Jump to content

Richard The Third


Recommended Posts

There seems to be a squabble breaking out, so far between Leicester and York, regarding the final resting place of Richard III. Having read the arguments so far, it seems to me that York has a good case, and the case for Leicester is very tenuous.

There's an online petition in favour of York here if anyone would like to sign it .

Link to post
Share on other sites
Latest, petiton now over 11,000 , and the Chapter of York Minster have said Leicester can have him.

Why dont York want him, the Channel 4 documentary tried to portray him as a decent guy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently they agreed prior to the investigation that any remains that might be found should go to Leicester Cathedral. I suspect there's going to be strong words between the City and Minster in York!

Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

Somebody in one of the Newspapers pointed out that since Richard was found in an NCHP car park he now owes about 3 Billion pounds in parking fees! he he

Personally I think the funeral will be delayed while Leicester Social Services investigate what happened to the the missing Royal Children! ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unitedite Returns

Somebody in one of the Newspapers pointed out that since Richard was found in an NCHP car park he now owes about 3 Billion pounds in parking fees! he he

Personally I think the funeral will be delayed while Leicester Social Services investigate what happened to the the missing Royal Children! ;-)

Not forgetting all of the camping and outdoor activities in Leicester that are looking to cash in big time on this new found sales opportunity.

After all "NOW IS THE WINTER OF OUR DISCOUNTED TENTS"!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ouch!!!

Though more seriously, I do get the impression that Leicester want him for the tourist value rather than any historical claim. Richard has a world-wide following of admirers, many of whom will doubtless want to make a pilgimage to his tomb. Leicester Cathedral are already planning the service which they say will be 'multi-faith', which seems a bit odd for a king who died when England only had Roman Catholicism.

It smacks a bit of the Druids who have demanded the right to bury any prehistoric remains archaeologists unearth, according to their rites (which they've made up.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

Personally I would leave it up to the Richard The Third Society where he is put back. Afterall they are responsible for having found him and dug him up. I understand they are paying for the monument or tomb and presumably the cost of the funeral. It shouldn't come out of taxpayers money though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's fair comment. I'm somewhat disgusted by the attitude of Leicester. They've already started planning a visitors centre and talking about marketing Richard III weekend breaks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in full agreement with your suggestion having read this.

Personally I would leave it up to the Richard The Third Society where he is put back. Afterall they are responsible for having found him and dug him up. I understand they are paying for the monument or tomb and presumably the cost of the funeral. It shouldn't come out of taxpayers money though.
Link to post
Share on other sites
History dude

Thanks for that Richard and the link.

Philippa Langley was the main one that seemed to know he was there under that car park. I don't know if you all saw the documentary about the finding of the remains Monday on Channel Four, but it was quiet spooky the way he was found and the way Philippa Langley reacted. She - for the benefit of anyone who didn't see it - had the inclination to say dig in this spot first. What was even more odd that the place was marked with a large "R". :wacko:

And the first thing they came upon (when they dug) was his bones! Mind you it didn't go all the way the Richard the Third people would have liked. And I jumped with glee when the bones specialist proved that Shakespeare was right about the fact he had a curved spine. With RTT members saying he couldn't ride a horse with that condition and everyone would have noticed this and reported in the historical records. Of course he could! As the doctor pointed on the show, most people can have the same condition today and unless they are on the beach you wouldn't notice they had a bent spine.

By the way I have come to the conclusion that the portrait of Richard the Third that many call a Tudor propaganda picture, is in fact a portrait of the very actor that played the part of Richard in William's play. The fact that he was not as Richard in the play describes himself fits well with Elizabethan ideas on personality. And the notion of self-image versus actual image is common in that world. There's no greater example of this then Queen Elizabeth, who was a beautiful woman, but even today because of her belief of her ugliness is portrayed falsely in everything we see today. And we can understand why Elizabeth refers to herself as Richard III, after she saw the actual play with that actor in that portrait. In this context.

It's another of the things that I can add to the mistakes of historians, dealing with William Shakespeare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...