Marka Ragnos Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 This is one of those stories that's pure catmint for someone like me, but I wonder what you all think. Don't care? Should we embrace Richard? Do you still suspect he was a cruel monster? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/king-richard-iii-reburial-divisive-5382509 King Richard III reburial: Divisive monarch honoured as crowds gather to watch funeral procession start 22 March 2015 By Tom Parry For six days from today the last King of England to die in battle on home soil - nearly 530 years ago - finally receives a proper funeral and burial For more than five centuries he was regarded as an ugly misfit in the history of the monarchy, a Machiavellian king who killed two young boys to gain power. The hunch-backed caricature of wicked King Richard III was a product of William Shakespeare’s imagination, but the reputation of the last Plantagenet king was never restored. So it seemed fitting that Richard’s corpse was casually chucked into a church ditch – in with the commoners - after the Battle of Bosworth. He was the only ruler not to be given a proper burial, a casualty of war left to rot in an unmarked grave beneath a church by his enemies, the House of Tudor. But all that changed three years ago when a group of enthusiastic historians uncovered Richard’s bones near the battle site, underneath a car park in Leicester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bickster Posted March 23, 2015 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think he's dead and lived a long time agoHe lost a war and paid the ultimate price, he didn't get to write history as a result 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leemond2008 Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Great song Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) I saw the documentary about them digging up his skeleton. It was hilarious. There are this group of campaigners who campaign about him not being as bad as everyone says he was. One of the "rumours" is obviously that he was a hunchback. The guys who dug him up were talking to the head of this campaign group and the guy was ranting about how everybody says he was a hunchback but there's no evidence for it and he definitely wasn't a hunchback. And the archaeologists are like "ummm, well we've dug him up and we can tell from the skeleton that he was a hunchback" *silence* Edited March 23, 2015 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 Meh. I'm an early 20th C history buff, not a mediaevalist. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Ugggh God, I hated learning about Kings and Queens at school, stupid clothes, stupid hair cuts, pissing in the streets, boring, boring, boring. Then came WW1 and I was like, yeah, history is great. I just had no relation (obviously) to anything about medieval times or kings and queens in tudor etc times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 I wouldn't go that far, lapal. There was a lot of slashing people to bits with swords and axes, what's not to like? Game of Thrones is supposedly based on the Wars of the Roses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) I can't say I have much interest in Richard III and the misplaced reverence for the collection of what might be his bones seems to reveal stupid toadying royalist sentiments and a belief in divine right. The stuff about him being branded a monster by the incoming Tudors is quite interesting in political terms and Americans might draw a parallel with Nixon to understand why that was found to be necessary. Shakespeare's play is very good but as all his history plays are one big suck-up to the Tudors, it has to be taken as a propaganda piece. Edited March 23, 2015 by MakemineVanilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I wouldn't go that far, lapal. There was a lot of slashing people to bits with swords and axes, what's not to like? Game of Thrones is supposedly based on the Wars of the Roses. I don't like that kind of thing either, it's quite odd. I like Gladiator, Braveheart and 300 (all different periods/civilisations there admittedly) and stuff, but I generally just really dislike "ye olde" type things. I think it's part of the reason I don't like things like Lord of the Rings and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I wouldn't go that far, lapal. There was a lot of slashing people to bits with swords and axes, what's not to like? Game of Thrones is supposedly based on the Wars of the Roses. I've not read or watched 'Game Of Thrones' beyond 'Medieval Fun Time World', though aren't large parts suspiciously similar to an older French tome? Whether that was based on the WOTR, I couldn't tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 Dunno, I couldn't get past episode one. Just repeating what GoT aficionados have told me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 A child killer. Murdered his own nephews. But hey, he's royal, so that's okay then. Butchers the lot of them. The sort of Royal scumbag who reaffirms my belief in a modern Republic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted March 23, 2015 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 How do you feel? Indifference, hostility, and willful if not quite gleeful ignorance -- is that about the score here? I just hope you English have a better attitude about Oliver Cromwell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 A child killer. Murdered his own nephews. But hey, he's royal, so that's okay then. Butchers the lot of them. The sort of Royal scumbag who reaffirms my belief in a modern Republic. Because no "Republican" has ever behaved terribly have they? What a bizarre arguement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 Better ask the Irish what they think of the great democrat Cromwell. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 How do you feel? Indifference, hostility, and willful if not quite gleeful ignorance -- is that about the score here? I just hope you English have a better attitude about Oliver Cromwell. Not if they understand how he turned himself into a dictator in the end and the atrocities he committed in Ireland. The parallels between him and Napoleon are uncomfortably similar, to say the least. His example put the English/British off the idea of a republic and is probably one of the reasons we didn't have a revolution like the rest of Europe in 1848. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I'm related to one of his right hand men apparently. Named after him too. The dozy git also got killed at Bosworth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 How do you feel? Indifference, hostility, and willful if not quite gleeful ignorance -- is that about the score here? I just hope you English have a better attitude about Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell is a funny one. Over threw a monarchy to become monarch in all but name when he realised that for a King/Supreme Head of state/whatever that Parliaments and rule by consent are a pain in the arse. He was just as autocratic as the autocrats he overthrew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 How do you feel? Indifference, hostility, and willful if not quite gleeful ignorance -- is that about the score here? I just hope you English have a better attitude about Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell is a funny one. Over threw a monarchy to become monarch in all but name when he realised that for a King/Supreme Head of state/whatever that Parliaments and rule by consent are a pain in the arse. He was just as autocratic as the autocrats he overthrew. Is that what they meant by 'rump' parliament? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 23, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 23, 2015 I believe I may be related to the tutor of Cromwell's children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts