Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 04:34 am
Richard III is one of History's villains, portrayed as a hunchback monster by Shakespeare. He was the last Yorkist king prior to the Tudor dynasty, and many historians feel he was unjustly treated. History is written by the winners, and it was unthinkable that Shakespeare should portray the man deposed by the current monarch's grandfather as anything other than a monster. There is a society still in existence dedicated to clearing his name.

Now bones have been found in an archeological dig under a car park, and if they are confirmed to be Richard's he will be buried in Leicester cathedral. Is this justice, or a pointless exercise considering he died over 500 years ago?

Quote:
The government has confirmed a skeleton that could be that of Richard III will be interred in Leicester if it is confirmed as the 15th Century king.

The bones were found in September by archaeologists digging beneath a car park in Leicester.

Leicester, Nottinghamshire and York MPs discussed a permanent grave on Friday.

In a written answer, justice minister Helen Grant said the skeleton would be interred at Leicester Cathedral if tests proved it was Richard III.

In response to a question posed by Dan Jarvis, Labour MP for Barnsley, Ms Grant wrote: "My Department issued a licence to exhume human remains which could be those of Richard III.

"Remains have now been exhumed and archaeologists are currently carrying out tests to determine the identity of the remains.

"Should they be found to be those of Richard III, the current plan is for them to be reinterred in Leicester Cathedral."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20116118
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 4,886 • Replies: 84

 
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 04:36 am
@izzythepush,
would they give him a 21 arrow salute
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 04:44 am
@farmerman,
Although Richard was hit by an arrow he's not the most famous king to suffer such a fate, that was Harold Godwinson, defeated at the battle of Hastings.

And they did have cannon at the Battle of Bosworth where Richard was killed.

Quote:
The November 2012 issue of Armchair General magazine features ACG Board Member and internationally-renowned forensic archaeologist Douglas D. Scott’s article “Battlefield Detective: The Case of the Small Lead Ball.” The diminutive (less than 30mm) lead ball – fired by a small cannon during the 1485 Battle of Bosworth – helped battlefield detectives, at long last, discover the true location of one of history’s most famed battles. In this web article, Scott expands on his ACG magazine article by delving into how the discoveries at the Bosworth battlefield are redefining historians’ knowledge of early gunpowder weapons’ use in medieval warfare.


http://www.armchairgeneral.com/the-guns-of-the-battle-of-bosworth-1485.htm
0 Replies
 
Rockhead
 
  4  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 04:46 am
@farmerman,
what are they gonna do if it turns out to be Jimmy Hoffa instead...
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 05:23 am
@Rockhead,
Probably give the mob a medal for the most cunning disposal of a body ever.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 11:39 am
From a strictly sentimental point of view it would be nice to see Richard's bones given a decent internment. He has been very badly maligned since before Shakespeare. Shakespeare's play is fine theater (I saw a community theater production of it right here on the island of Hawaii this past summer) but execrably bad history. Josephine Tey wrote a fine mystery novel based on an attempt to revise the false history of Richard, The Daughter of Time.
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 12:08 pm
Is he the one that got a red hot sword up the arse?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 01:13 pm
@contrex,
That was Edward II, allegedly instigated by his wife and her lover.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:14 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
When I was at Uni my friends performed in a production of Richard III part 2 David Pownell, which was an attempt to give a more accurate portrayal.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:16 pm
@fresco,
Some say he was just suffocated. Although those that say he had the hot poker claim they put a tube up his bum first so not as to wound the exterior of the king.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:21 pm
A number of years ago Al Pacino was Richard III in a road production that came to Boston and did several performances not at one of the downtown theaters but at a church the company had rented just outside Copley Square. I saw it there. Interesting production ideas -- most of the actors, including Pacino, dressed in blue jeans and sports shirts, the altar as the primary stage but some scenes taking place in balconies off to one side etc. etc.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:42 pm
@izzythepush,
Reread your opening post. I doubt if Richard was. deposed by Elizabeth's grandfather, unless she is a lot older than everyone thinks.

How are they going to prove it is Richard or not?
Does he have any living descendants?
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:53 pm
@mysteryman,
Apparently...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/12/canadian-descendant-richard-iii-dna

Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 02:58 pm
@mysteryman,
Your doubt does you no credit. Henry Tudor, Earl of Richomond, defeated Richard III at bosworth in 1485. He became King Henry VII. He died in (i believe) 1509. He was succeeded by Henry VIII, father to Elizabeth.
0 Replies
 
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:00 pm
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:00 pm
Just checked. Henry VIII was born in 1491 (six years after the battle of Bosworth), and his daughter Elizabeth was born in 1533. She was 70 when she died in 1603.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:01 pm
@mysteryman,
Uh...MM...that's Elizabeth the First they're talking about.

But you knew that, right?

Laughing
mysteryman
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:17 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
That's what I thought, but the opening post says he was deposed by "the current monarchs grandfather".
I just wanted clarification.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:23 pm
@mysteryman,
I can see why that would be unclear. Elizabeth I was the current monarch when Shakespeare began his career. The author of the OP was not clear about that.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2012 03:34 pm
@JPB,
Its going to be interesting to watch unfold.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » At long last justice for Richard III?
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/16/2018 at 11:33:15