#11 "Why should we believe Holbein?"


Since I believe in good methods, I neither believe nor disbelieve but merely remember what is said and then test it for myself, thoroughly. I have to draw attention that documentation from the 16th century, which made no sense before, has been tested and makes sense today. Personally, I do not twist facts to fit my theory. I twist and torture my theory to fit the facts and no-one has come up with a better theory or better interpretation of the evidence to date, over a substantial period of time, 1976-2000, and I'm very glad about that.



#12 "How do we know Holbein isn't a hoaxer?"


On the one hand, we know Holbein left personal and secret political information literally 'on the wall', for anyone to see, when there was much less risk if he had left the information in a diary, perhaps in code, buried in the ground for someone to find at a much later date. We know the story Holbein tells amounts to sedition and treason, whether true or false, and many honest men have hanged for less. On the other hand, if DNA findings are positive...he is not a hoaxer. But that still does not tell us why he risks his life to tell us the story. The most likely answer is in an unpublished book, Volume No. 1 of five volumes, written by me, which one day you may be able to buy and read about the greatest portrait painter in Henry the Eighth's Tudor England, the German artist who virtually alone created the record we have today of the English Court in the 16th century, showing us not just Holbein the artist but the life and times of Holbein the Man.


For the record, the risk to the artist was the fate awaiting a commoner condemned to die for treason -- to quote the sentence passed on Bishop John Fisher in 1535:


You shall be led to the place whence you came and from there shall be drawn through the City to the place of execution at Tyburn, where your body shall be hanged by the neck; and, being half live, you shall be cut down and thrown to the ground, your bowels to be taken out of your body, and burnt before you being alive; your head shall be smitten off; and your body divided into four quarters; and after, your head and quarters be set up where the King shall appoint; and God have mercy upon your soul. (The Life and Death of St. Thomas More by E.E. Reynolds, Burns & Oates, London, 1978, p.346)



#13 Please answer the seminal question: "For what, so silently, died More?"


Holbein's testimony on this central point of why More did not protest with all the legal skills we know he possessed when he was found guilty of treason in one of the greatest travesties of justice ever seen at trial in England, contributes greatly to the understanding of this period of history. If true, it means that this famous question, first raised by regius professor Dom David Knowles (Thank you for reminding me!), suggests today that More sacrificed his life in silence rather than be part of a popular cause for civil war advocated by his friends, unhappy at the Divorce, who wanted to replace the legal heir, Henry VIII, with the rightful heir, Richard IV (Richard, Duke of York, also known as John Clement). (See: "The Princes in the Tower")



#14 "What will you do if the DNA findings show the continued existence of the two princes?”


If DNA profiling confirms the former existence of two missing persons living under false names and identities, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, I propose a full and proper investigation by an open-minded and multi-disciplined committee willing to listen and examine new evidence, using systematic criteria in an on-going method of inquiry. I propose to present the evidentiary case in book form. Since the research findings extend into multiple volumes, the first volume will be strictly confined to the central theme of the deception plan and how it was kept in place, borrowing global jargon of the national security agencies to describe and explain the methods to support and keep in place a plan of deception. The inquiry will read the given and received history of Henry VII on the tightrope while his enemies set fire to the rope. The inquiry will also hear expert opinion on the black-ops, which kept Henry VII from being burned.


The criteria used in cases where persons at risk assume false names and identities, the role of the case officer and the required behaviour of the notional person he creates, are described and explained in detail. The inquiry will see the "new" pictorial evidence, corroborating the deception plan and the subsequent cover-up in many paintings and drawings attributed to the German portraitist at the court of Henry VIII, Hans Holbein the Younger. Finally, I recommend that the inquiry sit in the Lower Hall at Nostell Priory in front of the painting and that the public be admitted to seats in front of the long oak tables holding the books and other documentary evidence behind which the distinguished panel may take their places: the case to be presented by Michael Mansfield QC and the findings submitted for judicial review and, if positive, enacted in the Rolls of Parliament.



#15 "If Elizabeth II is not the rightful queen of England, who is?"


There is a story in the UK that an American Mafia boss had a novel idea and called Buckingham Palace. "Declare war on America," he advised. "But America is our ally", said the Queen’s private secretary. "Forget it! You declare war, we beat you in a week, we pay for the damage and you’re the next US State!"


"And what if we win?"


To be blunt, Rebellion, Regicide and Usurpation IS the history of England. That's a line from The Debt, a play translating the new history into drama for the stage, written by me at the insistence of the late and great Sam Wanamaker. Some of you may remember it. Today, Elizabeth II is the Queen of England and she and her descendants remain the legal kings and queens of England unless Parliament decrees otherwise. Parliament means the Lords, the Commons and the People. There is no other rightful Queen of England. That is the law and I like it!


Revised 090900

Last Revision 010401




#67 “I cannot believe that such a controversial theory as yours can be a fertile theory…”


The so-called “fertile theory” explodes on an unsuspecting world shooting outwards in all possible directions. If it doesn’t – it’s not a fertile theory. This is the odd test applied over a substantial period of time in the study of methods. This test was applied first to my conjecture that More’s History of King Richard III was a blind. The blast into a highly combative academic world of history, art history, linguistics, literature, secret writings and secret history, something I could not possibly have known at the time, left me with no alternative – I was a rocket on the launch pad and obliged ABSOLUTELY to shoot into space – Whatever! Whatever! This month, I land on the National Gallery, London, in the latest battle I intend to win, and be seen to win, in space. Click ß FAQs à Talking Pictures.

Last revision 010801


Click “Ctrl + Home”