The search for Richard III

[Lady Nicolette]

I have to say that I'm quite enjoying the discourse here, it is refreshing to see so many Rennies interested in actual history and a lively discussion resulting from some current historical discoveries.

[BLAKDUKE]

I was one of the few students in high school that was interested in history.  Of course anything other than the American revolution and the civil war you had to find out on your own.

[Lady Nicolette]

Kind of like whatever country you live in a map of the world is printed with your country in the middle...
I loved it when I had a history teacher who made the history come alive instead of it just being a matter
dates.

[DonaCatalina]

Actually what they teach here about the American Revoltion and the Civil War covers only about 10%. I've always been fascinated by history and I was amazed at how much my teachers didn't know when I brought up books that I found and read on my own.
Even now, I'm still finding out how bloodthirsty and treacherous English monarchs were, no offense meant to any Englishmen. H VII may have invented a lot of the bad things that were passed down about R III; but make no mistake, he was as probably as bloodthirsty and trecherous as the rest of them.

[BLAKDUKE]

If the heads of 2 of his slaughtered wives could now talk,  I think they would agree with you.

[Welsh Wench]

I've always found history fascinating, especially English monarchs. Charles II being a favorite of mine. What a guy!

But to me it seems quite a lot of people attending Renaissance festivals don't seem that interested in the historical aspect.
It's more than garb and what to drink at a pub.
It's kind of like paying homage to a wonderful time long gone and immersing yourself in it.

Like speculating on what would have happened if Richard III had children who lived. Would Bosworth have been necessary? What if Henry lost? Who would have inherited the kingship then?
What if Elizabeth had children?
If Catherine of Aragon had been able to bear children, would England be a Catholic nation?

How many rennies think of these things?
I am thinking only the ones who are historically and not garb-inclined.

Just an observation, not a slam to anyone.

It's the history that fascinates me.

[Lady Nicolette]

I agree that it is WAY more than garb and drinking and think that those who only find those aspects are missing out on a lot.
But each to his/her own. 

Pretty fascinating stuff to think on, if history had played out differently! 

[Rowan MacD]

  It's always been about the history for me.; both to see it in 3 dimensions, and to be a part of it.

  I drink little, and I'm not at faire to party or to hook up, but I know plenty of folks that attend for no other reasons (though most of those never get further than a nodding acquaintance).  

[BLAKDUKE]

W.W.

In the what if department.  I picked up a book once and read the fly leaf.  It was a book of some length on historical fiction and one of the things that it covered was exactly what you suggested, "What if Richard had won'  damme if I did not buy the book.  I think it would have been an interesting read

B.D.

[Rowan MacD]

   The 'What If's' are half the fun of History.   
   Just pick up any thread, and run it back to the first interesting fork in the road.   Travel the road not taken to whatever conclusion it takes you to.  I have wondered many times what would have happened if, for example, Anne Boleyn had died of the sweating sickness, would Henry have just found someone else? 
    It is likely that other ladies at the court would have caught his eye, but none as bold as Anne, who's insistence on wedding before bedding helped the king decide to dispose of his first wife, and his religion. 
   Without Anne as a catalyst, there would be no Jane, etc.   Mary would likely have inherited the throne and Phillip of Spain would have been King after her.....   

   

[Lady Gregory]

Great thread.  I cannot wait to see how this all transpires.  History could indeed very well bs rewritten.

For me faire is all about the history, and although not accurate in any means, it is as close as you get short of SCA.  It is all what you put into it and take away from it.

There are so many whatif's.  If H8 had stayed with Catherine, Mary would have succeeded and England would likely still be mostly Catholic (and Northern Ireland at that).  A lot of history would have been so different and bloodshed not taken.  What if Catherine had a male heir?  Or Anne or Mary for that matter?  QE likely would not have been queen.  What if Jane had lived and went on to have more sons?  What if Katharine Howard had not been so scandalous and lived to produce a male heir?  Just this one very short, but major period in English history could have transpired in so many ways with such lasting impact on generations to come.  It could have also impacted American history as well, as many early settlers traveled here for religious freedom.  Interesting indeed.

[BLAKDUKE]

W.W.

I just became educated.  I have been involved in  this discussion long before this forum came into existance.  I went to Wikipedia and did a search on Edward IV, Richards brother and learned that there was a controversy in his own lifetime which discussed the possibility that Edward was illegitimate.  Now there is a Pandoras box if I ever saw one.   If you read the section also look at one of the highlited hot spots which discusses the alternate sucessions to the english throne.  Now there is some interestin gwhat-ifs in there.  Let me know when you have read it and tell me what you think.

B.D.

[Welsh Wench]

While an interesting theory and would make a great movie, I'm not buying the illegitimate theory.

Based on physical appearance, genetics is a weird thing. A throwback trait can show up several generations later. If Edward's height is considered a factor, it must be remembered that he was descended from Edward I known as Longshanks who was 6'2" when the average height for a man was 5'3" and about 135 lbs.
Can you imagine how Longshanks height scared the bejeebers out of them?

It was said that Edward IV's mother went into a tizzy over his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville and called him a bastard.
Really.....who of us have not uttered that word in a moment of testiness?

Wikipedia is a great source but sometimes the facts can be as reliable as those who wrote the article.

I came across these, Blakduke, which you may find interesting.

http://forum1.aimoo.com/allmytudors/The-Plantagenets/Edward-IV-Illegitimate-1-1376684.html

http://vanorabennett.com/book/figures-in-silk-aka-queen-of-silks-was-king-edward-iv-illegitimate/

We really need to meet up at a faire, have dinner and a nice long discussion on this!

Bring your defibrillator and iron lung.  

[DonaCatalina]

W.W. you know me... I can see a portrait and tell you who their grandparents were. I'm not buying Edward IV's illegitimacy theory. As fas as contemporary chronicelers, the fact the Richard III declared Edward's children illegitimate was suspect at the time. "Cecily Neville left court and had little contact with her son Edward before his death in 1483.

After Edward's death, Cecily supported the claim of her son, Richard III, to the crown, nullifying Edward's will and asserting that his sons were illegitimate. These sons, the "Princes in the Tower," are generally believed to have been killed by Richard III or one of his supporters, or perhaps during the early part of Henry VII's reign by Henry or his supporters.

When Richard III's brief reign ended at Bosworth Field, and Henry VII (Henry Tudor) became king, Cecily retired from public life -- maybe. There is some evidence that she may have encouraged support for an attempt to dethrone Henry VII, when Perkin Warbeck claimed to be one of the sons of Edward IV ("Princes in the Tower"). She died in 1495."

[BLAKDUKE]

w.w.

I am leaning to giving the theory a little more than cursory value.  I am not basing it on physical resemblance for the obvious points that you brought.  I am basing it more on the documented evidence of who was where and when.  The documents portend that Richard of York was nowhere near home plate during the cruical 5 week period when Edward was supposed to have been
conceived based upon his birthdate.  Now I supposed he could have been early or late, but there seems to be no evidence of either.

None-the-less interesting to say the least.

I would love meeting up at a faire and discuss all over ale and scotch eggs.

B.D.