objects.The irony was not lost on Philadelphia’s ArchbishopRyan (no relation), who once said to Furness: “I don’tsee what objection you could have to relics, for yourhouse is full of them.”

walks through sunny garden and shaded avenue,marching before him witb tail erect, rubbing

condescendingly against his legs, orpausing, with plaintive paw upraised, to intimatethat stroll has lasted enough. Warrior cats, towhom wasgrantedtbe boon death, drank of battle witb on a moonlight and returned in tbe morning toshow their scars to a master who reverenced valor.Siamese cats, theirpale-blue eyes shadowed by desiresthat no one understood, their lonely, troubledlittle hearts to his feet for solace. And all these wisebeasts knew tbat silence reigned in long workinghours. They lent grace of tbeir presence to tbe scholar who loved to his bead,ponderfor a moment over tbe natureof their idleness, and return to his books again.

One suspects that was herself a feline whosaw in Furness the perfect post against which to rubherself in idle comfort. In 1871, Furness brought outthe first fruits of his extraordinary labors: a variorumRomeo He chose this play because it was hisfavorite and because he did not expect to do a orum edition of another play. One can well appreciatethis sentiment when one considers that Furness’s Ro-meo was compiled from editions of the play, all ofwhich were collated for textual variants. Over 100critical works were consulted and cited, includingthose in French and German. Unlike many Shake-speare scholars today, Furness was at home with avariety of foreign and ancient languages. The volumewas generally quite well received among ans in this country and abroad, though what they didwith that enormous body of unsynthesized accumula-tion of variant readings and critical opinions is be-yond me!

Furness began building his collection at his resi-dence on Washington Square West but eventuallytransferred it and his work to his estate at shade in Delaware County, Agnes Repplier, a notedauthor of the time and a close friend of Furness,caught other dimensions of the man’s library. Afterdescribing Furness’s long hours of solitary concentra-tion on his variorum project, she continued:

Romeo was not, after all, his one and onlycontribution to scholarship. Between 1871 and hisdeath in 1912, Furness produced variorum editions ofno fewer than fifteen plays a m o n u m e n t a lachievment for someone working alone. What thesevolumes did was to bring together in short form theavailable totality of Shakespeare scholarship, and thatwas an important and necessary achievment for thegrowth and maturing of Shakespeare cri t icism.Furness became, in effect, the scholar’s scholar, andfor that reason he has earned a prominent place in thehistory of Shakespeare criticism.

tbe inspired sagacity of scholar, be admitted What was he like as a man? Edmund Burke re-to his solitude only scholar’s and marked somewhere that scholarship is not good for

cat. Generations of cats sat blinking at him one: long hours at the desk tended to produce excesswitb affectionate contempt as volume after volume of bile and a foul temper. Scholars are not necessarily

Winter, 996 Register

pleasant people. Happily, Furness did not fit Burke’sgeneralization. By all accounts he was an uncom-monly friendly and welcoming person, with a warmand ironic sense of humor. He was unpretentious andwore his learning lightly. He gave generously of histime and knowledge to actors and other scholars aswell as to the merely curious. Agnes Repplier, knownfor her take-no-hostages approach to human nature,found him “a man of exquisite charity,” who spoke evilof no one. Short and stout, he had a sort of grand-fatherly aura about him, and he was renowned as afine conversationalist. Somehow he escaped un-scathed from the sheer drudgery of his scholarly la-bors and retained a genial and welcoming humanity.

It is important to keep in mind that Furness didnot simply “happen.” Rather, he was part of an infre-quently remarked on cultural renaissance that tookplace in Philadephia during the last third of the century. This was the period that saw the birth of theMuseum of Art and the Free Library, the haunting artof Thomas Eakins, the popular westerns of OwenWister, the exuberrant verse of Walt Whitman (thenliving across the Delaware in neighboring Camden),and the controversial treatments for hysteria adminis-tered by Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, also known for hishistorical novels.

This was the world in which Furness moved, thesewere his colleagues. Philadelphia was a small city inthat sense: the mandarinate knew each other well, saweach other frequently at clubs and social events, andtook pride in sponsoring civic and cultural projects.In retrospect, it seems not unlike the claustrophobicNew York world described so by EdithWharton. While mutual admiration was the unstatedfirst rule of courtesy among this group, they were notabove catty observations. Furness, for example, firstmet Walt Whitman at a dinner in 1879. Here aresome of his impressions:

Last Wednesday our ninefold dinner took place webad a time. Our guests were AtbertonBlight, Forney (wbo was only a vehicle for sake our third Walt Whitman.I sat between two latter. Walt, as be likes to becalled, awed us his large his snowy hair, and his majestic beard, spreading overhis broad chest. He is inclined to be so be may seem upon acquaintance, but what I should say was his moststriking characteristic at is an absence ofhumor. I don’t think be once smiled. We werenot greatly impressed by what be said after hisdeparture Kirk said Walt was like little childrenwho should be seen and not beard.

Furness was not fond of Whitman’s verse either,but in public tried to put the best face on it and so wascareful to say nothing truly critical. He, like the oth-ers, was careful to observe the standards of civility andgentility. I think that it is precisely the “genteel” qual-ity of this group that has relegated it to comparativeobscurity, but this last blooming of culture in d 1 e p certainly deserves more attention than it hasreceived from scholars.

Furness was a public figure of a type now longextinct: the wealthy man of culture who gives as easilyas he got. It was not simply that he served on theboards of many organizations and societies; he was agenuinely public presence. In the last twenty or soyears of his life he gave numerous readings of speare to audiences numbering in excess of 2,000.People clamored to hear this good ing scholar declaim in public. So, in spite of the de-mands on him made by the variorum editions, hesought to satisfy the demands of the public for ap-pearances, readings, and lectures. This was all a part ofthe duty of having knowledge and a little bit of money.Would that the tradition had lasted!

His public role as a “man of the book” probably alsoexplains his close relationship to the University ofPennsylvania. Although he was a Harvard man,Furness developed a close relationship with WilliamPepper, the energetic Provost who transformed Pennfrom a pleasant academy for young elites into a mod-ern research institution by the end of the

Pepper put Furness in charge of the LibraryCommittee, appointed him to recruit Penn’s first librar-ian, and enlisted him into working with his architectbrother Frank on the design of the new library for theUniversity. And, as if that were not enough, he was evenasked to give courses on Shakespeare at the University.

But while Pepper brought Furness within the orbitof the university, it is important to see in Furness thelast of a long tradition of gentlemen scholars whosework was done outside the academy and its traditions.Indeed, the nature of Furness’s project points to thechanged landscape in which he and his colleaguesworked. At a time when academic scholarship andcriticism were rapidly displacing the free-lance effortsof the gentlemen, Furness demonstrated how amateurs themselves could play the academic game.The attempt to “restore” Shakespeare, to get at theur-text, to purify his works of the myriad accretionsand deletions they had endured these were theessentially professional goals which Furness could sharewith academic colleagues. Shakespeare retired frompublic view when he was ushered into the academy, andit is ironic how much Furness and his project contrib-uted to the increasingly academic isolation of the Bard.

The family’s relationship with Penn did not end withthe death of Horace in 1912. Furness’s son Horace Jr.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Little-Known of in (continued)

continued the work of his father on the variorumeditions. Indeed, contemporaries found junior re-markably like his father in terms of appearance, tem-perament, and interests. He inherited the library andthe relics and converted them into a sort of shrine inmemory of his father at his home on Street.But he had neither his father’s acumen or stamina andmade only slow, halting progress through the remain-ing variorums. However, at his death in 1930, it waslearned that the University of Pennsylvania wasnamed beneficiary of the library and of a fund tosupport its maintenance and continued growth. Socame to Penn a large and important body of material,including the books, manuscripts, and artifacts in thelibrary, as well as theatrical memorabilia from the

and Furness’s extensive scrapbooks,working files, and correspondence. Although by 1930,Messers Folger and Huntington had built larger “bigticket” collections of Shakespeare, they did so outsidethe context of universities. The Furness Library, onthe other hand, was by far and away the most exten-sive and important such collection in any Americanuniversity, and it remains so to this day.

Furness senior never tried his hand at editing Rich-ard III. He left that task for his son, who published hisvariorum Richard in 1907. It is not hard to understandwhy. Furness Sr. operated according to the intellectualpleasure principle: he edited those plays he most en-joyed and which had the surest editorial traditionsbehind them. Now, I cannot find any evidence of hishaving a view on the historical Richard III one way orthe other. In other words, I don’t think he shunnedthe text of the play because of the ignominy surround-ing Richard. Rather, of all Shakespeare’s plays it mustsurely be one of the more perplexing to edit. Thus, Ithink the degree of difficulty factor plus his advancedyears counselled him to leave Richard to Junior.

As Ricardians surely know, the problem with theplay for an editor is that there are no fewer than eightsurviving editions spanning the period 1597 1634, each of them different from the other in quitenotable ways. Moreover, the gulf between the 1597

and the 1623 first folio of the play is substan-tial. Controlling and assessing the enormous quantityof variant readings in such a corpus would have been adaunting task even with a computer. Nonetheless,that is precisely what Junior had to do.

However, rather than editing the text, that ischoosing to incorporate one or the other variants inthe text he offers as “definitive,” Junior reproduced thetext from the 1623 first folio, while enumerating vari-ants in long footnotes. This is probably no worse asolution than any other to the vexing textual issuesthat haunt the history of the play. His instincts herewere not bad: the 1597 text “played” better, but the

1623 text was much finer poetry it “read” better.As I can follow its labyrinthine ways, contemporarycriticism thinks well of this intuition: with the twotexts arising out of two different contexts for twodifferent purposes. So, Junior’s variorum Richard re-mains, after all, a useful contribution to the field.

As part of the 1916 celebration of the tercentenaryof Shakespeare’s death, Junior gave a talk at Pennabout the Bard’s history plays. As such things go, itwas not bad. In it, Furness noted the tension betweenhistory and drama, the demands of truth and therequirements of art. He walked his audience throughthe ways in which Shakespeare used and abused thechronicles from which he derived his history plays.His argument was simple and quite cogent: Shake-speare was a poet, not a historian; he did not intend towrite history or to instruct us in the ways of kings andprinces. Rather, he wrote to move us and was notabove sacrificing history in the process. His favoriteexample? Why, Richard III, of course. He concludedhis remarks: “It cannot be too often repeated thatShakespeare did not write history, but he set its pagesbefore us in living form. Richard III for us is no otherthan Shakespeare has presented him. We care not thathe has had apologists or that he is not as black aspainted.” Furness grapsed well the gulf between artand life, art and history. Life may be short and artlong, but history is longer than them all.

I am not sure whether the Furnesses would haveenrolled in the Richard III Society, though I kind ofthink they would. It would be hard to find anotherfamily in America whose dedication to the bard wasas intense and sincere as it was among the Furnesses.It was an enthusiasm they were able to share withothers in Philadelphia in the late 20th cen-turies. They adopted Shakespeare and the cityadopted them but only because the city had alsoadopted the Bard. The Delaware was not the Avon,nor Philadelphia Stratford. But those distinctionsmattered little in this era. Philadelphia had theFurnesses, their library, and their project. It was al-most better than having the Bard himself.

Sources on which the paper is based include:James A. Gibson, The Philadelphia Shakespeare Story.

Horace Howard Furness and Variorum Shakespeare(New York: Press, 1990).

Appreciations of Horace Howard Furness (Cleveland:Privately Printed, 1912).

Shakespeare Tercentenary in Philadelphia(Philadelphia, 1916).

Graham Price, “An Hour at Lindenshade with Dr.Horace Howard Furness.” Sine (June 15,1912).

Winter, 996 Ricardian Register

Ricardians gather in Philadelphia for Annual General Meeting

Toni Collins toasts her fellow Ricardianswhile husband and Park Ranger Jeffrey

Collins welcomes us to Philadelphia with aninformal lecture on sights to see within a

five-minute walk of the hotel.

Chairman Compton Reeves, leftand V.P. Laura Blanchard, right.

Marion Harris and Bonnie Battaglia,Northern California Chapter and newTreasurer, at the AGM in Philadelphia.

Kristen Moosmiller OH) models the latest in

fifteenth-century protectiveheadgear with some help from

Kriner.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Baron HeinrichKreiner (Barony of

the Bright Hills,Kingdom of Atlantia,Society for Creative

Anachronism)crafted the set ofreproduction plate

armor with which heis now armingSoutheastern

Pennsylvania Chaptermember Dave

at the AGMbanquet inPhiladelphia

ReluctantRicardian Roy

caughtenjoyinghimself.

After preparing the AGM flyers andhandling all registration paperwork,Southeastern Pennsylvania chapter

member Nancy Griggs looksremarkably relaxed.

Winter,

Peggy Allen, new Membership Secretary

“This is a poky-sticky...” loseph Kriner deliversa lecture on fifteenth-century weaponry, while

Bob Kriner arms Dave in a set ofreproduction fifteenth-century plate armor.

Janet Snyder, who organizedthe American Branch’sneedlepoint project forSutton Cheney Church.

New Look on Society Web Site Reflects In Focus

S ITE TRAFFIC TRIPLES OF PACINO

When we launched our Society home page in June1995, we envisioned it as a sort of “electronic store-front,” a place where people could come to find basicinformation on the Richard III Society.

Since that time, the purpose of the site has under-gone a considerable change. We are becoming a sig-nificant on-line resource for the study of Richard IIIin history and literature. In addition, at the request ofthe parent society, we have now included informationon membership and programs for the larger society aswell as for our branch. Finally, the development ofimportant new features in web browsers makes it pos-sible to improve the ways in which users could navi-gate around our site.

The result is this new home page. Since about 80%of our content is now on-line resource rather thanSociety information, it seems logical to retitle the site“The Richard III and Yorkist History Server,” a trib-ute to our parent society’s sister charitable organiza-tion, The Richard III and Yorkist History Trust,

Laura

which has sponsored the publication of so many im-portant source works and works of twentieth-centuryscholarship. This home page makes use of the“frames” feature the title bar at the top and thecontents bar on the left remain on the page, while thecontents of the larger frame on the right change as theuser pursues the hypertext links. We have grouped ourpages into six main categories, reflecting our commit-ment to education:

Primary Texts and Secondary Sources On-Line

Richard III Onstage and Off

Learning Resources (curricula, syllabi, bibliog-raphies)

What’s New

Special Topics and Links to Other Sites

About the Society

The new IIISociety homepage. The

frame on the leftdisplays the site’s

of contents;clicking on one of the

choices theframe on the right to

The itself offers links to

current(such “Not Guilty!”or “‘The of Three

of the the

contents

Register Winter, 1996

Site Traffic Triples (continued) _

Our on-line content now includes six importantprimary source works the chronicle of The Arrivalof Edward IV, the Ballad of Bosworth Field, ThePrivy Purse Expenses of Elizabeth of York and theWardrobe Accounts of Edward IV, the relevant por-tions of Polydore Historia, the fulltext of Horace Walpole’s Historic Doubts, and theWarkworth Chronicle. Thanks are due to Judie Gallfor keyboarding the Arrival, the Ballad of BosworthField, the Privy Purse/Wardrobe, and Warkworth. JeffWheeler keyboarded Polydore Vergil and also pro-vided an introductory essay. Janet key-boarded the Walpole text. Judie Gall is currentlyworking on the Third Continuation of the CroylandChronicle, and Cheryl is experimenting withher scanner to see if it will recognize Holinshed (atthis writing, it hasn’t).

We also now have the full text of Shakespeare’sRichard III, with links to excerpts from the Ross biog-raphy of Richard III to show the difference betweenthe historical and the dramatic figure. Thanks are dueto members Nancy Laney and Mark Doublekar fortheir work on this project. As a companion piece anda bit of a curiosity, we have Colley Cibber’s rantingadaptation of Shakespeare’s play.

Other new additions include: text on the discovered 1912 film version of Richard III describedin the last Register; information on the Indiana Uni-versity Law School mock trial of Richard III, at whichChief Justice William Rehnquist pronounced him notguilty; a complete section on the works of Sharon Kay

Penman, based on materials provided by the author;and a full section on Al Pacino’s new film, Richard. As a matter of fact, we are the unofficialoff ic ia l for t h e f i l m , a n dFox/Searchlight has worked very closely with us todevelop the resources in this section, which include acurriculum on the dramatic and historic Richard III.

Visits to the site have increased threefold since lastyear we are averaging 2,000 file requests a day from150-200 individual visitors. Most folks who visit oursite take the time to view several pages occasion-ally, we find someone who gets lost in Ricardian berspace and spends hours at our site!

Some viewers, both from within and outside theSociety, have written to me to ask why the site doesnot take a stand on the murder of the Princes. This isa personal decision on my part, and I hope that

will agree with my reasoning. It is my hopethat as more and more teachers use the World WideWeb in their activities, they will come to the Society’ssite and send their students there. I think that in thelong run it is better for us all if we simply present theresources and allow the reader to draw his or her ownconclusions. Certainly it will help teachers to encour-age their sudents to think if we present the tools butdon’t attempt to do their thinking for them. Besides,we hardly need to the facts speak for themselves!

If you haven’t seen the site yet, we hope you willvisit it soon:

A page from the online hypertext editionof Shakespeare’s Richard ZZZ. Hypertextlinks lead to excerpts from the CharlesRoss biography, showing that even a

traditionalist historian mustacknowledge the wide gap between

drama and history.

Winter, 1996 Register

R I C A R D I A N

R E A D I N G

Smith

Pledge Week Pitch

I know I have asked for this before, and my heart-felt gratitude to those who have come through with contributionsfor this column, but what do I have to do to get the attention of the rest of you? I am doing my best to catchyour eye, and while I can’t promise you any pecuniary reward, I will send a postcard of thanks. Simply indicateyour choice scenic, comic, or plain.

If you indicate no choice, you will get whatever I have on hand, but in any case, my thanks!

The Mammoth Book Whodunits 1993 Carol Graf, NY

The Mammoth Book of Detectives 1995 MikeAshley, ed., Carol1 Graf, NY

I understand that these two books are soon to be in one volume, which will probably be called

‘super-mammoth’ and should carry a warning label forthose who read in bed. Be that as it may, these two bookscover a wide time span, from the Australian (and the only sealed-cave mystery I have read) to theearly 20th century, include many of our favorite sleuths,and introduce some ones. There’s Daniel prophet and the Three Wise Men. (But how do we knowthere were three?) There’s Brother Cadfael ( inWhodunits), Sister Frcvisse, Father Hugh (anothercreation Monica Pulver, who is

(a Irish nun-lawyer),Judge Dee, Sam Johnson, a Holmes story by A. Doyle that’s Adrian Doyle, not his fatherArthur and many other series and one-off stories.And if, after reading all of these, you still yearn for more,

author you to novels about these periods, manyby the same writers anthologized here. Note: a goodlypercentage of the stories in these volumes were speciallywritten for them, and do not appear elsewhere. Othersare difficult to find elsewhere, e.g. Edith Pargeter’s “TheDuchess &the Doll” about our period, not her usualone. On a per-story basis, these are bargain books.

These are just two of more than thirty titles that startwith The or other. Here aresuggestions for some ‘Mammoth’ books that do not yetexist, but ought to:

The Mammoth Book ofHerbal Medicine

(which should contain stories about twophysicians/herbal practitioners of the middle ages):

The Book of Shadows C. L. Grace, St. Martins Press,NY, 1996, $20.95

This, the fourth book of the cases of Kathryn Swinbrook,MD of Cante rbury , and her Chaucher-quotingright-hand man, Colum, concerns itself with a grimorie(book of spells) but there is nothing supernatural aboutit. The possessor book, a or warlock’, makeshis pile by quite earth-bound means. The proof-readingin Mr. Grace’s books is a crime. He to ElizabethWoodville’s first husband as John Woodville, not JohnGrey. Though Grace draws her as a less-than-admirablecharacter, I do think she would have drawn the line atincest. Strange, his atmosphere and background areso well-drawn, and plot moves right along. RichardIII does not appear in the book, though the Butler marriage is referred to, and in the afterword hespeaks of Richard’s ‘usurpation’ of the throne. TheWoodvilles are called ‘robber barons of the first order’.

Roger Shallot belongs in this partment, if anywhere, since he claims to have anapothecary at one point during his chequered career,selling a sure-fire cure for baldness! More about this inthe next issue.)

The Nun’s Tale Candace Robb, Mandarin, London,1995, pb

Although this is referred to on the cover as ‘the thirdOwen Archer Mystery’, his wife, who is also anapothecary, plays as large a part in the solving of the crime

Ricardian Register Winter. 1996

Ricardian Reading

as he does. It is she who repeatedly questions the nun ofthe title, though she rarely gets a straight answer out ofher. The story that finally emerges is a chilling one, butthe motif for the story comes from a true incident,according to MS Robb. It took place in the early

and Robb moved it to the last half of thecentury, and built her story around it. It’s rather a long story

she has a case of the but moves swiftly,though you might get rather tired of Sister beforeit’s over. Owen and now have a baby daughter anda sequel, The Bishop. Watch for this next time out.

one, which is an outing for Dame Frevisse andDame Claire walking to Oxford to fulfill a vow. It isalso truly the murderer’s tale for the point of viewalternates between the villain and Frevisse Within afew pages the murderer-to-be establishes his identitythrough his arrogance, bitterness, malice and pleasure incausing pain.

He is irredeemably evil The only mystery is howFrevisse solves the crime and uncovers the murderer’strue identity despite his cunning care.

The Mammoth Book of Detectives

Dame Frevisse and Dame Claire meet house-hold in which the murderer lurks on the road to ster Lovell, the destination of both The nuns havedocuments regarding a dispute between their prioryand Lord Lovell, who is in France because of the war,in 1437. Lady Love11 is in charge of the manor a new wing is being constructed. Having stood amongthe ruins of Minster Lovell, I was particularly en-chanted with the vivid picture Frazer portrays of thebustling, busy household the layout of the houseitself and the beautiful gardens. Frazer describes thechurch as glowing with holiness. It still does in 1996, forthe afternoon light seems to come from above, softlyfilling the tiny sanctuary with an unearthly radiance.

And they are legion, from Father Brown on, downto Kate Sedley’s Roger Chapman, a failed Benedictine.

An intriguing addition to the sub-genre of Medievalclerical sleuths is Catherine Le Vendeur, novice at theconvent of the Paraclete, in Death Co mes As Epiphany(A Tor Book, Tom Doherty Associates, NY, anda near-contemporary with Brother Cadfael. Eleanor ofAquitaine is still queen consort of France (the setting of

book), Peter and Abbot Suger are at odds,and is the abbess of the Paraclete (which may beEnglished as Holy Spirit). It is she who sends Catherinehome, ostensibly in disgrace, but actually to find out whohas been tampering with the Psalter designedfor the convent’s use. Catherine eventually does, as wellas finding a murderer, and uncovering the secret hiddenin her own family. Catherine has a logical, incisive mind,and finds an outlet for her intellect in the convent, butalso finds conventual life galling at times. She has not yetattained the state of grace reached by Brother Cadfaeland Sister Frevisse (and in one sense never will, since she‘can fall over anything, including her own feet’) but shehas also not reached the stage of taking her religiousprofession for granted, as just another job. She has notyet taken her final vows, and there is a strong suggestionat the book’s end that she never will, but there are still 3more books, to date, in the series. The title has a doublemeaning, ‘E i hp p any’ is defined as ‘an illuminatingdiscovery; a usually sudden manifestation or perceptionof the essential nature or meaning of something’, whichvery well describes what happens to Catherine, but it isalso a festival of the Church, celebrated on January 6.

The inner workings of a noble household, the prepa-rations which must be made for the coming season, thejustice that must be dispensed the duties to beassigned the sure knowledge of other propertiesowned by the lord, are clearly depicted by Frazer. TheLady Lovell, graciously presiding over all these as-pects of life in the manor, is probably Francis grandmother The book is interesting for ans, having this somewhat tenuous connection withR i c h a r d A n d anyone who has visited MinsterLove11 will enjoy seeing it in its prime.”

The Mammoth Book ofCanterbury Tales

Frazer also gives us a sidelight on life in the con-vent: Domina has passed on, and DominaAlys is abbess, a fact that few if any of the sisters arehappy with. But since none of them wanted to hurther feelings and risk her wrath if she got not even onevote for the position, all but two of the sisters votedfor her! Naturally, Frevisse was one of the hold-outs.

Although the story does not take place exactly at thattime, it is set during the Christmas season in and aroundParis. By the way, Catherine speaks of alphabetization asa ‘new innovation English’, that is, arranging itemsby alphabetical order. Interesting, if true.

The Sins of Madam and Other Essays on Chaucer-Richard Rex U. of Delaware Press, 1995

In this study of Chaucer’s impious and hypocriticalPrioress, Rex characterizes her Tale as a pastiche, neithertragedy or parody but halfway between genuine pathosand literary satire.A sleuth better known to us, or at least to me, is Sister

Frevisse, who appears in The Murderer’s Tale. (Margaret The first four chapters are concerned with rescuingFrazer [Mary Monica Pulver Gail Frazer], Berkeley Chaucer from the imputation that he shared the pb, 1996). D 1 Sa ummers takes a special interest in this Semitic views expressed by the Prioress. Rex reminds

Winter, 1 9 9 6 Ricardian Register

us that the Monk calls the Jews “Goddes peple” inkeeping with orthodox eschatology, and quotes con-temporary religious as diverse as St Bernard and JohnWyclif who commended the Jews for their charitablemunificence and their reverence for the Sabbath.Gower and both advise Christians to emu-late these praiseworthy qualities, and Chaucer’s in-trinsic humanity precluded vengeful bigotry.

The author believes that Chaucer’s satire of clericalabuses has a deeper purpose than to provoke detachedamusement at human lapses and pretensions. He wasno reformer, but his mirror of society was intended toinstruct as well as entertain. Rex argues that somerecent authorities have erred in being charmed by thePrioress, whose vanity and ignorance are contrastedquite deliberately with the learned virtuousness of theimpoverished Parson. Rex’s denunciation of her unfit-ness for a vocation is unequivocal: “There is scarcely aword in the portrait that does not detract from herworth as a nun and a Christian.” (p. 108)

In order to evaluate her in the context of her owntime, Rex has consulted an impressive array of ro-mances, sermons, homilies, plays and glosses. He cor-rects anticipated misreads by modern readers; thuswhen Chaucer delineates her “tender herte” it is not acompliment. The chapter on convent ownership of

brothels is convoluted and confusing. Theindex tends to be incomplete, and long Wyclif quoteson pp. 49, 110, and 127 are not listed. But Rex pro-vides a glimmer of understanding to readers baffled bythe ubiquity of “grey and lawhyng in scores ofmedieval romances. No esthetic preferences for grayeyes should be inferred. The term was never intendedto denote any color and means only ‘bright and keen.’

Cheryl Elliot

An abbess, in fact two of them, feature strongly in P.C.Doherty’s A Tapestry of (St Martin’s Press).Doherty frequently puts Chaucer quotations in themouths of his characters, e.g. Colum Murtagh andKathryn Swinbrooke in the mysteries he writes as C.L.Grace. It should come as no surprise that he goes backto the original in this series, using the characters andformat of the Canterbury Tales themselves. And why not?They have been in the public domain for centuries. Thereader is asked to assume that the pilgrims told the talesrecorded by Chaucer during the daytime, but when thegroup stopped for the night they would spin tales ofmystery and murder. The first story, the knight’s, had astrong element supernatural. Tapestry, which is theMan of Law’s tale, is straightfonvard mystery, with astrong suggestion of the hard-boiled and Inc.The young lawyer is on the hunt, somewhat belatedly,for the murderers of Edward II, and any incriminatingevidence they may have left behind. There is a prioressinvolved who makes Chaucer’s Prioress look like a saint,

Register

and, in the colloquies between the pilgrims interjectedduring the telling of the tale, hints as to a mystery ormysteries involving at least some of the pilgrimsthemselves. Incidentally, both this book and The Book ofShadows have a minor character named Notthe same one, though. At one point, one of the characterssays to another, “I’m not as stupid as you look,” whichproves to me that Doherty didn’t spend all of his youthstudying Chaucer: he must have spent a fair amount oftime watching Laurel Hardy movies.

The Mammoth Book of The Trial Of Richard Shallcr, DramaticPublishing Co, Woodstock, IL,

This play, written for the 500th anniversary of the Battleof Bosworth, is semi-allegorical; Time is the judge,History and Rumor the prosecutors, the counsel. The audience is the jury, literally, and has alternate speeches to cover either verdict. Much isleft to the discretion of the director. forexample, may be modern, stylized, or historical.Richard’s lines may be delivered with sincerity or slynessto elicit a desired verdict. The author adds a note that theguilty characterization “is harder to maintain but infinitely more interesting.” However, to play Richard asguilty is to perpetuate the myth and further to subvertthe play’s stated object, the establishment ofjustice.

The play within the play, a device used by Shake-speare, is the great dramatist’s Richard III. Shake-speare, along with Sir Thomas More, is a witness anda colorful participant in the trial. Shakespeare pleadsthat he wrote plays to entertain, not to represent truthor history. Both witnesses admit that if they had writ-ten truth, there would have been punishment fromtheir monarchs.

Scene by damning scene Shakespeare’s “evidence”is dismissed. In his final speech to the jury, Richardpoints to his accomplishments as king, but leaves thefate of the boys unanswered. Richard’s explanation isthat the murderer may have been his friend seeking tosecure his throne or an enemy seeking to damn him,but he reveals no identity, only pleads his innocence.

There are some nice uses of irony and witty lines,such as the statement that charity is seldom seenat court,” Sir Thomas modestly comments about Uto-pia, “College professors seem to enjoy it” Shakespearestates, “Weeping mothers make good theater.”

Permission to perform the play must be soughtfrom the author and copies may be ordered from herat: The Dramatic Publishing Company, P.O. Box 109,Woodstock, IL, 60098.

-Dale Summers, TX

Of course you Gentle and Erudite Readers know what a‘pastiche’ is. That describes Dark Sovereign, The True

Winter, 1996

Ricardian Reading (continued)

Tragedy Of King Richard III, by Robert Fripp, which Ihave just received and will review in the Spring issue.

The Mammoth Book ofThe Royal

or rather The Book of A Mammoth Royal Family.

In reading George III’s Children by John Van der Kiste, Icame across following Defense of Richard (sort

there would have been no for a Queen ofHeaven. The poem is accompanied by a painting of ablissful Eden with the serpent peering gleefully froma tree. Margery Kemp reveals her absolute faith, andher contemporary and friend, Julian of Norwich, sures us of God’s love in ‘All Manner of Things Shallbe Well.’

Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, to portray KingGeorge III’s large family as of an ion. Comparisons may be drawn not unprofitablywith Shakespeare’s historicalplays, producedpartly tocelebrate the of Tudor England and todenigrate the last King of the preceding Yorkistdynasty, Richard III.

In the romantic section there is a blatant irony as,across from a portrait of himself, Henry VIII promisesthat like the ivy he will never change hue and ever tohis lady love prove true. One wonders which ladyinspired this poem and what was her ultimate fate.

“Peace and War” includes Gracias, anglia’ giv-ing thanks for Agincourt, and ‘In a Glorious Green,’ ‘A Song for St. George’ and ‘A Fruitful Gar-den.’ Also in this section is a charming calendar withthe months marked out by a farmer’s chores.

Among the “Marvelous Tales” are Chaucer’s‘Knight’s Tale’, and several Arthurian tales.

Van der Kiste says that it was largely due to theefforts of Whig politicians that Earnest of Hanover(the son) became “one of the most vilified char-acters in history since Atilla the Hun.” (Even includ-ing Richard?) Van der Kiste’s well-researched,well-written, and wel l - i l lus t ra ted s tudy of theHanoverians puts not only the Plantagenets andTudors in a different perspective, but also the presentroyal family. Whatever you may think of the sors, remember they are relatively few in number.Imagine 13 of ‘cm! Older books on the same subjectare: The Wicked Uncles (Roger Fulford, Putnam’sSons, NY, Love and Princesses, monger, Thomas Crowell Co, NY, and manyothers.

The illustrations, from illuminated manu-scripts, are well-chosen both in terms of beauty andappropriateness for pieces they accompany. Mostof the pieces are anonymous but the known authorsare given a brief biography. The introduction by theeditor is appealing, evocative, and intelligent. This is abook to pick up and browse through during those dullperiods of life.

The Mammoth Book of Names

House The World Joyce C. Miles, David&Charles Ltd, Devon, 1972

Any of these books would be of interest to read inconjunction with watching “The Madness of KingGeorge.” Much as I enjoyed “Babe”, I think NigelHawthorne really deserved the Oscar.

The Mammoth Book of Poetry

Through The Glass Window Shines The Sun, AnAnthology Of Medieval And Prose. PamelaNorris, ed., Little Brown &Company, Boston, 1995

This exquisite slender volume brings touching andinspiring glimpses of medieval life. (I was thoroughlypleased that the editor extended the Middle Ages intothe reign of Henry VIII. It annoys me to see theRenaissance dated from 1485 as if Richard single-handedly had been holding it off.)

The works are divided into four categories, “The of Heaven,” “My True Love and Lady,” “Peace

and War” and “Marvelous Tales.”In the first section, an anonymous author philoso-

phizes that had Adam not taken the apple from Eve

House names, like detectives, go back to Babylon, atleast, and are found around the world, applied to large and small, and mobile. Says the author everywhere display a inventiveness andimagination th ere are, inevitably, banalities anddisasters, but even these may reveal something of theperpetrator and the society in which he lives.” Onechapter deals with the history of house with examples drawn from castle and cottage names ofthe Middle Ages, such as Goodluck’s, or Master Stone’sLodgings. Being a Truly Trivial Pursuit kind of person,I found this most interesting. In fact, I am inspired toname my own place, although if you are moved to writea review, I would recommend that you send it to the routeand box number given in the masthead. But it makes forsomething of a flourish, don’t you think, to sign off inthis fashion:

Winter, 996

Dale Summers, TX

Myrna Smith von

Texas1996

Ricardian Register

A Letter To Ricardian Readers: this happened to you? You search for years for that

special Ricaradian novel, finally pay a used book dealera tidy sum for it and two weeks later you find anothercopy at a library book sale for What to do?

My suggestion is: buy it. Then, put it back in theRicardian pipeline. Offer it to the Fiction Librarian,either for the Library or for an auction. Offer it to yourChapter, if it maintains a library. Take it to a Chaptermeeting, offer it to the other members, and donatewhatever they pay you to the Chapter treasury. Themain thing is, put it where other Ricardians can find it.I don’t know of any book dealers who specialize inRicardian fiction, and the last time I did hear of one,they didn’t reply to a letter of inquiry. No matter thisis a project well within the scope of any Ricardianbook-lover, an act of random kindness.

And may I also make a plug for your public library? Beinvolved with it it’s good for the library and it’s goodfor you. Most libraries have Friends groups, to providemanpower for special events and do much-needed

join one or form one. Most libraries, at leastin this area, hold an annual book sale ofvolumes donated

by the public as well as culls from the libraries’collections. Friends groups often organize and staffthese. Stands to reason that helping set up sucha sale, you’ll get look at whatever comes in, andthere can be some great finds. for a hardback

With dustjacket. Palmer’s Roarfor next to nothing it was Two Bucks a Bag Just this past summer, the new Castle Library’s Friendsgroup received the collection of a retiring historyprofessor from Westminster College. Over 500volumes, all in great shape. The average reader, looking for a quick mystery or romance, isn’t going toget excited about these, but we invite a lot of bookdealers, and the books wind up where they can reach thereaders who’ve been searching for them.

So here’s an easy chance to do some good. Not justbecause the Fiction Library suffered from flood damage,but because it benefits of us. It’s an opportunity weshould make the most of.

Dexter

Editor’s Note: Hear! Hear!

Sharon Kay Penman autographing copies of her worksfor Sharon Michalove at 1996

Annual General Meeting inPhiladelphia. Michalove won the

grand prize of this year’s Schallekraffle, a complete set of Penman’s

historical novels.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

RE P O R T

a recipient of the 1995 Schallek Fellowships,would like to express my appreciation for the

award. It enabled me to carry out some of theresearch on my dissertation, “Chyldren! Geue eareyour duties to learne’: The Education of Class Englishwomen in Late Medieval and EarlyModern England,” at the Library in Chi-cago. On September 3, 1996, I successfully de-f e n d e d m y disse r ta t ion and wi l l g radua te inOctober from the University of Illinois at Champaign. The following is a of the disser-tation.

Piecing together the pattern of upper-classwomen’s education in late medieval and early modernEngland is no easy task. The difficulties in findingsource material, in interpreting for the many the sto-ries of the few, and defining what is meant by educa-tion are familiar to those who I have followed in thisventure. Just defining the class structure is difficult,as gentry and aristocracy blended into each other andmany a gentleman was “self-selected” in the sense thatin England one could claim gentle status without hav-ing to prove an ancient aristocratic long asmoney was available to uphold the standards of theposition and one could lose that status if the money ranout.

My definition of upper class includes both thearistocracy and the gentry and could even includewealthy members of the mercantile classes. Whatseems most important was the acceptance of upper-class ideals and the ability and desire to participate inthose activities that were the province of upper-classlife. These would include patronage, which includedproviding political advancement, encouraging artisticendeavors, promoting social inferiors by providingeducation or training, conspicuous consumption, andlavish hospitality. The acquisition of estates and theprovision of an upper-class education for the childrenof family were also essential aspects of elite culture.

That leads to the problem of defining education. Ihave chosen a broad definition of education as thesocialization of both children and adults so that theywere able to assume their proper place in society. Inthe case of upper-class English men and women, theeducation would have been functional and designedto teach the skills of management and social graces.Music, dancing, archery, riding, and accountingwould have been taught to both boys and girls. How-ever, male education would also have had a compo-nent dedicated to the military arts, while femaleeducation would have stressed household skills, some

Sharon

medical training, and arts such as embroidery, Read-ing and writing may have been part of the curriculumalthough status was established partly by having ser-vants who could provide the services of reading andwriting. Literacy, in the modern sense of the term,may have been irrelevant.

In this dissertation I have tried to bring togetherthe threads of much of the recent research on upper-class women in late medieval and early modern Eng-land by focusing on how that work illustrates aspectsof women’s education. Chapter is the heart of mydissertation and in it I have emphasized the central-ity of household education and described how upper-c lass househo lds were schoo ls . Theimportance of informal methods of education has beenstressed, primarily by analyzing parts of the correspon-dence of Honor Lisle and her man-of-business, JohnHusee.

To understand the educational process in this pe-riod it is essential to understand that academic educa-tion was merely a gloss acquired by a few members ofthe upper-class but was not an essential part of eliteeducation. These were people who lived in a politicallyuncertain time, who were materially affected by courtlife and politics and who had to learn how to maneuverin ways that would turn a variety of situations to theirown advantage. The upper classes lived a life in whichpublic and private were completely entangled and dis-entangling these threads is impossible and poten-tially misleading for the modern historian whowishes to understand the mentality of elites in thisperiod. They were happy to use humanisticallytrained personnel in their households but, with certainnotable exceptions such as Sir John Tiptoft and SirThomas More, they were not usually interested in ob-taining humanistic education for themselves or theirchildren.

Because this is a project that deals with women,gender would seem to be a major issue. I found thatclass was much more important than gender. Withinupper classes women did tend to exert more indirectinfluence rather than being active participants, buteven this is to oversimplify. Not only were there femalerulers at the end of the period, but, as will be evident inChapter 7, widows especially were able to wield poweron their estates, just as men did.

This study covers a wide period of time. In orderto gather enough examples to make the project vi-able, it was necessary to extend the research from thelate fourteenth-century well into the sixteenth-cen-tury. The quality of available material becomes much

Winter, 1996 Ricardian Register

more substantial after 1500, but in an essentially con-servative society, the aims of education were not verydifferent in 1580 than they had been in 1380. Thestatistical paucity of materials has led many re-searchers to conclude that women who show up inthe records were extraordinary. I would argue, on thecontrary, that these women are examples of the po-tential influence of women generally in the upperclasses.

The hereditary aristocracy of England used edu-cation to maintain its cultural, political and economicsuperiority of men and women in the hierarchy ofsociety. Aristocratic education was training for lead-ership of the group and the skills taught were thosethat the group defined as signifying a leader. Part ofaristocratic education was also based around play andconspicuous consumption. The sentiments of thetwentieth-century slogans, “If you’ve got it, flaunt it,”and “let the good times rolls” would not have seemedforeign to a fifteenth-century English aristocrat.These principles were adopted by those who movedinto the upper classes of society.

Aristocratic English education usually did not in-volve formal schooling. If schooling was pursued atall, it was a finish to an education that took place in ahousehold, either that of the natal family or that ofanother to whom the child had been sent to be edu-cated. This education included learning to eat prop-erly in company, how to converse, sports and games,as well as reading, possibly writing, music, dancingand so on. Children were educated withinthe household of a family with a higher social stand-ing.

In the end, what can we conclude about the edu-cation of elite women in late medieval and earlymodern England? First, there can be no doubt thatwomen were educated. While misogynists insistedthat women were learning to manage households,teach their children, practice their religion, defendtheir property, represent themselves in court, and amultitude of other skills essential to maintainingtheir position in society,

The late medieval and early modern householdfunctioned as a school for elite women and offeredthem possibilities to learn, to teach, to practice pri-vate and semipublic devotion, and to dispense politi-cal, artistic and educational patronage. Patronagecould be defined as doing and receiving favors, andwhile in itself a vertical relationship, it created andreinforced both horizontal and vertical interconnec-tions. The patronage nexus started with the familyand spread outward in ever-widening circles. Thevertical giving of patronage gave prestige to the giveras well as to the recipient. For the client, patronagecould mean the garnering of lands, money and titles.Patronage was attractive because the promotion ofclients enhanced the standing and reputation of the

patron and because the patron could expect a sub-stantial reward from the client. Writers, of course,could glorify patrons. In other cases, gifts and cashwere more likely rewards. Authors hoped for an out-right gift of money or more valuable forms of patron-age such as offices. These offices might be religiouspreferments, appointments as tutors or secretaries,university fellowships and masterships in schools.These opportunities allowed some elite women toplay a central role, not just in their communities, butin national and international affairs.

The English thought very seriously about the edu-cation that their children received. Literature onproper education for the aristocracy was producedfrom at least the twelfth-century. Romances likeMalory’s Le Impomedon by Hue deRotelande, and the anonymous Guy of dis-cussed curricula and tutors. Drawing on Aristotleand other classical authors, medieval didactic litera-ture from authors such as Peter Alfonsi, Vincent ofBeauvais, and of Rome were guides to the edu-cation of the laity. however, seem tohave been more important guides for the Englishnobility. Books like John of Salisbury’s Gerald of Wales’ De and the

supposedly the advice of Aris-totle to Alexander about the art of being a ruler, weresome of the most famous. The mirrors discussed re-ligion, ethics, politics, military matters, history, lit-erature and medicine. Books were also written forchildren, especially from the late fourteenth-centuryonwards. The most famous example is that of Geof-frey Chaucer’s written for his young son,Lewis. Some of these books were filled with advicemeant to improve moral and educational standards.

The emphasis on hospitality and good lordship inlate medieval and early modern England underscoredthe importance of certain educational principles. In asociety that placed great emphasis on the outwardforms of behavior, dress, and manners and taughtproper eating habits as part of the curriculum, house-hold-centered education was the logical method ofdelivery for elites. Political patronage positions cen-tered on service to an overlord and this service wasusually very personal in nature. Being able to carve,serve at table, and entertain musically and conversa-tionally, were skills valued by the elite members ofsociety. In the household these skills could be for-mally taught and informally observed and the stu-dents, both male and female, could then use theseskills to obtain places in more exalted households orat the increasingly important royal court. The skillswere also useful adjunct to property for success onthe marriage market.

Education can be a conservative or a revolutionaryforce. In late medieval and early modern England,the traditional education of elites was conservative.

Register Winter, 996

Schallek Scholar Report (continued)

In a time of political upheaval, the skills that werelearned, both formally and informally, provided afirm basis for life as it had been. Humanistic educa-tion, which was more revolutionary in its effects, wasslow to take hold with elites. While they tried to usehumanists to their advantage through patronage, up-per-class men and women continued to learn theskills that supported the strength of the householdand lineage, and that gave them the dexterity to sur-vive in a court society. Education has always been apowerful tool for molding society. The English aris-tocracy understood this and used their knowledge tocreate and cement their own power base by creating atype of education that defined the possessor as a

or

1 Most Englishmen who claimed the status ofgentleman did have elaborate genealogical charts toprove their ancient lineage (at least back to theConqueror). However, many of these genealogies,which were prepared for the College of Arms inorder to claim a familial coat of arms, were found tobe at least partly fictitious when they wereresearched by the heralds in the century. See James, Family, Lineage andCivil Society; a Study of Society, Politics and Mentalityin the Durham Region, (Oxford,Clarendon Press, 1974)

2 Guy of Warwick was, and remained for centuries, avery popular romance. See Velma BourgeoisRichmond, The Legend of Guy of Warwick (NewYork Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996).

Margaret Gurowitz’s position has come to involve more and more international travel, andshe is no longer in a position to respond to press inquiries in a timely fashion (hard to callDes Moines when you’re in Bruges, we suppose).

The Society needs a volunteer to maintain a mailing list, send out annual BosworthIn-Memoriam releases and place our in-memoriam ad, send out releases about our AGM,and handle publicity opportunities such as the recent Shakespeare film or the mock trial asthey arise. Access to fax and e-mail is helpful but not mandatory.

Additional volunteers to work with the chair would be helpful.

If interested, contact Laura Blanchard, 2041 Christian Street, Philadelphia PA 19146,

Everyone loves aRicardian

banquet eventhe staff.

Left to right:Peggy Allen, Janet

Trimbath, PatColes, John theBartender

hat), LauraBlanchard, Donthe Maitre d’ (in

Compton Reeves mortarboard)

and Gall.

Winter, 996 Ricardian Register

R ICHARD III

Pro osed Calendar 1997 Budget(General und)REVENUE BudgetDues 5,600 Interest 2,200Library Contributions 300Tour Receipts 300Other Misc.* 3,000

TOTALEXPENSES

$2 1,400

Administrative:UK 7,500Ric. Register 5,200Printing, Other 400Postage, other than Register 900InsuranceTelephone (Board Mtgs.)

All Other Admin *Expenses Incurred By Area:

ChairmanVice-ChairRec. Secy.Mbr. Secy.Past ChairTreasurerArchivist,Chapters CoordA-V LibraryFiction Library** *Research Lib.Libraries Coord

P/RResearchSchallek MailingSchools CoordinatorTravel Coord.Monograph Fund

TOTAL

175600400

1,800

2402401006060

1806060

250750250

22030

300606030

21,255

* Donations, sales, etc.** Bosworth flowers, plaque, purchases for sales

*** Increased fiction library budget to allow for replacementof volumes lost in flood

Treasurer’s Report to 1996 The Society’s finances have continued at a normal pace since the lastAGM. Both the Wiiam B. Graduate FellowshipFund and the newly-established Maxwell Anderson ScholarshipFund have seen increases in the value of their assets, as has the

Memorial Research Library Fund.

I wish to give heartfelt thanks to all those members who havecontributed extra donations in addition to the normal dues paymentsand to encourage anyone who can afford it to make such an extradonation. These contributions enable the Society to maintain andimprove all its services libraries, scholarships and fellowships, andoutreach. In particular, extra contributions this year, given to thegeneral fund or the Fiction Library, will provide to replace

books lost in the flood at Mary Miller’s house. Of course, donationsgiven for a designated purpose are used only for that purpose.

Today, with this AGM report, I am submitting a proposed 1997budget for the General Fund. The complete 1995Treasurer’s Report with financial statements will be published in anupcoming issue of the Ricardian Register. I would appreciate yourcomments on either or both of these.

Being Treasurer since 1993 has been an interesting challenge, oftenhard work, and a pleasure, too. I hope that the new Treasurer willenjoy it as much as I have, and wish her all the best.

G. Allen, Treasurer

1996 Fiction Library ReportOn July 18, my basement flooded when northern Illinois received arecord rainfall. Water rose to a depth of thirty inches. The bottomshelf of the fiction library was under water by the time we discoveredthe situation at 6:00 a.m. Thanks to the help of my family andneighbors, the books on the upper shelves were moved to a location. By the time the water was pumped out thirty hours later,there was little that could be done for most of the soaked volumes.Forty-seven books, consisting of thirty-five individual titles wereeither damaged or totally ruined. I picked out seven volumes that Ithought could be rescued. The rest were too waterlogged to attemptto rescue and were discarded. After six weeks, it appears that threeof the saved books will be usable again.

The library was not insured. All the copies lost were hardcover. Mostof them are out of print and many were only published in England inthe first place. A report was sent to all and to the “RicardianRegister”. Members are asked to donate books if they can, but theyshould contact me first to see if the book(s) they wish to donate arestill needed. A case in point is ElizabethPeters. I have already received two copies from members who heardabout the flood loss. I will be searching at used book sales and bookstores. I have already located one replacement.

I have written Carolyn Hammond, librarian of the English Branch,to see if she knows of any sources of used Ricardian fiction. The 1997Chicago AGM committee has agreed to host a breakfast next year tobenefit the Library.

Otherwise it has been a slow year for the Fiction Library.Twenty-one books were circulated between September andSeptember 7, 1996. Twelve books were purchased for the library,including a screenplay of Ian “Richard III” and the fourvolumes of Thomas Costain’s Plantagenet series. Six books weredonated. The Board of Directors donated a copy of Roses in Fiction, an annotated bibliography compiled by RoxaneMurph.

The Fiction Library list was revised and updated. Copies are availablefor members. Until the list is revised again, a list of books lost in theflood will accompany it.

Mary Miller, Fiction Librarian

ArchivesThe archives have had numerous additions this year andto thank the many members who sent items for inclusion, particularlythe many items concerning the public and media reaction to themovie, Richard III. Members are encouraged to send items forinclusion.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Committee Reports (continued)

These archives are the records of our organization, and we all knowthe fate whose history is lost. The archives are currently storedin a secure facility belonging to the National Park Service (Toni Jeffrey’s house).

Toni Collins

Sales OfficeAs reported in the Ricardian Register, this has not been an easy yearfor the sales office. The volunteer handling our shipping department,David had to give up for health reasons. As a stopgap,Laura Blanchard handled the orders but found herself unable toprovide timely service for a variety of reasons and the sales officesuspended operations in May. A search for a new volunteer wasannounced in the summer issue Register; Roxane Murph reportsthat three have stepped forward and that she is indiscussions with one of them which will result, we can only hope, ina grand reopening of the sales office in the near future. A financialreport is shown below. In the meantime, we would encourage you allto buy with enthusiasm at the sales table this year!

Cash Statement, October Balance Forward October 1, 1995 $1.472.48Add: Sales proceeds

11 851.95

108.70

223.45177.20

66.50

280.75

24.95 1,835

Subtotal

Deduct:1 Brewer, inv.Cambridge Univ Press, inv

refundD. Boggs, refundSt. Martin’s Press, inv.D. Boggs, refundCheck charge

E. Wesselink, refund Muehlbauer, refund

Wendy W. Logan, stamps Richard Ill Society, inv.

Peters Son, inv.

Balance

73.00128.64137.00

43.50332.66

20.0015.0718.00

9.507.00

263.1282.40

(Balance subject to payment of Alan Sutton Publishing chargefor inventory estimated at $400.00)

Wendy LoganLaura

Wiiam B. Schallek Memorial GraduateFellowship Awards

For the 1996-97 academic year, we received seven applications fromhighly-qualified graduate students. With a total of $2,500 in award

Winter, 1996 Ricardian Register

money available, and based upon recommendations by our SelectionCommittee, the American Branch made three awards:

Anna University of MinnesotaManners, and Morals, Conduct Books for Women in Late

Medieval England

John Dwyer, University of ColoradoLocal Control in Age Hereford 1475-1620

Matthew B. Goldie, City University of New York Language and Language

The success of our scholarship program depends on two importantgroups of people: our selection committee and our donors. The fundhas received $1,350 during Calendar 1995 and $308 to date incontributions for current giving, with another $1,940 in 1995 and$870 to date to help build the endowment. As I write this, a weekbefore the AGM, I am hopeful that the proceeds from our raffle andour benefit breakfast will yield another to benefit the fundfor our 1997-98 applicants. Thanks as usual are due to our manydonors, but especially to whose annual giftscontinue to build the endowment; and to the five members of ourselection committee: Lorraine C. Barbara A. Hanawalt,Morris G. McGee, A. Sinclair, and Charles T. Wood.

Laura Blanchard

Tour CoordinatorThe 1995 tour resulted in three new members for the Society. Therewere eight people on the 1996 tour, four are members of theSociety. Thus the Society will gain $400 for this tour. This tour wasparticularly successful. Six of the eight (including me) were membersofprevious tours, one from 1993, two from 1994 and two from 1995.The group was particularly congenial and new sites added to theinterest.

Due to circumstances beyond my control, we did not lay a wreath thisyear. The total expenditure for 1996 will include a nominal amountfor copying and postage for the evaluation.

Lord Addison Travel will conduct the 1997 tour to some newRicardian sites, including Cambridge, Walsingham Abbey andCastle Rising.

Dale Summers

ResearchI was appointed to the position of Research Officer both in the middleof the year and in the middle of writing my dissertation on theeducation of upper-class women in late medieval and early modernEngland. Therefore I have not been as active on the research frontin terms of Society issues as I would have liked. Now that I havedefended and deposited my thesis, I hope to have more time forfacilitating Ricardian research by members. A bound copy of thethesis will eventually be available in the Society’s library.

Margaret Gurowitz has done an excellent job in that position, buttrying to facilitate research and serve as Publicity Officer is anoverwhelming task

great deal of the research effort has been Laura Blanchard’s superbmanagement of the society’s web site. Several research queries havebeen forwarded to me and the queries and the responses will appearin a future issue of the Register.

On the research front, Compton Reeves again put together anexcellent session in Kalamazoo at the International MedievalCongress. In addition, Sharon Michalove has taken over themanagement of the fifteenth-century sessions sponsored by the

Society of the White Hart, ensuring that Ricardian topics will be wellrepresented.

The major conference on fifteenth-century English history was heldin Aberystwyth, Wales this summer. Joel Rosenthal of SUNY StonyBrook attended the conference and report, “A nice conference smallish (40-50) and inexpensive, in an attractive town and acomfortable campus. The papers by design were political, and the‘end of the middle ages’ theme was to explore any possible line ofdemarcation between say the 1480s and 1520s or so. But mostly theywere case studies and very empirical a lot of extremely good andextremely detailed work.” The papers from this conference will bepublished by Alan Sutton.

On the publications front, Alan Sutton will be publishing the papersfrom the Ricardian conference held at the University of Illinois inApril 1995 in their Fifteenth-Century Studies series, edited by Ralph

We are still waiting for word on the publication of the firstmonograph. Kelly will coordinate efforts with Roger Thorpof Alan Sutton.

We hope to have the second Ricardian conference at the Universityof Illinois in late 1997 or just before the 1998 Kalamazoo conference.

Sharon D.

World Wide WebThe American Branch’s World Wide Web site went on-line in thesummer of 1995 and was featured in a workshop at the 1995 AGM.At that time it was primarily an “electronic storefront” for the Society,a place for interested people to find information about Societymembership, programs, and activities.

Since then, it has taken on a broader purpose: to provide informationon Richard III and late fifteenth-century English history, and to serveas an on-line library of primary texts and secondary sources. Thanksto the efforts ofvolunteers around the country and around the world,we have on-line editions of the Arrival1 of Edward IV, the WardrobeAccounts of Edward IV and the Privy Purse Expenditures ofElizabeth of York; the relevant portions of Polydore Vergil’s

and the sixteenth-century Ballad of Bosworth Field; extractsof the relevant fifteenth- and sixteenth-century texts related to theBattle of Bosworth introductory essays on Richard III;bibliographies on various topics; the beginning of an on-linehypertext edition of Shakespeare’s play. The Ohio chapter issponsoring a section on Fifteenth Century Life. Coming soon:on-line editions of Horace Walpole, the Warkworth Chronicle, andthe Croyland Chronicle.

For those with an interest in fiction, we are hosting a section on theworks of Sharon Kay Penman.

The site has received a Point Communications Top 5% of the Webaward and was a “top ten links of the week” site from America Onlinein February. Some organizations and institutions linking to our siteinclude Britannica Online, Artists, American FilmInstitute, University, Labyrinth, and ORB, theOn fine Resourcefor Medieval Studies.

Our site will be the focus of a demonstration at the 1997 meeting ofthe American Historical Association. Richard Oberdorfer is workingwith us to create an “open web quiz” or scavenger hunt, which teachesabout Ricardian topics and about techniques to use the World WideWeb for research and how to evaluate the sources found there. Hehas been testing it on his students this fall and we eagerly anticipatethe results.

Thanks are due to the many Ricardians who have helped createcontent or do hypertext markup for this site, including Judie Gall,Peter Hammond, Nancy Laney, Elizabeth Linstrom, RoxaneMurph, Richard Oberdorfer, Anne Vineyard, and Jeffrey Wheeler.

Laura

Ricardian

Chapter CoordinatorThis is a good news/bad news report. The good news is there weretwo requests for information to form chapters, one in Minnesota andone in Florida. Neither has been formed as yet but there is progressand hope that one or both will be successful.

I have received reports from Southeastern Pennsylvania, MiddleAtlantic, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, Southwest and NorthwestChapters. I did not receive a report from Northern California but Ihave had contact with them during the last year. I have had noresponse to requests for reports or other information from NewEngland, Rocky Mountain or Southern California in the last twoyears and am unable to determine the status of those chapters.

In addition, I have received requests for information via our web siteand due to my own activities on-line. I have ongoing discussionsabout Richard in two forums on CompuServe and intermittentdiscussions in other forums. I can report that almost all thoseparticipating in the discussions are Ricardian supporters althoughnone of them are members of this Society. At least one is a memberof the parent body.

Chairman Compton Reeves, Research Officer Sharon and Vice Chair Laura Blanchard as well as Research Officer PeterHammond in England have promptly answered questions I have

them when I could not answer discussion questions.Promptness is critical in these discussions and I greatly appreciatetheir assistance. While this is not chapter related it does relateto the overall Society and its aims and, in my opinion, the directionthe Society must go if it is to survive.

The NORTHWEST CHAPTER reports an increase inmembership to 35 members and attributes it partially to publicityfrom the AGM in Seattle last fall and its booth at the SeattleHighland Games in July. The chapter held five meetings during theyear, the most of any chapter. “We feel that we are in pretty goodshape at present,” reports Yvonne Saddler, Chair.

The ILLINOIS CHAPTER, host to the 1997 AGM, reports theyhave begun sending their newsletter to all Society members in thestate in an effort to promote chapter members. “The web page hashelped direct attention to our chapter,” reports Janice Weiner, Chair.Chapter activities have included Ricardian display at a bookstore, anexhibit at a library and their annual memorial service at a church forBosworth. This memorial service has attracted the attention of theparent body.

The MICHIGAN CHAPTER has approximately 10 activemembers but maintains a mailing list of 49 for their newsletter. Theyhad four meetings during the year and finished the revision of theirbylaws. In addition, they queried libraries regarding an exhibit andchurches regarding a memorial service. Moderator Diane Batch saysthey passed out flyers at the showing of “Richard III” and twomembers participated in a Shakespeare authorship “trial” withRichard III mentioned prominently.

The SOUTHWEST CHAPTER has maintained their membershiplevel. Roxane Murph, Chair, reports she has written to all Societymembers in the area who are not members chapter and invitedthem to join. She says the biggest problem, as people’s lives growbusier, is attracting and keeping members, a sentiment echoed byother chapters.

The OHIO CHAPTER is enjoying stable membership as the resultof the most active promotion and recruitment efforts of any chapter.They participated in two faires and also passed out literature at theshowing of the version of Richard III in Columbus. Inaddition, they held four meetings at different locations. As with manychapters, they are wrestling with the issue of how to engageindividuals who are only interested in participating at a local level.

The SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA CHAPTER hasbeen planning this AGM but has done little else. At their only

Winter, 1996

Committee Reports (continued)

meeting, held in January at the University of Pennsylvania’sDepartment of Special Collections, no one wished to run for officeso the chapter is currently without officers. An In Memoriam noticewas placed in the Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News.Former Chair Laura Blanchard reports a core group of interestedmembers but says the chapter is about to go on sabbatical.

The MIDDLE ATLANTIC CHAPTER was on hiatus during1994-96. Jeanne Faubell is currently attempting to revitalize Chapterparticipation and activities. She has sent out a newsletter to all Societymembers in the area to discuss plans and solicit ideas and assistance.The chapter is without officers with Jeanne acting in the chairman’sposition for now.

The bottom line, as most chapters pointed out, is that people are toobusy these days to participate in chapter meetings. They might wantto and even try to but it is very difficult just to do the things they must.The Society needs to promote membership contact and activitythrough the ever growing medium of computers. It seems that mostpeople, at least in the segment from which we draw membership, areon-line either at work or at home and possibly in both places. Byproviding on-line resources, contacts and discussions people can stayin contact and profit from their membership without having to goanywhere. No doubt they sign on several times a week They can gettheir Ricardian information at that time and perhaps participate in adiscussion too. They don’t have to make time for or drive to a chaptermeeting to be an active participant.

This should not eliminate chapter activities where there is a groupwith members who are willing and able to participate in socialactivities, faires, presentations and such. It would provide activity formembers who do not have a local chapter, which is the vast majorityof the membership, or who are unable to be an active participant inone for whatever reason.

Cheryl

Research LibraryWe added eight books to the Research Library year, one replacinga lost book. We also added twenty-five articles, papers and excerpts.

Library use has been steady, although only about a dozen people havebeen regular borrowers. During the past year there seem to have beenmore requests for articles than for books, an interesting trend if it isa trend! Do we all find ourselves with less time for reading, or are“hard-to-find” books becoming more readily available? In any case,I urge members to avail themselves of this precious Society resource.Library lists are available on request, and they still are free.

Helen

Audio Visual LibrarianThe audio-visual library has had very little activity this year. I am notsure whether this is due to the emergence of more easily accessiblematerial (via WWW, Internet, History Channel, etc.) or the fact thatthe library is located in Canada. One of the main reasons I rented apost office box was so that I would be assured of receiving any requestsfrom the members. However, there are several factors indicating thata change of location may be a wise decision as far as the future of thelibrary is concerned.

1. The exchange rate is approaching 40%. Therefore, your U.S. dollaris worth approximately $1.40 CDN. As the rate fluctuates frequently,a quoted dollar amount is extremely changeable. Additionally, whenmy expenses are submitted to Peggy, I convert the amount into the

rate that particular day, which can change before I receive the cheque.Also, my bank puts a hold on the cheque for sometimes as long as 30days. This, I am sure, cannot be convenient for Peggy. I know itcertainly is not for myself. The only alternative would be if Peggy wereto pay me by money order.

2. I have had problems shipping tapes. There is a $25.00 limit oninsuring videotapes now. Some of the items in the library are worthsubstantially more than that amount. Also, Canada Customs hasoccasionally opened my packages, both incoming and outgoing, andon one occasion, a tape went missing. I received the box, which hadbeen sent to me containing two tapes when it left the States, and uponopening same discovered that only one tape was inside. The packagehad been opened and resealed, but not well enough. I can only blamethe border.

3. Any new material I may order for the library would be subject tothe same scrutiny by the Customs inspectors at the border, as far asits commercial value is concerned and I would be charged a duty fromthis end. This is why I have not ordered any new tapes this year.

Some of these restrictions are new since my 1995 report. I feel thatin light of the above, the library would be better serviced from withinthe United States. As I stii attend meetings in Seattle, I could takethe contents there to our next meeting in October and ship them fromwithin the US if you decide on a new librarian by then.

I hope this does not sound too negative, but once the factors I havedescribed are considered, I think you will agree that moving the librarywould be the best alternative for the Society.

Sandra

AGM 1997Plans for the 1997 AGM in Chicago are gradually beginning to fallinto place. It will be held October 3rd through 5th. After protractednegotiations, a contract was signed with The Courtyard by MarriottChicago Downtown. The hotel is a very convenient location in theRiver North area of downtown Chicago, just two blocks fromMichigan Avenue. Within a few blocks are several restaurants, theshops of Michigan Avenue, and Navy Pier a recently opened festivalmarket place. Also close by are the world-renowned Chicagomuseums the Art Institute, the Field Museum, the AdlerPlanetarium, and the Shedd Aquarium.

We are in the process of planning workshops and selecting a keynotespeaker. If any members are interested in putting on a workshop,please let me know. We are planning on three sessions with twoworkshop choices at each session.

Chicago is the scene of several mystery and detective stories, so wehave chosen a mystery theme for our AGM. At the Saturday eveningbanquet, we plan to hold an entertainment that will explore themystery of what happened to the Princes in the Tower. With someluck and a bit of we may shed some light on the matter. If anymember would be interested in participating in this entertainment asa suspect/character, please let me know.

We also plan to host a Sunday morning breakfast to benefit theSociety’s Fiction Library.

Chicago is beautiful in the autumn. We hope that many of you willjoin us next October for a weekend in the Windy City.

Mary

Winter, 1996 Ricardian Register

R ICHARD III SO C I E T Y

The thirty-sixth annual general meeting of the RichardIII Society, American Branch, was called to order bychairman A. Compton Reeves at 2:00 p.m.

Upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimouslycarried, the reading of the previous year’s minutes waswaived. In the absence of the membership chairman,Laura Blanchard reported that membership appears tobe stable, with 600 individual memberships and anadditional 60-70 family members.

Peggy Allen presented the treasurer’s report, which is beingprinted separately. Written committee reports werecirculated prior to the meeting in order to conserve meetingtime, and are included as an addendum to these minutes.

Chairman Reeves announced that he had beenapproached by the archivist of Ohio University regardingthe Society’s archives. The University is willing to handleconservation and storage of the Society’s archives, andmake them available to members and to researchers asrequested. Reeves understands that the University iswilling to do so at no cost to the Society. Upon motionduly made, seconded, and unanimously carried, it was

RESOLVED, that the Chairman continue discussionswith the Ohio University Archives and report back to themembership.

There was some discussion of the Society’s presence onthe Internet, especially its World Wide Web site, andthe ways in which the Society can continue to use theInternet to its objectives. A show amongthe members present indicated that approximatelyone-third currently had some access to the Internet. Thecontinued development of an on-line library of primaryand secondary source materials was generally endorsed,and upon motion duly made, seconded, andunanimously carried, it was

RESOLVED, that the Society should bear the costs ofmaintaining the web site (currently donated by one of itsmembers).

Laura Blanchard mentioned a Philadelphia-areaInternet service provider that offered no-cost Web sitesto nonprofit corporations in the area. She will investigatethe possibility of migrating to this site, and of registeringa domain name for the Society to make its Internetaddress easier to remember.

Members discussed the feasibility of establishing anelectronic discussion list for members. This will requirea member volunteer willing to devote the necessary timeto maintaining the list. Sharon Michalove suggested that

Sheraton Society Hotel, PA

in the meantime members might want to joinH-ALBION, the electronic discussion list for history ofthe British Isles supported by the National Endowmentof the Humanities. Michalove is a co-moderator of thislist.

Roxane C. Murph, chair of the nominating committee,presented the results of the balloting for current officers:

! Chairman: A. Compton Reeves

! Membership Chair: Peggy G. Allen

! Secretary: Judith A.

! Treasurer: Bonnie Battaglia

Through a clerical oversight, the position of Chairmanwas not included in the ballots mailed to members inAugust. Since the nominating committee had receivedno nominations for alternate candidates in response toits published call, and since Compton Reeves hadpreviously agreed to stand for election for a second term,ballots were distributed at the meeting and Reeves wasduly re-elected as Chairman.

A summary of the revised mission statement from theparent society was circulated to the members and thefloor opened for discussion. Members voiced twoconcerns: one, that the support of the various causes didnot imply that the parent society would assess itsbranches any contribution over and above the branches’dues; and, two, that this did not suggest that the Societywould not continue to work for a re-assessment ofRichard III’s reputation.

Murph presented this year’s awards for meritoriousRicardian service to Peggy G. Allen, whose work astreasurer spanned a period where the Society’s assets grewconsiderably and the treasurer’s position took on a newdimension; and Dr. Sharon D. Michalove, whose career ofRicardian service spans more than two decades, mostrecently as American Branch research officer and organizerof the very 1995 academic conference.

The meeting concluded with the traditional raffle insupport of the William B. Schallek Memorial GraduateFellowship Award. The grand prize, a complete set ofthe historical novels of Sharon Kay Penman, donated bythe author, was won by Sharon D. Michalove.

There being no further business, the meeting wasadjourned at p.m.

submitted,Laura Blanchard, vice chair

in the absence of secretary

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

T H I R T Y- SE C O N D I N T E R N A T I O N A L

Dortha L. LiningerHarry BlustainHenry BrennanWilliam J. Brown &Margaret M. BrownDarlene DuncanEvelyn FairKatherineMichael J. JablonskiJulianne LearyLaura LonesBety T. LordAmyShirleeCatherine MorrisonDavid E. Jerome B. VictoryDawn D. Wood Laura Clarke L. WilhelmSuzanneEdith CoxLouis EverettDuncan StuartB. SilvermanThomas J. MooreMarcia K. StoneMarilynn Alan Lee SummersKathleen CaseyKennett LoveEvelyn P. BonavitaJudith-Alison BroekingJohn BrozaDonna-Marie CarpinelliIvy LivingstonJanet YanoskoMarsha Weaver

Thanks to Compton Reeves, the American Branch ofthe Richard III Society is once again sponsoring asession of papers at this conference, which drawsthousand of medievalists from all over the world for fourdays of workshops, lectures and fellowship. Not tomention shopping (imagine stalls for all the academicpresses and all the medieval chachka vendors in theworld).

of interest to Ricardians: The Society of the WhiteHart, an informal of scholars of late medievalEnglish history that gathers regularly at the conference,will also be sponsoring four sessions, co-organized bySharon D. Michalove and Jeffrey Hamilton.

In recent years, as many as a dozen Ricardians haveattended and found themselves warmly welcomed by theother conference participants. Registration isapproximately $100 and adequate though spartandormitory rooms are available for about $17 a night along with meal service.

To be added to the mailing list, write to The MedievalInstitute, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo,MI 490083801, 6166-387-8745, fax 616-387-8750,mdvl_congres@wmich.edu,medieval.

Georgetown University and Cambridge University Press have announced the publicationon Shakespeare, a new magazine for Shakespeare enthusiasts, scholars and teachers.

T he premier issue includes an interview with Donald Foster about the Funeral Elegy andseveral articles on Hamlet, including an interview with Kenneth Branagh about his film, fourveteran teachers’ approaches to teaching Ham/et and Hamlet on the Internet. In addition, akindergarten teacher writes how she uses The Tempest, Pericles, and The Winter’s Tale to assistin the cognitive and moral growth of her students.

Subscriptions are $12 for one year (3 issues). Send your name and address to: Shakespeare,Georgetown Unversity, P. 0. Box 571006, Washington, D.C. 20057-1006.

More information is available at

Winter, 996 Ricardian Register

Dale Summers

by Al Pacino, Michael Kimball,1996

1 Pacino is looking for Richard but not veryeeply. He never goes beyond the surface of

the play. Ignorance of the historical facts of theWars of the Rose is rampant. unan-swered by Shakespeare remain unanswered. tions such as “Why did Richard need a wife?”

The opening credits were interesting. The words KINGRICHARD appeared on the screen: then LOOattached itself to KING and “for” appeared between thewords to complete the title.

There was far more documentary than Shakespeare inthe approximately film. There were aboutthirty people in a theater designed for probablythree-hundred. Two couples behind us made approvingnoises throughout the About a dozen newcomersentered during the final credits.

The acting was in the main superb. Alec Baldwin wasGeorge, Duke of Clarence; Kevin Buckingham;Kevin Conway shone as Hastings; Penelope Allen,Elizabeth Woodville; Estelle Parsons, Margaret ofAnjou; and Larry Bryggman, Stanley. There was a gaspof recognition when Bryggman appeared on the screen.He plays Dr. John Dixon on The World Turns.

Two actors’ performances were disappointing. WinonaRyder seemed very uncertain as Lady Anne. Her hatredof Richard in the beginning of the courtship scene wasnot convincing. Perhaps she was overawed at playingopposite Pacino and was grateful to have been chosen.

Pacino himself was the other disappointment. Helacked the smooth humor and charm that makesShakespeare’s Richard palatable. Each time he appearedin costume, he sported a three-day stubble of beard. Ifhe intended to portray Richard as a gangster, hesucceeded. But the antihero of the play depends on hischarm to achieve his ambition. Pacino’s Richard isintense and strong but devoid of charm and humor.

My long-suffering, non-Ricardian spouse took me tothe film. “It was more entertaining than I bull sessions with the actors gave a lot of insight into theplay. He described Pacino’s Richard as a caricature. SoPacino represented Shakespeare well.

Many of the scenes were shot in a medieval museum inLos Angeles. But there were conversations shot on

American streets, at the reconstruction Globe andin London.

Pacino’s stated purpose was to explain Shakespeare toAmerican audiences. To prove the need for the film, heinterviewed an assortment of Americans on the They seemed to prove his premise. To help explain theplay, he filmed statements from such luminaries asKevin Kline, James Earl Jones, Kenneth Vanessa Redgrave, Derek Jacobi and John aswell as some English scholars who were inadequatelyidentified. He and his fellow producers (one of whomwas intelligently vocal but not clearly designated) choseRichard III because it is performed more often than anyother Shakespearean play and therefore perhaps more

to playgoers. But they admit that it is a difficultplay to comprehend. It has a large cast and therelationships are entangled.

An attempt was made to explain the language. KevinConway gave an example. Where we say “Go,”Elizabethans would say, “Be Mercury, and on thywinged feet, fly.” Vanessa described iambicpentameter in philosophical and elegant prose but themeaning got lost in the words.

The battle was filmed through a red filter. Then l’acino,wearing velvet not armor, lost his horse. I was struckby arrows and done in by Tudor himself. That is,

killed Al Pacino.

I kept hoping someone would say, “Hey, this can’thave been real.” My ears pricked and my heart leaptwhen Vanessa said words completelydivorced from truth.” But she was referring to thespeeches Shakespeare put into Richard’s mouth. Thereal Richard was never acknowledged.

Ricardian Register Winter, 1996

Jeanne22 15 Westmoreland

Falls Church, VA 22043(804)

Michigan AreaDianne Batch

9842 Hawthorn Glen DriveGroselle, Ml 48138

(313) 675-0181

New EnglandDonald D. Donermeyer

67 Moss RoadSpringfield, MA 01 1 19

(413) 782-9542

Northern CaliforniaValerie Fitzalan de Clare

16666 159th AvenueSan Leandro, CA 94578

(510) 276-1213

NorthwestYvonne Saddler

2603 E. Madison StreetSeattle, WA 98 1 12

(206)

Ohio

Laura Bailey5567 Bramble Court

Willoughby, OH 44094-7251

Rocky MountainPam Milavec

9123 West Arbor AvenueLittleton, CO 80123

(303) 933-l 366

Southeastern PennsylvaniaLaura Blanchard

2041 Christian St.Philadelphia, PA 19146

FAX (2 15) 985-l 446

Southern CaliforniaKaren Vogel

SouthwestRoxane C. Murph

3501 Medina AvenueFt. Worth, TX 76133

(817)

Rencwnl

Mr. Mrs. Miss

Address:

City, State, Zip:

Country: Phone: Fax: E-Mail:

Individual MembershipIndividual Membership Non-USFamily Membership

$30.00$35.00

Contributions:Schallek Fellowship Awards:General Fund (publicity, mailings. etc) $

Contributing Sponsoring Memberships: Total Enclosed:

Honorary Fotheringay MemberHonorary Middleham MemberHonorary Bosworth Member

75.00$180.00$300.00

Family Membership $30 for yourself, plus $5 for eachadditional family member residing at same address.

Plantagenet Angel $500.00 Make checks payable to Richard Society, Inc.Plantagenet Family Member Mail to Peggy Allen, 1421 Wisteria Metairie, LA 70005

Winter, 996 R i c a r d i a n R e g i s t e r