Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:42 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Presumably though not including those who smote his skull with a halberd or drove a dagger into his brain

And apparently his bare booty as his naked body was thrown over the saddle of a horse and paraded around for all to have a gander at, wound marks on his pelvic bones would suggest post death stab wounds there.

Fairly brutal era to be a King and the description of how he fell at Bosworth is well worth reading.

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:44 pm  

Facinating story this. I would have thought that his remains would have been lost forever. Especially following stories of his coffin being used for various things including a pigs trough. Being able to locate the remains at the first serious attempt is good work too especially as many at first just thought they were using guess-work.

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:54 pm  

As it has been reported that King Alfred's suspected remains might be the next to be exhumed, where will it all end? Should historians be allowed to go round looking for the remains of historical figues?

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:04 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Blimey, what have you got against this then?
No profit in it for multinationals or something?

Maybe he doesn't realise the English monarchy is part of our heritage and is worth every penny!

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:21 pm  

I watched the two dimwits on Yorkshire TVs Calendar tonight prattle on about bringing his body back to be buried in York Minster. It was the House of York and many cities and towns in Yorkshire supported the other side the House of Lancaster and then Henry Tudor. Leicester plan to bury him in there cathederal, no doubt establishing some sort of shrine ala theme park around him. Richard was not the tyrant he was made out to be by the people who wrote his history, the Tudors look at his suit of armour in the Tower and no way was a hunchback cripple some would have us to believe. As for killing the young princes in the Tower, in a time when killing was a way of securing power, the Tudors did not shy away from killing anyone Elizabeth I killed thousands of catholics just to prove a point.

I would put the poor sod back where he has lain undisturbed since he lost his the battle, his crown and his life. I think we should repect the dignity of his final resting place or do we start a mass moving around of old bodies to fit in with some modern " relics " charter and some one has seen £££££ signs

Northampton will no doubt enter the race to bury him as he was born there, not York , Leeds or Middleham

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:27 am  

Ian P wrote:

I watched the two dimwits on Yorkshire TVs Calendar tonight prattle on about bringing his body back to be buried in York Minster. It was the House of York and many cities and towns in Yorkshire supported the other side the House of Lancaster and then Henry Tudor. Leicester plan to bury him in there cathederal, no doubt establishing some sort of shrine ala theme park around him.

I would put the poor sod back where he has lain undisturbed since he lost his the battle, his crown and his life. I think we should repect the dignity of his final resting place or do we start a mass moving around of old bodies to fit in with some modern " relics " charter and some one has seen £££££ signs

Northampton will no doubt enter the race to bury him as he was born there, not York , Leeds or Middleham

I agree with those sentiments.

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:44 am  

I watched the last 14 mins of the programme last night (the first part somehow not having been recorded, humphhhh).
Judging by the number of wounds to the head, you'd guess that as soon as Richard had been knocked down, everyone wanted to have a slash at him ... "I killed him", "No, it was my stab that killed him", "Look mate, when I hit 'im with me halberd, that's what took him out".

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:01 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

I watched the last 14 mins of the programme last night (the first part somehow not having been recorded, humphhhh).
Judging by the number of wounds to the head, you'd guess that as soon as Richard had been knocked down, everyone wanted to have a slash at him ... "I killed him", "No, it was my stab that killed him", "Look mate, when I hit 'im with me halberd, that's what took him out".

Sounds similar to the final moments of a certain Libyan dictator...We were as animalistic then as we are today.

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:02 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

I watched the last 14 mins of the programme last night (the first part somehow not having been recorded, humphhhh).
Judging by the number of wounds to the head, you'd guess that as soon as Richard had been knocked down, everyone wanted to have a slash at him ... "I killed him", "No, it was my stab that killed him", "Look mate, when I hit 'im with me halberd, that's what took him out".

Sounds similar to the final moments of a certain Libyan dictator...We were as animalistic then as we are today.

Re: Richard III - yes, it's him : Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:16 am  

Dally wrote:

As it has been reported that King Alfred's suspected remains might be the next to be exhumed, where will it all end? Should historians be allowed to go round looking for the remains of historical figues?

Seeing as they are historians then yes obviously.