RenaissanceFestival.com Forums

The Squire's Tavern => Squire's Tavern => Topic started by: Welsh Wench on August 26, 2012, 07:43:30 PM

Title: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 26, 2012, 07:43:30 PM
I hope they find him.

I hate to think that a Mini-Cooper is parked on top of him.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-19361350
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on August 26, 2012, 10:06:04 PM
Isn't it amazing that the English (in the past, at least), gave no regard to their national treasures and built over, refurbished over, pulled up & destroyed, and so on?

So many gorgeous medieval monumental brasses in churches had pews built over them, nailed right into the brass plates, or covered with carpeting.  And some of the ones on the walls were plastered over, and unless the plaster needed to be replaced, no one knew about them.

Honestly, one of their truly notable kings possibly had a parking lot built over him!  That is incredible.

I hope they find him, too, and if not taken to Westminster Abbey along with so many other kings and queens, at least put into the cathedral in Leicester.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on August 27, 2012, 04:59:00 AM
The Tudor dynasty went to such lengths to expose Richard's misdeeds that they probably added a few that were made up whole-cloth. So at the time, local people thought of it more as a grave for a villain than a king.
Those who benefitted from the dissolution of the abbeys including greyfriars were more interested in obliterating anything that might cloud their claim to the property. It is typical of all people that they only see the historical value of a site long after it has been destroyed.
I do hope that they frind the grave; but there have been digs near there before that turned up all sorts of graves.
Skeletons found during road work near Greyfriars (http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Fife/article/21803/skeletons-uncovered-by-st-andrews-roadworks-thought-to-be-remains-of-15th-century-monks.html)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Nicolette on September 01, 2012, 02:22:40 PM
Very fascinating part of history.  The last conversation I had with my older sister who died some years ago was about Richard III, she had a lifelong fascination with him.  Even though she was so ill, the story still was compelling enough to make her forget the pain she was in for a while.  It's a good last memory.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 06, 2012, 10:24:20 AM
This dig is indeed bearing fruit. Archaeologists have confirmed they've found the medieval Grey Friars Church.

http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/05/search-for-richard-iii-confirms-discovery-of-the-church-of-the-grey-friars/ (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/05/search-for-richard-iii-confirms-discovery-of-the-church-of-the-grey-friars/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 07, 2012, 05:05:50 AM
Well....maybe this will bear fruit. Thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 10, 2012, 12:06:40 PM
 http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/10/archaeological-dig-inches-tantalizingly-closer-to-possible-burial-place-of-king-richard-iii/

Over the past two weeks, the team has made major discoveries about the heritage of Leicester by:
 •determining the site of the site of the medieval Franciscan friary known as Grey Friars
 •finding the eastern cloister walk and chapter house
 •locating the site of the church within the friary
 •uncovering the lost garden of former Mayor of Leicester, Alderman Robert Herrick
 •revealing medieval finds that include inlaid floor tiles from the cloister walk of the friary, paving stones from the Herrick garden, window tracery, elements of the stained glass windows of the church, a medieval silver penny a stone frieze believed to be from the choir stalls amongst others

Thanks, Jack, for sharing this with me!


(http://www.medievalists.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/47428_web.jpeg)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on September 10, 2012, 05:41:48 PM
I read about this today.  Maybe something will come of it.

Lady Nic.  I wish I had known your sister, she sounds like a lot of fun. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Nicolette on September 10, 2012, 09:26:29 PM
Wow! (@ WW's and Jack's posts)  I so wish my sister could have lived to see this.
@ Blakduke:  She was incredibly intelligent.  I loved when she read to me as a child (I was 8 years younger),she would do all different voices
and accents for the characters in the tales, she made them come to life. Kind of set me up to be a Rennie before I knew what was happening! :)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 12, 2012, 08:56:30 AM
Have the remains of Richard III been found? Archaeologists discover skeleton at Leicester dig (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/12/has-the-remains-of-richard-iii-been-found-archaeologists-discover-skeleton-at-leicester-dig/)

From the article at Medievalists.net:

Quote
Archaeologists searching for the grave of Richard III have discovered the human remains of a human male that have “strong circumstantial evidence” indicating that it is of the English king.

An initial analysis of the male skeleton has discovered:

  • That it appears to have suffered significant peri-mortem trauma to the skull which appears consistent with (although not certainly caused by) an injury received in battle.
  • A bladed implement appears to have cleaved part of the rear of the skull.
  • A barbed metal arrowhead was found between vertebrae of the skeleton’s upper back.
  • The skeleton found in the Choir area has spinal abnormalities. We believe the individual would have had severe scoliosis – which is a form of spinal curvature. This would have made his right shoulder appear visibly higher than the left shoulder. This is consistent with contemporary accounts of Richard’s appearance. The skeleton does not have kyphosis – a different form of spinal curvature. The skeleton was not a hunchback.
  • There appears to be no evidence of a “withered arm”.

Another article can be found here: King Richard III grave hunters find bones in U.K. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/12/king-richard-iii-grave-hunters-find-bones-in-uk/57760350/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 12, 2012, 09:09:03 AM
Wonderful find!

I wonder too if the Queen will deny testing on the bones like she did the bones found in the Tower of London with a possible claim to be the lost princes.




Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on September 12, 2012, 05:24:00 PM
I realize she is the queen but can she really do that.  The grounds are not part of any royal control as was the Tower of London.

what unfolds will be most interesting.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 12, 2012, 06:26:32 PM
The archaeologist and the Richard III Foundation seem more concerned about finding viable DNA for testing than they are about royal decrees. Regardless, the boffins are very confident they got their man!

Here's the latest: Richard III Foundation welcomes success of archaeological dig and looks forward to re-burial of England’s Last Plantagenet King (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/12/richard-iii-foundation-welcomes-success-of-archaeological-dig-and-looks-forward-to-re-burial-of-englands-last-plantagenet-king/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on September 12, 2012, 06:52:23 PM
That is awesome!  Jack, thank you for posting that link.  I read the story and watched the 2 videos.  How interesting about the descendant of his sister who gave the DNA swabs, and I really enjoyed seeing the second one, where Richard Taylor has a huge grin on his face.  You can see his excitement.  It will be wonderful if they did find out it is him, and how nice if they would inter him with his wife.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 13, 2012, 04:58:39 AM
I think this is exciting. If it does indeed turn out to be Richard III, the arrow in the back changes a lot of stories.
"The traditional view of the cause of the King's famous cries of 'Treason!' before falling have been that during the battle Richard was abandoned by Baron Stanley (made Earl of Derby in October), Sir William Stanley, and Henry Percy, 4th Earl of Northumberland."
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on September 13, 2012, 05:11:09 AM
DONNA C.

Not necessarily.  The traditional story is as you say, however there was never any definitive report of HOW Richard met his end.  It could very well have been by an arror in the back as he was riding toward Henry Tudor after having unhorsed and killed Henrys standard bearer. It seems that everyone did everything behind his back that day.

The BLAKDUKE
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 13, 2012, 05:40:32 AM
And in the first video on the page linked in post #12, the researchers acknowledge that if they have indeed found Richard this will most certainly rewrite the history texts, particularly where Tudor mythology is concerned.

Here's the latest update from the Beeb: Richard III dig: 'Strong evidence' bones are lost king (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-19561018)

Quote
DNA will be extracted from the bones and tested against descendants of Richard's family.

Dr Turi King, who is leading the DNA analysis, said: "It is extremely exciting and slightly nerve-wracking.

"We have extracted teeth from the skull, so we have that and a femur, and we are optimistic we will get a good sample from those."

The tests are expected to take about 12 weeks to complete.

If their identity is confirmed, Leicester Cathedral said it would work with the Royal Household, and with the Richard III Society, to ensure the remains were treated with dignity and respect and reburied with the appropriate rites and ceremonies of the church.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 13, 2012, 09:35:08 AM
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2qHW1CCMAAerkC.jpg:large)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: RenStarr on September 13, 2012, 09:58:48 AM
Here's somthing posted on Yahoo today. 

http://news.yahoo.com/battle-bruised-skeleton-may-king-richard-iii-121528688.html

I don't know if there's any new info in this report vs what's already been reported thru the BBC.  Thought I would post it anyways.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 13, 2012, 11:31:37 AM
Which brings up another thought--

What if the battle had turned favorable for Richard? What would England have been like without the Tudors? Better or worse?

And a link of interest--

http://www.historum.com/speculative-history/20967-if-richard-iii-had-fled-bosworth-field-survived-fight-late-4.html
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 13, 2012, 04:24:58 PM
Combining a previous topic on Richard III--

http://www.renaissancefestival.com/forums/index.php?topic=14699.15

To answer the question, the Stanleys always backed a winning side even if it was the last minute.
The move to crown Henry Tudor made Lord Stanley the step-father of the King.

http://www.r3ne.org/Worth8.html
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 14, 2012, 05:19:18 AM
I see that they finally dtermined that the second skeleton was female. Twelve weeks will seem like an eternity of waiting.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 17, 2012, 05:20:30 AM
I also noted something odd that they said about the female skeleton. The joints were all broken apart.
No What odd circumstanes led to a female being broken apart at the joints (drawing and quartering) and the buried under the floor of a church?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 17, 2012, 08:22:31 AM
An interesting take on things from a Tudor historian: A Tudor historian's view of the Richard III excavations (http://www.historyextra.com/blog/tudor-historians-view-richard-iii-excavations-0)

She brings out quite rightly that not only should this spur a re-examination of Richard III, but the reputations of Thomas More and William Shakespeare thanks to their rather dubious characterisations of the monarch.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on September 17, 2012, 04:38:47 PM
I also noted something odd that they said about the female skeleton. The joints were all broken apart.
No What odd circumstances led to a female being broken apart at the joints (drawing and quartering) and the buried under the floor of a church?
  That would make for an interesting sub-story....Drawing and quartering was a traitor's death (high treason) and I don't think they were allowed to be buried in hallowed ground after execution much less inside a church.
   Another question would be: If she was D&Q-why were her parts gathered back together to be buried? It was customary to display the body parts in different areas of the city.
  Perhaps she was not killed this way, but racked? 
  To add to the mystery: Only nobility, royals and the very wealthy rated a church burial.  I wonder who she was?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 17, 2012, 05:05:14 PM
That is what Jack and I were talking about.
Who is she?

If she were a heretic, she would not have a burial in the presbytery.

Could it be a woman that they wanted to keep her death silent?
But then Greyfriars was a monastery of sorts.

Robert Herrick, the mayor of Leicester, bought it in 1612 and built a mansion there, fifty years after Henry VIII had it knocked down.
Could she have been down there from that time?

WHO IS SHE???
A new mystery to solve!
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: PollyPoPo on September 17, 2012, 06:47:15 PM
Joints all broken apart?  Phrasing might indicate a reburial, where bones were disinterred after soft tissues were gone. 

Are there any reports as to what was with the body in the way of shrouding, garments, etc.?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 18, 2012, 04:56:21 AM
The phrasing for reburial after only skeletal parts remain is usually just that, skeletal remains. Stating that the joints were broken apart usually indicated visible stress on the bones where the cartilege and tendons were forcibly seperated. It would be interesting if they tested her bones for DNA or even dating.
One king's traitors were another king's heroines for much of English history. Post Mortem honors?
As for Will Shakepeare and Thomas Moore, it is pretty much a given that they played to the Tudors' vanities for their daily bread.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 18, 2012, 08:12:20 AM
I keep coming back to the "broken at the joints" wording as well, since that would indicate shearing trauma where the ligaments and tendons were pulled free from the bones. With no other remarkable trauma mentioned, she was quite probably broken on the rack for whatever reason. The post mortem honours angle is an interesting one. A martyr, perhaps? It's a fascinating mystery to be sure.

Regarding More and Shakespeare: a good many people don't know the history surrounding these men's patronage, so it can come as a surprise that what they've accepted as fact is indeed propaganda. My wife, for instance, hadn't pieced it together until I got her to reason on the history. Unfortunately, this is another case where the Big Lie principle worked.

Here is a link to the video of last week's press conference about the discovery: Video of the Richard III discovery Press Conference (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/18/video-of-the-richard-iii-discovery-press-conference/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 18, 2012, 11:16:42 AM
You have to wonder, too, if the Battle of Bosworth would have been necessary if Richard's ten year old son Edward had lived. He would have inherited the throne and perhaps Richard's death would have been not warranted.

I do hope they rewrite history but I won't hold my breath.
Some people prefer the myth rather than the truth.

I hope too that he is buried in his beloved Yorkshire.

Now if we can only find out who the female is......
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on September 18, 2012, 12:16:53 PM
 The article mentioned that if the skeleton is Richard's, he will be 'reburied with appropriate ritual'.
   I am hoping that will not mean he will be stuck back under the parking lot.   I didn't see any mention of making the site a permanent site to be visited. 
  I wonder where Richard (if it is him) will end up?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 18, 2012, 12:28:04 PM
The Richard III Foundation are already calling for him to be buried in his native York, which is, I feel, only appropriate.

Time for King Richard III to “Come Home to York”, says Foundation (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/09/17/time-for-king-richard-iii-to-come-home-to-york-says-foundation/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on September 18, 2012, 12:42:55 PM
  Yes, I was hoping he would be buried in York Minster.  I took some video there in '09 when we stopped in York on the way to Edinburgh.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 20, 2012, 05:33:03 AM
Still making news,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/19/skeleton-could-prove-coup-for-maligned-king-richard-iii/57809640/1
Richard Ibsen has been identified as the descendant of Anne of York.
Its possible that if the skeleton is indeed Richard III, there may already be an agreement in place for him to be buried at Leicester Cathedral.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/13/richard-iii-grave-leicester-burial_n_1880668.html
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/09/richard-iii-a-ceremony-fit-for-a-king/
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on September 27, 2012, 10:33:06 AM
A piece on the descendent of Richard III's sister Anne, the man whose genetic profile quite possibly holds the key to this archaeological mystery.

Richard III dig: From cabinet-maker to kingmaker (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19731622)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on September 27, 2012, 10:46:39 AM
"A number of manuscripts belonging to Richard III, which include a prayer book, a guide on how to be a good king, and literary texts in three languages have survived. These books show him as a learned, devotional and cultured medieval monarch", says historian Michael Wood.

He believes these texts are the only way of "getting behind the Tudor myth… When you look at the manuscripts you forget Shakespeare's legend of the hunchback which dominates everyone's imagination".

"He was a legitimately crowned king so the Tudors had to portray themselves as successors delivering the country from a wicked tyrant. The image of him as wicked is entirely spawned by Tudor propaganda.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19572103

Michael Wood is the historian who also brought us The Story of England on PBS where they take the village of Kibworth and tell the history of England through one town in Leicestershire.

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on September 27, 2012, 07:22:21 PM
I believe I mentioned this little tidbit in a previous thread, but Henry was able to pull off this major usurpation of the crown and have Richard declared traitor by dating his reign from august 21st instead of august 22nd.  The 22nd was the actual date not the 21st.  But by doing this he made Richard the traitor by warring on the King(Henry).  He could also declare anyone that fought for Richard a traitor and thereby sieze their lands.   And they had the nerve to call Richard devious  Ha.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on October 02, 2012, 02:46:43 PM
A rather fascinating article on the Greyfriars, and how they became intertwined with Richard III.

Richard III and the Lost World of Greyfriars (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/10/02/richard-iii-and-the-lost-world-of-greyfriars/)

The contributor's novel looks like an interesting read, as well.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on October 03, 2012, 04:50:37 AM
Interesting reading. December is going to e a long wait.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: iain robb on October 03, 2012, 06:12:23 AM
I thought he was buried in a backyard in suburban Detroit. Oh, wait, no, that didn't pan out.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 03, 2012, 04:58:53 PM
JIMMEY NOT RICHARD.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on October 05, 2012, 08:52:09 AM
An online petition for Richard to be returned to his native York is up and active. Here's your chance to let your opinion be heard.

Link for more information: PRESS RELEASE: YORK PETITION LAUNCHED AS ‘RICHARD III’ DEBATE GOES GLOBAL (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/10/04/press-release-york-petition-launched-as-richard-iii-debate-goes-global/)

For those not big on reading press releases, here's the petition itself: TIME FOR KING RICHARD III TO COME HOME TO YORK (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/369/648/460/time-for-king-richard-iii-to-come-home-to-york/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on October 05, 2012, 08:59:38 AM
Richard should go home to York. He loved it there.

I just read The Goldsmith's Wife by Jean Plaidy about Jane Shore, mistress of Edward IV and brother of Richard.
In the end, she supported the theory that Henry Tudor was responsible.

It was written in 1950 and an excellent read.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on October 06, 2012, 07:16:24 AM
One cannot discount the fact that Sir James Tyrrell, the loyal servant of Richard III who is said to have confessed to the murder of the princes in 1502, could have been paid for his confession by Thomas More.
The Queen has resisted all calls for DNA testing of the bones in the urn, which is even more odd since DNA testing is being done on bones suspected to be Richard III.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 06, 2012, 07:47:54 AM
Well I believe we can discount it.  More did not begin his 'History of Richard III'  until 1505.  So what reason would he have had to pay Tyrell for any info 5 years before he was involved in the whole mess.  I am inclined to discount any info coming from the
"sainted(?) More".  Certainly none of his writings on R.III could be considered contemporary.  True he was alive at the time of R.III, but he was 6 years old when Richard died at Bosworth.  Also he was H VIII historian.  If he wanted to keep his head he would say nothing approaching the truth about Richard.  One only has to read his garbage to realize that.  Supposedly he(Richard) spent 2 years in the womb, came out full grown covered in hair, with teeth and hunchbacked.  Of course he lost his head anyway so much good it did him.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Nicolette on October 06, 2012, 09:09:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 07, 2012, 04:02:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Nicolette on October 07, 2012, 09:57:14 AM
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.

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on October 08, 2012, 04:49:57 AM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 08, 2012, 04:57:05 AM


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

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on October 10, 2012, 08:07:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Nicolette on October 10, 2012, 08:29:11 AM
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! 

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on October 10, 2012, 09:52:02 AM
  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).  
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 10, 2012, 06:44:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on October 10, 2012, 07:22:52 PM
   The 'What If's' are half the fun of History.   ;D
   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.....   
 
   
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Gregory on October 12, 2012, 09:21:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 12, 2012, 07:22:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on October 13, 2012, 08:35:39 AM
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.   :D
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on October 13, 2012, 10:05:32 PM
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."
 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on October 14, 2012, 10:26:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on October 14, 2012, 10:28:46 AM
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."


 What a lovely woman.  Looks from here like she would throw anyone under the bus for power.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on October 15, 2012, 12:28:36 PM
OK so now we have the name of the archer.
Blaybourne.

Whether Edward IV was illegitimate or not, it didn't really matter since Richard III inherited and he was the legitimae son of Cecily Neville and Richard Duke of York.

http://www.serendipity.li/more/monarch.htm

Furthermore in another site--

In 2003, historian Dr Michael Jones revealed in a Channel 4 documentary (first broadcast January 3, 2004) previously overlooked evidence from Rouen, cathedral, France, discovered while researching the Hundred Years' War. In the cathedral register, an entry in 1441 records that the clergy were paid for a sermon for the safety of the Duke of York, going to Pontoise (near Paris) on campaign. He would have been on campaign from July 14 to August 21, 1441, several days' march from Rouen.

If a child with a claim to the throne was born small or sickly it would normally have been recorded, and there is apparently no such record, consequently, proponents of the theory of illegitimacy claim it is likely that Edward was not born prematurely. By calculating back from Edward's birth on April 28, it seems apparent that Richard was not present at the time of Edward's conception around the first week of August 1441.

Additionally, the cathedral records reveal that Edward's christening took place in private in a side chapel, whereas for the christening of Richard's second son the whole cathedral was used for a huge celebration, again suggesting to proponents of the theory that Edward was indeed illegitimate, although in spite of this, the Duke never disclaimed his paternity of his wife's eldest son.

Some historians have raised the criticism that it is logistically possible for Richard Duke of York to have returned briefly from battle to Rouen because often military leaders led their forces from the rear.

Dr Jones argues that, if it were true that Edward IV was illegitimate, this would have invalidated his claim to the throne of England thus rendering the existing royal family path as illegitimate. Dr Jones argues that tracing through Edward's younger brother, George Duke of Clarence (whom Jones argues was the legitimate heir), the current heir would be Michael Abney-Hastings, 14th Earl of Loudoun who resides in Australia as a rice researcher. However, since King Henry VII claimed the throne of England through right of conquest, it can be argued that Michael Abney-Hastings is no more legitimate to the throne then the blood line that would have continued if William the Conqueror had not taken over. Furthermore, under English law, the son of a married woman is automatically considered the son of her husband unless he is disclaimed at birth. Since Richard did not do this, Edward remained his legal son and heir, whether or not he was actually Richard's biological son.

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php?topic=4102.0;wap2

Isn't a fifteenth century scandal fascinating?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on October 15, 2012, 04:39:18 PM
  Better than a soap opera. ;D

  This was pretty much the same thing I pointed out to my hubby when he commented on the 'Aussie heir'.
   Once the throne was taken by conquest; all claims of the losing side are null.
   All hail the new royal bloodline, who got to spend the next few generations cementing their hold on the crown against the 'old regime'.
    Of course, one of the best ways to accelerate the process was what H7 did-Marry the Princess.
    After, of course, her brothers were safely out of the way.   
   
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on October 16, 2012, 05:02:42 AM
"According to documents discovered by Dr Michael Jones in Rouen Cathedral there was a 5-week period when Richard was 100 miles away from his wife, leading a military campaign against the French, during which Henry was conceived, so Richard could not have been Henry's father, and so Henry's parents were not married at the time of his birth. Moreover, only one of Henry's parents (Cecily) was descended from Edward III and Henry II, and that line of descent was illegitimate (it was again via the union of John of Gaunt with Katharine). Thus Henry IV had no legitimate claim to the English throne, and so none of his descendants, including the present Queen of England, have had either."


I think he switched some names up, whoever wrote this.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on October 29, 2012, 10:42:46 AM
Well, it's officially decided. If the remains are those of Richard III, they will be re-interred in Leicester Cathedral. This according to justice minister Helen Grant.

Not everyone is pleased with this development.
Quote
Joe Ann Ricca, founder and chief executive of The Richard III Foundation, which had argued the skeleton should be interred in York, said she was disappointed at the decision.

"If his remains are really going to be buried in Leicester, we would hope he at least has a traditional Christian service," she said.

"But it's kind of a monstrous act when you know that the former king of England had expressed the desire and a wish to be buried at York Minster."

Full story here: Richard III dig: Leicester Cathedral burial confirmed (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20116118)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on November 08, 2012, 02:21:53 PM
  Does anyone know how soon we will know if they have the real Richard or not? The suspense is killing me!
I wish they had photos of the remains in situ.  I should like to see the skull and the arrowhead.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on November 09, 2012, 04:49:00 AM
The announcement is tentatively scheduled for sometime in December pending tests.

Personally I think they already know since they have just announced plans for internment in Leicester Cathedral IF it is Richard III.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on November 20, 2012, 01:47:35 PM
Now targeting January 2013 for the results to be announced.

Is it King Richard III? We we will know in January (http://www.medievalists.net/2012/11/19/is-it-king-richard-iii-we-we-will-know-in-january/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on November 21, 2012, 05:06:46 AM
Thanks for the update.....sheesh. another month.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on November 21, 2012, 07:26:46 AM
It seems a facial reconstruction is in the works too along with analysis of teeth and bones to find out diet and lifestyles.

Should prove very interesting.
New year, new beginnings in English history!

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on November 21, 2012, 08:10:09 PM
Last night I finished the historical novel "The Kingmaker's Daughter" about Richard Neville's two daughters, Isabelle and Anne, who was married to Richard.  I really enjoyed reading it, and I am looking forward to finding out if the tomb is really his.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on November 21, 2012, 08:28:04 PM
Murdered, buried, forgotten, had Victorian-era foundations mere inches from crushing his remains, then all that bulldozed and a car park laid over him... I really do hope it's Richard and they can lay him properly to rest. He's been through enough.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on December 18, 2012, 08:08:25 AM
Well according to the latest internet posts.  It seems that we will have an answer around the first part of the year.  The DNA is almost complete and the powers to be are almost certain that they will be positive.  I hope so.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on December 20, 2012, 04:53:02 AM
press leak? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9745893/Carpark-skeleton-will-be-confirmed-as-Richard-III.html)
I wonder what else they found with the body that they're keeping from the public.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on January 03, 2013, 05:19:40 AM
http://www.gadling.com/2012/12/17/remains-of-king-richard-iii-discovered-in-parking-lot/
Now they are waiting until after a TV Documentary airs.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on January 04, 2013, 11:45:04 AM
I would love to know the relationship of the woman (if any) that was buried there.
The romantic and fanciful in me would like to believe it was a mistress that followed him into battle.

I still would like to see him buried in York. I think he spent enough time in Leicester (under a carpark.)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on January 04, 2013, 12:31:00 PM
  I can't wait for the news.
After that- I wonder if they will televise the (re) interment of the remains.
It would great if they would allow a reenactment society to stage a 'period' funeral for him. This would be a fantastic opportunity to teach living history...  
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: dbaldock on January 04, 2013, 01:06:36 PM
Just subscribed to Archaeology Magazine, http://www.archaeology.org/ (http://www.archaeology.org/), and they've got at least one article about Richard III that can be read online.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on January 05, 2013, 07:55:28 AM
 I can't wait for the news.
After that- I wonder if they will televise the (re) interment of the remains.
It would great if they would allow a reenactment society to stage a 'period' funeral for him. This would be a fantastic opportunity to teach living history...  

I think under current British Law that if it is proved to be Richard III, there are set protocols for the State funeral. I also think that Parliament has to approve it. So it could get a bit sticky. Has anyone heard if the Crown has offered an opinion on a State funeral?
I know we have a few connections to GB here.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on January 10, 2013, 05:16:40 AM
http://www.richardiii.net/whatsnew.htm
Still no date for the Documentary or the announcement.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on January 10, 2013, 08:10:20 AM
Results will be released the first week in February.

http://www.medievalists.net/2013/01/10/results-of-richard-iii-search-will-be-announced-in-the-first-week-of-february/ (http://www.medievalists.net/2013/01/10/results-of-richard-iii-search-will-be-announced-in-the-first-week-of-february/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on February 04, 2013, 05:48:23 AM
It's him!  I saw it this morning when I turned on the computer.  He will be buried in Leicester.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Bob of the Lake on February 04, 2013, 07:06:44 AM
Yes! I heard it on the radio this morning--it's official!

Here's a BBC News article about it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21063882 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21063882)

(Edited to add URL)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 04, 2013, 09:23:27 AM
Wonderful!
OK so they don't bury him in York.

I wonder if this will open the door into looking for the Princes in the Tower. Maybe Queen Liz will consent to the testing of the bones found on Tower property.

I do love a good English mystery to go with my tea and scones.

Now about that woman found with Richard........
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: LadyFae on February 04, 2013, 10:28:45 AM
Wonderful!
OK so they don't bury him in York.

I wonder if this will open the door into looking for the Princes in the Tower. Maybe Queen Liz will consent to the testing of the bones found on Tower property.

I do love a good English mystery to go with my tea and scones.

Now about that woman found with Richard........

Yes, my thoughts as well.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: RenStarr on February 04, 2013, 04:14:25 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/experts-remains-englands-king-richard-iii-105948025.html (http://news.yahoo.com/experts-remains-englands-king-richard-iii-105948025.html)

This just popped up on yahoo.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on February 05, 2013, 04:59:10 AM
How interesting that the second descendant wanted to remain anonymous.
Maybe they'll get permission to look fot eh princes in the Tower.
or even look for the real body of Edward VI.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 05, 2013, 10:32:07 AM
I wonder what the amount would be in parking meter money if they charged him for parking his carcass there.

Seriously, I hope this opens the way to do forensics on the bones found at the Tower. I'd love to know what happened to the princes.

I think Richard knew of it but 'what he didn't know didn't hurt him'.  Until Henry Tudor came along.

I still wonder what it would have been like if the Tudors hadn't seized the crown. Would the Spanish Armada still have happened, making Britain Queen of the Seas?
Would we never have Shakespeare?
No Church of England so would they be a Catholic nation?
No monasteries pulled down so no archaeology finds because they were still there?

Interesting things to ponder.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: LadyStitch on February 05, 2013, 12:30:25 PM
I know the thought of genetic testing is a bit testy for the royal family starting with Queen Victoria.  If somehow it was proved that she was NOT the rightful heir to the throne, do you realize how much 'fertilizer' would hit the fan  across Europe?  She was considered the "grandmother" of Europe because she married all her children off to the royal families of Europe.  I just think that if the testing could effect the royal line of succession, it will NEVER be done.  If it is to identify remains, it is a good possibility the royal family will allow it to proceed. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 05, 2013, 12:44:43 PM
Enough fertilizer for all the potatoes in Ireland?

OK the reconstruction has been revealed. Take the cloth off the bust and here he is...
The one....the only....

RICHARD THE THIRD!!!!

(http://www.medievalists.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RicihardIIIface-650x433.jpg)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: LadyStitch on February 05, 2013, 05:01:01 PM
Enough fertilizer for all the potatoes in Ireland?
That pretty much sums it up.  I tried to see who would have gotten the crown, and it made my head hurt.  It IS really cool what they can do with computers now. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 05, 2013, 08:02:26 PM
I'm wondering how the line of succession could be affected.

Richard had a son who died before he did. No heirs.

The princes--if they were murdered--had no heirs.

The Battle of Bosworth would have gone just the way it did so I can't see where the problem would lie in succession.
No heirs were left to claim the throne.

If Bosworth hadn't happened or had a different outcome, Richard could have had more children and they would have inherited.

Very interesting indeed. I love 'what if's'.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on February 06, 2013, 05:17:12 AM
Enough fertilizer for all the potatoes in Ireland?

OK the reconstruction has been revealed. Take the cloth off the bust and here he is...
The one....the only....

RICHARD THE THIRD!!!!

(http://www.medievalists.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RicihardIIIface-650x433.jpg)
That is amazing.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: LadyStitch on February 06, 2013, 11:28:36 AM
I'm wondering how the line of succession could be affected. Richard had a son who died before he did. No heirs.The princes--if they were murdered--had no heirs. The Battle of Bosworth would have gone just the way it did so I can't see where the problem would lie in succession. No heirs were left to claim the throne. If Bosworth hadn't happened or had a different outcome, Richard could have had more children and they would have inherited. Very interesting indeed. I love 'what if's'.
My comment regarding line of succession was in response to royal family allowing DNA testing of their ancestors.  The testing of Richard III, not a big problem.  The testing of anyone Queen Victoria and below, major problem. If it was proved anyone them were NOT from the issue of George III, the whole royal line of succession would be a major FUBAR. If Victoria was NOT, the daughter of the Duke of Kent the crown would have gone to her uncle Eurnest Agustus the Duke of Cumberland who was German.  That royal line lost it's claim to the British crown by the Titles Deprivation Act of 1917 by George V.  If that was negated, it would mean that Prince Ernst August of Hanover born in 1954 would be king. Consequently, he is currently married to his 2nd wife Princess Caroline of Monaco.  He has a son that was born in 1983, who because of other inter marriages is 50 something currently in line for the crown.  However because of the Bill of Rights of 1689 and the Acts of Settlement 1701 Parliament could say who is the rightful sovereign of the realm.  If Parliament said someone was King/ Queen they ARE the King/ Queen.  Like I said, my head hurts from all that.

Now back to our regularly scheduled Richard III discussion.  ;D
My next question is, what will become of the car park?  Technically that is the resting place of royalty. Will a special area be  set aside with a plaque, or statue to show where he laid?  Kind of reminds me of the historical marker that was stuck between two buildings in my home town.
 That is why I said
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: RowenD on February 14, 2013, 12:21:22 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/02/07/Royal-funeral-at-last-for-Richard-III/UPI-82831360217820/?rel=4231360764332 (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/02/07/Royal-funeral-at-last-for-Richard-III/UPI-82831360217820/?rel=4231360764332)

Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 14, 2013, 10:57:11 PM
I find Queen Elizabeth's lack of interest in a major coup in British history a bit.....how shall I say? Disturbing? That she won't be attending the funeral.

I would go dressed to the nines. With a big Kentucky Derby hat.

And the fact that she won't allow the testing of DNA on the bones found on the Tower grounds.

I'll bet Dr Who could find them.

Maybe there should be an episode where the Doctor goes back in time to Bosworth.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on February 16, 2013, 10:49:49 AM
Sent to me by NoBill Lurker.   ;D

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7056162048/h72D37A60/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on February 16, 2013, 07:19:19 PM
LOL
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on April 18, 2013, 04:54:54 AM
National Geographic is advertising a special on Richard III to be aired starting this Sunday, April 21, 9pm/8 central.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on April 18, 2013, 10:57:35 AM
  I'll be watching!   Has there been any further info on when the (re) burial will be?  The most recent info I have is this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21786634 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21786634)  from March 17th.
    The cathedral at Leicester has notified it's architects regarding construction of a tomb.   We may have to wait until that is completed before he is officially re-interred.   
   What do you think about the issue of a Catholic burial service?
   The Anglican church did not exist when he died, and he was a devout Catholic, as most of the rulers of the christian world were at that time.

Edit: I did find this:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21427369 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21427369)
  I like this proposal for the tomb design.   Another artcial said that the original grave site will be preserved as part of a museum.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on April 18, 2013, 11:03:54 PM
Thanks for the notice on the National Geographic special, Dona!

I agree, if Richard had lived, there probably would not have been the Anglican church. That was Henry VIII's doing.
Richard was Catholic, give him a Catholic funeral.
And send him to York.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on April 19, 2013, 08:05:33 AM
Thanks for the notice on the National Geographic special, Dona!

I agree, if Richard had lived, there probably would not have been the Anglican church. That was Henry VIII's doing.
Richard was Catholic, give him a Catholic funeral.
And send him to York.


AMEN TO THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As an aside
In the Kendall biography, I believe it was mentioned, that one of the reasons for the Stanleys defection was that Richard had indicated, as noted in some of the extant documents of the times, that he was going to drastically change things after the battle.  There is nothing surviving that denotes what those changes would be, but if the Stanleys thought they were going to lose stature, that might have swayed them to turn traitor.   
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on April 19, 2013, 08:48:17 AM
Maybe they misunderstood and he was just going to redecorate the castle.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: RenStarr on May 24, 2013, 07:12:28 AM
FYI............new article I found on yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/battle-bruised-king-richard-iii-buried-hasty-grave-230501174.html (http://news.yahoo.com/battle-bruised-king-richard-iii-buried-hasty-grave-230501174.html)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on September 11, 2013, 08:18:07 AM
FYI............new article I found on yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/battle-bruised-king-richard-iii-buried-hasty-grave-230501174.html (http://news.yahoo.com/battle-bruised-king-richard-iii-buried-hasty-grave-230501174.html)
"The study also delineates the 10 injuries on the corpse's skeleton. Most are likely battle wounds, including two fatal blows to the back of the head."

Since he was leading a charge, who betrayed him from behind?
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on September 11, 2013, 08:44:45 AM
Most likely the Stanleys, who turned traitor at the last minute, thereby sealing Richards
fate.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 07, 2014, 03:37:39 PM
It looks like Richard III will be buried in Leicester Cathedral on March 26, 2015.

How cool would it be to go to the funeral of a king who died over 400 years ago!

http://www.medievalists.net/2014/08/07/king-richard-lll-reburied-march-26th/ (http://www.medievalists.net/2014/08/07/king-richard-lll-reburied-march-26th/)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on August 07, 2014, 03:53:52 PM
Verycool indeed.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on August 07, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
  Indeed!  I've been following the debate on the design of the tomb.
    Can't say I'm a fan of the final design.
    It's too modern and minimalist for a 400 year old king. The Richard III society wanted something a bit more in keeping with what would have been constructed in the 1400's; and many were rabidly opposed to the block carved with a deep cross.   
   The depth of the cross is designed to reveal that the remains are not interred above ground. (at least this was the official explanation).
   Will they be holding a Catholic rite?  The Anglican church did not exist in his time.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 07, 2014, 09:51:30 PM
According to this article--

"It is deeply regrettable, it's crazy," says the Father Andrew Cole, spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Nottingham, which includes Leicester.

King Richard III was a Catholic and was buried with full Catholic rites in a marked grave.
Father Cole says he does not mind which city he is finally laid to rest in but the church would like him reburied as soon as possible.

"What some people forget is his funeral has already happened," he says. "A Christian ceremony was held and his body was given back to God.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-26526790 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-26526790)

A Christian ceremony and buried with Catholic rites? Seems to me he was dumped at Greyfriars. If it was a legitimate funeral and burial, why did he become a parking space?
Surely there would have been SOME record of it somewhere.

Sounds like Monty Python did the funeral.  ;D
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on August 08, 2014, 08:05:45 AM
It seems that controversy will follow good king Richard even after 400 years.  Will he never receive peace????
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: DonaCatalina on August 24, 2014, 07:36:20 PM
Richard III got short shrift from Alison Weir in her new book as well.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on August 25, 2014, 09:26:36 AM
Since my husband and I are going to England next year to visit his family, I wrote to Leceister Cathedral asking if we could attend the service.  They wrote this long, flowery letter back.  Short answer:  no.

 :-\
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 25, 2014, 12:02:30 PM
From the above website, Renee--

For three days King Richard III will lie in repose, in his coffin covered with a commissioned pall, for any who wish to pay their respects. Special arrangements will be in place to allow as many as possible who wish to visit to do so.

Go ahead. Sneak in. Act like you own the place.
It works for me at Don Cesar's pool and hot tubs.  ;)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on August 25, 2014, 01:07:03 PM
From the above website, Renee--

For three days King Richard III will lie in repose, in his coffin covered with a commissioned pall, for any who wish to pay their respects. Special arrangements will be in place to allow as many as possible who wish to visit to do so.

Go ahead. Sneak in. Act like you own the place.
It works for me at Don Cesar's pool and hot tubs.  ;)
  It would probably work too.
  On our visit to York Minster; the volunteers manning the gate didn't appear to be too overly vigilant about who had a pass or not.  Admission was 8 pounds 50p, so you know there were some that were just strolling in.  There was plenty to see in the 'free' area so we saved our money for Edinburgh.
   All the antiquities over there have a price tag; the towns and cities have to maintain their own attractions with little help from the government, so we tourists literally support the local church/ruins/castle.
   I have little doubt there will be the usual charge to get into Leicester Cathedral itself, even if they don't charge extra for the Richard III viewing.  I think it would be worth it.

As for the original burial service back in the 15th century: Richard would have had some sort of Catholic committal ceremony; especially if he was buried in a church in (then) consecrated ground.
   The monks would have made sure he was buried with the standard rites; just not the ones befitting a king.   He was devoutly religious, and they would not have ignored that; however, unless someone payed to have masses read for his soul he would have been buried, possibly in an unmarked grave, and soon forgotten. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on August 25, 2014, 05:42:05 PM
From the above website, Renee--

For three days King Richard III will lie in repose, in his coffin covered with a commissioned pall, for any who wish to pay their respects. Special arrangements will be in place to allow as many as possible who wish to visit to do so.

Go ahead. Sneak in. Act like you own the place.
It works for me at Don Cesar's pool and hot tubs.  ;)


They did invite us to see the remains lying in state, but if we have to drive 4 hours each way, I want to go to the ceremony.  I will ask my sister-in-law if  they have any provisions for people who live on the UK wanting tickets.  Maybe she could get them and give them to us.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 27, 2014, 11:36:09 AM
An interesting article just published. It seems Richard liked exotic food. And here is how they found out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/science/richard-iiis-rich-diet-of-fish-and-exotic-birds.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/science/richard-iiis-rich-diet-of-fish-and-exotic-birds.html?_r=0)

Mine would probably say, 'She sure loved pepsi and pizza.'
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: isabelladangelo on August 27, 2014, 12:24:26 PM
An interesting article just published. It seems Richard liked exotic food. And here is how they found out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/science/richard-iiis-rich-diet-of-fish-and-exotic-birds.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/science/richard-iiis-rich-diet-of-fish-and-exotic-birds.html?_r=0)

Mine would probably say, 'She sure loved pepsi and pizza.'

They pretty much ripped this article apart on the SCA cooks list:

http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org/2014-August/411765.html (http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org/2014-August/411765.html)

Just click through to see all the various replies. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Captain Jack Wolfe on August 27, 2014, 06:03:06 PM
Another good write-up on this information, in The Independent: Swan, egret, heron: Revealed - the Richard III diet (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/swan-egret-heron-revealed--the-richard-iii-diet-9673772.html)

"The findings of the research by experts from the British Geological Survey and the University of Leicester will be shown in a new documentary, Richard III: The New Evidence, to be shown [Sunday 17 August] at 9pm on Channel 4."

Though I'm sure it will turn up in the states soon enough.  ;D
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on September 17, 2014, 12:11:30 PM
 Interesting article shedding light on the last moments of Richard III...

http://io9.com/modern-forensics-reveal-gruesome-details-of-king-richar-1635759052 (http://io9.com/modern-forensics-reveal-gruesome-details-of-king-richar-1635759052)


 It seems to validate the contemporary descriptions of the posthumous treatment of the King's body.  His body was stripped (armor was considered spoils of war) and draped naked over the back of a horse.   Anybody who wanted to could stick a sword or spear in the corpse as it passed by, and many did just that.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on March 24, 2015, 08:57:29 PM
The funeral for Richard III was March 22, 2015 in Leicester, England.

http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/bidding-farewell-to-richard-iii-photos-150323.htm (http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/bidding-farewell-to-richard-iii-photos-150323.htm)
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Lady Renee Buchanan on March 24, 2015, 09:12:21 PM
I put my name and Steve's in for the 300 tickets for the 3 different events that were open to the public.  When I heard the first week, over 10,000 people signed up, I didn't get my hopes up.

I heard on the radio that when the procession marched into Leicester and to the cathedral, there were 35,000 people lining the streets for a glimpse.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on March 25, 2015, 06:29:05 AM
Not that it is of major interest, but not one ounce of news coverage could I find.  All kinds of murder, rape, suicide and violence, Hollywood snot noses behaving badly but nothing of this.   
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Merlin the Elder on March 25, 2015, 07:57:47 AM
A Google of "burial of king richard" will get you a ton of stuff, including plenty of mainstream media outlets.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on March 25, 2015, 08:24:30 AM
What I fiind interesting is that the royal family couldn't be bothered to send anyone as a representative.
I'm sure Charles wasn't doing anything of importance.

What I also find interesting is that people are under the misconception that Elizabeth II is descended from the Tudors. At least not directly.

All three of Henry's children died without issue so the crown passed to Mary Queen of Scots' son James.
Thus ushering in the Stuart dynasty.

Also, Richard will be actually buried tomorrow.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Rowan MacD on March 25, 2015, 12:17:19 PM
 I've been watching bits of the funeral (which goes on for several days) on BBC.  pretty impressive thus far.


   Very few people of my acquaintance think the Royal family is directly descended from Henry VIII ( but then they are history buffs).  After QEI, the Tudor Dynasty ended; but not the Tudor bloodline.
  The Royals today, are more or less descended from Henry VII, (Henry VIII's  father), via Henry VIII's sister Margaret Tudor. 
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on March 26, 2015, 07:08:13 AM
There is an excellent write up in the wikipedia site today.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: Welsh Wench on August 22, 2017, 11:27:35 AM
Sure, I am dredging up an old topic.

But August 22, 1485 was the date of the Battle of Bosworth.

The face of English history changed forever.

Can get a hat's off salute for Richard III? He gave his all.
Literally.
Title: Re: The search for Richard III
Post by: BLAKDUKE on August 22, 2017, 09:05:42 PM
Amen my lady.  I sure would like to see an accurate movie made of Richard III.  Not based on some Shakespere crap.