With "The Third Plantagenet" from John Ashdown-Hill is by Michael Hicks' "False, fleeting, perjur'd Clarence" 2nd "Biography" about George, Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward IV and Richard III appeared. While Hicks' book is not an easy read, but it contains a wealth of information and details, Ashdown-Hills plant is entertaining, but has less substance. Ashdown-Hill reported a lot of interesting, but wanders off temporarily in's inconsequential. He speculated sometimes wildly, for example about the paternity of Edward of Lancaster and the Tudors. Why Richard said to have been born at a time may be in Berkhamstead place in Fotheringhay, remains completely enigmatic. The most interesting thing I found the chapter on George's execution and burial site. Less convincing are Ashdown Hills-psychological explanations (where he was based mainly on Internet sources, according to bibliography, and so overall kitchen psychologically sound speculation then). If he, for example, George assumed an inferiority complex due to lack of height and as proof cites only an eyewitness account from which it can be deduced that George with 11 years was apparently rather small for his age (or at least not substantially greater than Richard 8), then is this theory on shaky ground. Then Ashdown-Hill attracts even the drawing of George and his wife in the Rous Roll for his theory approach, but do not compare them, as it would have been obvious, with the image of Richard and his wife in the same source, but used as a comparison a very different picture. In the Rous Roll but not size difference as between George and Isabella is between Richard and Anne make out, either Anne was greater than Isabella, George as an adult but not less than Richard, or, and this is probably the most obvious variant Rous Roll is the actual size of the persons represented simply not starting. This would go downhill Ashdown Hills-central theory. Unclear remained me of the title of the book: Why George is supposed to be the "3rd Plantagenet", do not open up to me. Plantagenets gave up the throne of England since 1154, and when Ashdown-Hill so the 3 "York-brothers" thinks that survived puberty, then would be the 3rd and youngest Richard. But perhaps goes Ashdown-Hill with its count somehow for "meaning", and since George King was not (but this was not due to a lack of effort in turn), he is the 3. However, as the title is kind of the whole Book - all a bit haywire. Overall an interesting read with some food for thought, but far less solid than Hicks' book. It is fair to take pleasure in Ashdown-Hills speculation, I have decided not to believe everything.
