68 replies to this topic

[monk 56]

Members must note, that Richard III has a huge debate in England, its centre is "The Richard III Society", so some members of other countries may not see this cause of debate of much!

It is an English thing but causes heated debate, link below:-

http://www.richardiii.net/

Obviously now he has been found, expect heated debate, i love it!

[TheLastLazyGun]

Taun, on 05 February 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

The Stanley's 'turned their coat' for future gains to their family from Henry... Not out of any sense of 'loyalty' or 'duty' to anyone but themselves...

That was quite a common thing to do in medieval battles.  It wasn't unusual.  Knights often sat on the sidelines and only joined a battle when it was clear which side was winning - and they joined, of course, on the winning side.

This would ensure they would be in favour with the monarch after he's won, rather than be on the losing side and be executed.

But when the Stanleys joined the battle on the side of the Lancastrians, it was their duty to protect Henry.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 05 February 2013 - 04:26 PM.

[monk 56]

I wonder if there is any connection to religious idea's, oops Henry the VIII did that later, ha ha!

http://en.wikipedia....te_Rose_of_York

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Luther_rose

[draugr]

I'm directly descended from the Stuarts and the Tudors, depending on what side of my family you look at, and I have to wonder, if they knew the context of him being under a parking lot, if they'd laugh and laugh.

I'm pretty sure they would.

[HollyDolly]

Speaking of Richard,I got an email from my local library saying that Alsion Weir's book The Princes in the Tower came in.Wow what a coinsedence.After all Richard waz said to have murdered his nephews the young boys in the Tower.

[glorybebe]

And this is supposedly what he looked like after reconstructing his face from his skull.  Pretty interesting, IMO.  rest of story:http://www.cbc.ca/ne...nstruction.html

Draugr, see any family resemblance?    wouldn't that be funny if he looked like one of your uncles?

[Taun]

glorybebe, on 06 February 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

And this is supposedly what he looked like after reconstructing his face from his skull.  Pretty interesting, IMO.  rest of story:http://www.cbc.ca/ne...nstruction.html

Draugr, see any family resemblance?    wouldn't that be funny if he looked like one of your uncles?

To me at least he somewhat resembles Lord Farquad from the movie Shrek...

[Antilles]

TheLastLazyGun, on 05 February 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

That was quite a common thing to do in medieval battles.  It wasn't unusual.  Knights often sat on the sidelines and only joined a battle when it was clear which side was winning - and they joined, of course, on the winning side.

This would ensure they would be in favour with the monarch after he's won, rather than be on the losing side and be executed.

But when the Stanleys joined the battle on the side of the Lancastrians, it was their duty to protect Henry.

What? You have an extremely fluid idea of loyalty, just like the Stanleys.

I'm interested in why only one of the DNA particpants has been publicly acknowledged. Why is the other donor's identity being kept under wraps? Privacy, sure, but who cares if a distant relative was Richard III? It's not like anyone's going to blackmail you over that.

[TheLastLazyGun]

Antilles, on 06 February 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

What? You have an extremely fluid idea of loyalty, just like the Stanleys.

As I've pointed out, what the Stanleys did was not unusual at the time.

Many of these noblemen often watched a battle from the sidelines and then joined the battle on the side of whichever side looked likely to win, especially if the victor was to be king.  That way, after the battle, they would be in the king's favour and awarded with land and titles.  The last thing they wanted was to back the loser and then likely be brutally executed by the king later.

Quote

I'm interested in why only one of the DNA particpants has been publicly acknowledged. Why is the other donor's identity being kept under wraps? Privacy, sure, but who cares if a distant relative was Richard III? It's not like anyone's going to blackmail you over that.

I thought that there was only one DNA donor.  That's why there are some people who are a bit dubious about the claims of the University of Leicester and the Richard III Society that the remains are those of Richard III.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 06 February 2013 - 02:14 PM.

[glorybebe]

Taun, on 06 February 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

To me at least he somewhat resembles Lord Farquad from the movie Shrek...

lmao!  Too funny!

[TheLastLazyGun]

Richard III: Academic mimics voice of last Plantagenet

An academic has recorded what he thinks could be the accent of Richard III - and was surprised to realise he may have talked with a West Midlands twang.

Dr Philip Shaw, from the University of Leicester, studied two letters written by the last Plantagenet king.

The spellings gave him clues as to how Richard might have spoken.

But Dr Shaw said the accent was probably not the same as the distinctive one associated with modern-day Birmingham.

He suggested that Richard could have picked up his accent from staying at Ludlow Castle in Shropshire, which his father (Richard, 3rd Duke of York) owned.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk...rshire-21369077

Edited by TheLastLazyGun, 11 February 2013 - 04:42 PM.

[ealdwita]

TheLastLazyGun, on 06 February 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

As I've pointed out, what the Stanleys did was not unusual at the time.

Many of these noblemen often watched a battle from the sidelines and then joined the battle on the side of whichever side looked likely to win, especially if the victor was to be king.  That way, after the battle, they would be in the king's favour and awarded with land and titles.  The last thing they wanted was to back the loser and then likely be brutally executed by the king later.

Especially as this particular king had his reign dated from the day before the battle to enable him to punish with greater ease those who had fought against him! (Northumberland was briefly imprisoned for treason)

[Mistydawn]

TheLastLazyGun, on 05 February 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

It IS a royal.  It is King Richard III.

And his skeleton is more significant than any skeleton of any normal person.

Ok TLLG, but that is your opinion and not mine. I think the peasants were as important.

[JesseCuster]

King Cobra 1408, on 04 February 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

study it to see what else we could find!its worth studying it and etc who knows you might find something interesting and exciting at the same time.i would personally study it.of course there might be some people that might say don't disturb the skeleton because of some religious crap/reasons or you might wake up or disturb their spirit.i do believe in that and etc but I'm sure id that was my body or at least was since i moved on and longer need it why would i  stay around where my ex-body is at and linger that would be boring for one thing most people wouldn't be able to see me or etc.screw religious reasons  or etc

Have you followed this story at all?

His bones were dug up and removed from the site months ago by the University of Leicester's archeological dept, taken to the university, scanned at the local hospital, subject to analysis by medical experts, carbon dated, DNA has been extracted and compared to a living descendant, etc.  

It's way past the date for anyone to object (religiously or otherwise) to disturbing the skeleton or to suggest that is should be studied.  The reason the University was able to declare that in their opinion, beyond reasonable doubt, that it is in fact the remains of Richard III, is because the skeleton was disturbed months ago and studied since then.

[monk 56]

Only Humour!

Hi Archimedes,

Were you demonstrating the Archimedes Screw on King Cobra? Ha Ha!

Edited by monk 56, 12 February 2013 - 09:16 AM.