FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Richard 111 reburial CH 4
Richard 111 reburial CH 4
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was."
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this."
Still a total waste.
There's less parking in the city now too... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this.
Still a total waste.
There's less parking in the city now too..."
I thought it was a staff car park...
Hmmmm are you just being grumpy for effect?   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this.
Still a total waste.
There's less parking in the city now too...
I thought it was a staff car park...
Hmmmm are you just being grumpy for effect? "
It is early lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger... "
Apparently he left Bosworth slung over a horse and was stabbed in the ass as a final act of battle. I suspect the aim was to give him a slightly more dignified exit from the battlefield.
I think it is all rather splendid, Britain has a rich history and Richard III, whether villain or hero is a big part of that. He was the last Monarch to die in battle (his opponent that day never got anywhere near the action) and I think it is right, having found his remains that as a former Monarch he is given an appropriate send off.
Leicester will see the benefit in increased tourism for may years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger...
Apparently he left Bosworth slung over a horse and was stabbed in the ass as a final act of battle. I suspect the aim was to give him a slightly more dignified exit from the battlefield.
I think it is all rather splendid, Britain has a rich history and Richard III, whether villain or hero is a big part of that. He was the last Monarch to die in battle (his opponent that day never got anywhere near the action) and I think it is right, having found his remains that as a former Monarch he is given an appropriate send off.
Leicester will see the benefit in increased tourism for may years."
Er, Henry Tudor was a sword stroke from death at the hands of Richard & his household men before Stanley's troops intervened.
Its true that Tudor never intended to be part of the fighting but Richard saw the opportunity & it almost came off.
Had that happened English history could have been very different, no Tudors so no Stuarts (worst line of monarchs ever) no civil wars so parliament may have evolved very differently.
Suspect we would still have broken with Rome at some point though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this.
Still a total waste.
There's less parking in the city now too...
I thought it was a staff car park...
Hmmmm are you just being grumpy for effect? "
I'm always fucking grumpy!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this.
Still a total waste.
There's less parking in the city now too...
I thought it was a staff car park...
Hmmmm are you just being grumpy for effect?
I'm always fucking grumpy! "
Don't fuck grumpy, smile. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bbandflow OP Couple
over a year ago
South Devon |
"I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger...
Apparently he left Bosworth slung over a horse and was stabbed in the ass as a final act of battle. I suspect the aim was to give him a slightly more dignified exit from the battlefield.
I think it is all rather splendid, Britain has a rich history and Richard III, whether villain or hero is a big part of that. He was the last Monarch to die in battle (his opponent that day never got anywhere near the action) and I think it is right, having found his remains that as a former Monarch he is given an appropriate send off.
Leicester will see the benefit in increased tourism for may years."
And increased funding for the Leicester University archaeology dept.
Huntingdon you're missing out on a commercial opportunity, Cromwell's body is out there somewhere! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger...
Apparently he left Bosworth slung over a horse and was stabbed in the ass as a final act of battle. I suspect the aim was to give him a slightly more dignified exit from the battlefield.
I think it is all rather splendid, Britain has a rich history and Richard III, whether villain or hero is a big part of that. He was the last Monarch to die in battle (his opponent that day never got anywhere near the action) and I think it is right, having found his remains that as a former Monarch he is given an appropriate send off.
Leicester will see the benefit in increased tourism for may years.
Er, Henry Tudor was a sword stroke from death at the hands of Richard & his household men before Stanley's troops intervened.
Its true that Tudor never intended to be part of the fighting but Richard saw the opportunity & it almost came off.
Had that happened English history could have been very different, no Tudors so no Stuarts (worst line of monarchs ever) no civil wars so parliament may have evolved very differently.
Suspect we would still have broken with Rome at some point though."
I bow to your greater knowledge! The red roses beat the white roses though didn't they?
Amazing how influential one battle was. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I thought it a bit tasteless taking the remains to Bosworth field, it's like me taking my mum on a tour of hospitals family members have died in, the pit where Uncle Jim got buried alive and the factory where my Grandad lost his finger...
Apparently he left Bosworth slung over a horse and was stabbed in the ass as a final act of battle. I suspect the aim was to give him a slightly more dignified exit from the battlefield.
I think it is all rather splendid, Britain has a rich history and Richard III, whether villain or hero is a big part of that. He was the last Monarch to die in battle (his opponent that day never got anywhere near the action) and I think it is right, having found his remains that as a former Monarch he is given an appropriate send off.
Leicester will see the benefit in increased tourism for may years.
Er, Henry Tudor was a sword stroke from death at the hands of Richard & his household men before Stanley's troops intervened.
Its true that Tudor never intended to be part of the fighting but Richard saw the opportunity & it almost came off.
Had that happened English history could have been very different, no Tudors so no Stuarts (worst line of monarchs ever) no civil wars so parliament may have evolved very differently.
Suspect we would still have broken with Rome at some point though.
I bow to your greater knowledge! The red roses beat the white roses though didn't they?
Amazing how influential one battle was."
Not really, Henry Tudor's mother was married to one of the minor Lancastrian refugees from the Yorkist onslaught but in reality Tudor had no real link with the Lancastrian dynasty, & that died on the field at Tewkesbury (and in the Tower shortly afterwards).
Tudor was an opportunist and usurper just like Richard, Edward IV & Henry IV before him. The Wars of the Roses were examples of the principal of 'might over right' when anyone with a faint claim & a powerful enough force could take the throne. Of course, you then had to hold it.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sara I love your historical knowledge  "
She should make a documentary! Would be much more entertaining than David Starkey or David Irving. I'd watch and would definitely learn....a lot!
Still think Bosworth is influential, what would our royal history have looked like had Richard III prevailed?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
".....
Still think Bosworth is influential, what would our royal history have looked like had Richard III prevailed??"
It might not have taken so long before the people overthrew the monarch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
"Sara I love your historical knowledge
She should make a documentary! Would be much more entertaining than David Starkey or David Irving. I'd watch and would definitely learn....a lot!
Still think Bosworth is influential, what would our royal history have looked like had Richard III prevailed??"
He would have had difficulty holding the throne. His usurpation had split the Yorkist polity in half and factionalism was rife. However, having survived Buckingham's plot, seen of Henry Tudor, he may have reigned through being last man standing, but could still have faced challenges from Lamber Simnel and Perkins Warbeck. Although Bosworth is remembered as deciding the Wars, the last battle was actually fought two years later over a pretender's claim.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sara I love your historical knowledge
She should make a documentary! Would be much more entertaining than David Starkey or David Irving. I'd watch and would definitely learn....a lot!
Still think Bosworth is influential, what would our royal history have looked like had Richard III prevailed??
He would have had difficulty holding the throne. His usurpation had split the Yorkist polity in half and factionalism was rife. However, having survived Buckingham's plot, seen of Henry Tudor, he may have reigned through being last man standing, but could still have faced challenges from Lamber Simnel and Perkins Warbeck. Although Bosworth is remembered as deciding the Wars, the last battle was actually fought two years later over a pretender's claim.
"
Its certainly possible, but as Edward's children had been declared illegitimate due to his pre-betrothal to another when he married the Woodville woman then its also possible that no one would take the claims of bastard claimants (who weren't actually from Edward) seriously.
Richard had certainly alienated the Edwardian faction at court & had managed the almost impossible feat of uniting Edwards followers with the despised upstarts, the Woodvilles!
He had removed (literally) the head of the Edwardian faction and without the princes the Woodvilles had nothing & would have been a target for all those they had trodden on in their rise to prominence-medieval court politics was a very dangerous game to play.
Remember that victory in battle was seen as a sign of God's favour, so if Richard had won & held on long enough to marry & produce an heir then its more than possible the Nation would have been quiet.
Bosworth was a throw of the dice, winner takes all & English & British history took a radical turn because of it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
I think victory would have helped him, but more through exhaustion than much else. The number of magnates willing to take to the field in 1485 was a lot less than during the first section of the wars. I think most of the political nation was unwilling to risk their necks and fortunes in politics. Henry VII was in some respects a dull king, but as the Chinese say, living during exciting times is dangerous.
On a side note, Edward IV reminds me of Robert Baratheon, a chap who worked damn hard for the throne, then largely retired into enjoying it once he got there |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think victory would have helped him, but more through exhaustion than much else. The number of magnates willing to take to the field in 1485 was a lot less than during the first section of the wars. I think most of the political nation was unwilling to risk their necks and fortunes in politics. Henry VII was in some respects a dull king, but as the Chinese say, living during exciting times is dangerous.
On a side note, Edward IV reminds me of Robert Baratheon, a chap who worked damn hard for the throne, then largely retired into enjoying it once he got there "
The story is based on Wars of the Roses!
The aristocracy had indeed lost a lot of its big players over the 35yrs of the wars, but they were a breed predicated on the concept of their right to rule & that was guaranteed to cause conflict!
Henry VII consolidated power in the centre, Richard too was extremely aware of the dangers of 'overmighty subjects' and may well have done just the same to survive. I suspect Parliament would have let him do that just for the chance of peace and security, the nobility were already moving away from the old ideas; castles were being abandoned in favour of modern manor houses as the need for defence lessened. Sons were becoming lawyers etc. rather than taking up the sword to solve problems. Society was changing around the nobles & the smart ones were already facing into the wind of change.
It was no accident that the Tudors created no Dukes during their reigns, a Duke was 'Your Grace' just as the King was. The Henry's, Edward & Richard knew only too well they were merely first amongst equals & had you tried to explain the Stuart concept (a French idea) of Divine Right of Kings to Edward he would have wet himself laughing. He knew he held his throne by force of arms & by dividing his enemies.
Many is the time we've sat around campfires discussing these theories of alternative futures - well, until the mead caught up with us! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They closed half the roads around where I live too.
I could understand it if it was a reigning monarch but for a bloke they found under a car park that's been dead several hundred years?
I fail to see the importance. They should have saved the public money and left him where he was.
Public money wasn't spent, funds were raised for this."
Channel 4 sponsored the dig/exhumation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I really need to buy a good book, I feel terribly ignorant about all of this 
To those who have contributed with such authority, a big  "
Haha, ive a bookcase full!
Some very good , some written by Ricardian nutjobs etc.
Would you prefer a novelised version of the story or more of a history textbook?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
"I really need to buy a good book, I feel terribly ignorant about all of this
To those who have contributed with such authority, a big "
It's a fascinating period. I got into it after reading the Black Arrow, then dabbled with it at Uni. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I really need to buy a good book, I feel terribly ignorant about all of this
To those who have contributed with such authority, a big
Haha, ive a bookcase full!
Some very good , some written by Ricardian nutjobs etc.
Would you prefer a novelised version of the story or more of a history textbook?
"
A textbook I think, although one that adds a bit of colour. All of the history I studied was from the industrial revolution onwards, haven't done the Tudors since primary school! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I really need to buy a good book, I feel terribly ignorant about all of this
To those who have contributed with such authority, a big
Haha, ive a bookcase full!
Some very good , some written by Ricardian nutjobs etc.
Would you prefer a novelised version of the story or more of a history textbook?
A textbook I think, although one that adds a bit of colour. All of the history I studied was from the industrial revolution onwards, haven't done the Tudors since primary school! "
May I suggest Alison Weir's The Wars of the Roses and The Princes in the Tower then?
Both very good books that are was to read, in fact they almost read like a novel!
She is very even handed on the subject which makes her a target of Ricardian ire & she concludes he was most likely responsible - but definitely worth the read.
Also, Andrew W Boardman's Excellent, The Medieval Soldier in the Wars of the Roses textbook if you are interested in how all classes of soldiery went about warfare. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
He did lose the battle so a lot of his legacy will be coloured by those who did win and that reputation will suffer, like that of Mary Tudor, who was the greatest of English monarchs.
Through him, we have one of Shakespeare's great plays.
Had he lived, the heretic henry and his child might not have destroyed countless works of art through the dissolution of the monasteries - which makes Richard still relevant today.
Maybe not on here, but in the media I have picked up on a hostile anti catholic about Richard. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I really need to buy a good book, I feel terribly ignorant about all of this
To those who have contributed with such authority, a big
Haha, ive a bookcase full!
Some very good , some written by Ricardian nutjobs etc.
Would you prefer a novelised version of the story or more of a history textbook?
A textbook I think, although one that adds a bit of colour. All of the history I studied was from the industrial revolution onwards, haven't done the Tudors since primary school!
May I suggest Alison Weir's The Wars of the Roses and The Princes in the Tower then?
Both very good books that are was to read, in fact they almost read like a novel!
She is very even handed on the subject which makes her a target of Ricardian ire & she concludes he was most likely responsible - but definitely worth the read.
Also, Andrew W Boardman's Excellent, The Medieval Soldier in the Wars of the Roses textbook if you are interested in how all classes of soldiery went about warfare."
Thank you, I'm off on hols in a couple of weeks so I will be getting onto Amazon in the next few days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He did lose the battle so a lot of his legacy will be coloured by those who did win and that reputation will suffer, like that of Mary Tudor, who was the greatest of English monarchs.
Through him, we have one of Shakespeare's great plays.
Had he lived, the heretic henry and his child might not have destroyed countless works of art through the dissolution of the monasteries - which makes Richard still relevant today.
Maybe not on here, but in the media I have picked up on a hostile anti catholic about Richard. "
Mary Tudor was a dangerous recusant who almost sold the country out to Spain!
A dangerous religious extremist who went a long way to creating a long lived hatred of Catholicism in England.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He did lose the battle so a lot of his legacy will be coloured by those who did win and that reputation will suffer, like that of Mary Tudor, who was the greatest of English monarchs.
Through him, we have one of Shakespeare's great plays.
Had he lived, the heretic henry and his child might not have destroyed countless works of art through the dissolution of the monasteries - which makes Richard still relevant today.
Maybe not on here, but in the media I have picked up on a hostile anti catholic about Richard.
Mary Tudor was a dangerous recusant who almost sold the country out to Spain!
A dangerous religious extremist who went a long way to creating a long lived hatred of Catholicism in England.
"
She did pave the way for her bastard half sister - daughter of the most famous whore in all christendome, who is still holds her criminal conviction.
Like her mother, she did show great restraint over heretics. Had she lived longer, been allowed to marry and had a child or been more 'dangerous' she could have sorted out the mess that henry created with his brain damaged personilty altered head after his jousting injury. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
