Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Medieval Adventures => Topic started by: Stuart on March 08, 2015, 10:37:42 PM
-
On the 22 March Richard's remains begin their journey, it's going to be a uniquely peculiar event I'm sure, just wondered what your thoughts were, is anyone considering going while he lays in state ?
I'm sure it will be an interesting spectacle and well covered in the media, Channel 4 are doing another documentary, the last 2 were pretty good.
-
Fascinating isn't it? It's not often you get the chance to be part of the funeral arrangements for a medieval king, and one of the most famous men in British history...
-
Sadly, living in America won't allow me that privilege but by God, I will follow it wherever I can!
-
May he rest in peace.
-
I had a hunch it would turn out this way. The choice of who would preside over the ceremony was something of a surprise. The Archbishop of Canterbury would have been the usual pick but I suppose going with Neil Oliver makes a degree of sense. Tony Robinson would have been my choice.
-
I had a hunch it would turn out this way.
:D
-
The back story to all this is possibly as interesting as the actual event will be...
I and many others got an e-mail from Channel 4 way back when, saying they had no plans to make a programme about the search for his resting place, at a time when funds and support were sorely needed... now they are all over it like Lord Hastings on a royal mistress.
Bids in the High Court to have him interred at York, Westminster Abbey shouting 'no room, no room'... and this piece of Shakespearian-like melodrama; http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/just-who-is-the-custodian-of-king-richard-iiis-bones/ goes some way to explaining why it has taken so long to actually getting round to re-interring HRH.
I suspect that the whole thing will be far more disrespectful and tasteless than when Tudor and his rebels originally bought the body back to Leicester in August 1485... which takes some beating.
/cynicism ;)
-
Here's an overview of events so far and plans for the week of re-interment;
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/08/richard-the-third-gets-ceremonial-send-off-at-last (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/08/richard-the-third-gets-ceremonial-send-off-at-last)
It reads like a bit of a circus, the cortège route is a bit OTT and farcical, a bit of a Leicester tourism band wagon.
But the whole thing has been unbelievable and uncanny so perhaps it's a fitting end.
-
I wonder which battle site they'll be visiting? ;)
-
I´m still trying to work out how the reconstruction of his face ended up looking like Niel from the Young ones.
-
I wonder which battle site they'll be visiting? ;)
Hopefully the right one, then the world will get to see the 'Tudor', 'York' and 'Blackadder' barns at the farm there. lol
-
"Hunch" and "back story". You guys!...
-
Hopefully the right one, then the world will get to see the 'Tudor', 'York' and 'Blackadder' barns at the farm there. lol
Down Fenn lane? Really? You thought someone would have mentioned it before?... ;)
-
I love it when a Plantaganet comes together
-
I love it when a Plantaganet comes together
lol lol lol
Oh that is awful... (but funny ;))
-
I love it when a Plantaganet comes together
You just made my Facebook status with that.
-
If they weren't going to bury him in Westminster, which is after all the burial home of the kings and queens of Britain, then surely it had to be York Minster a town on which Richard was very popular, even prior to becoming king?
It beggars belief that we have succumbed to deeply to crass commercialism as to bury the last Plantagenet King of England measured by his viability to profit and tourism!!??
Darrell.
-
...and originally burying him, a king, in a Multi storey car park..that´s wrong on so many Levels.
-
"a hearse, a hearse, my kingdom for a hearse!!"
-
Not wanting to sound mean, or nasty or nuthin, ::), but after all the hard work people have done finding his remains and identifying them..
To be honest. I think the guy would be rather disappointed.
With suggestions/evidence emerging that he might not have been as Bad as history (written mostly by the victors presumably) painted him as well.
Lets face it, killed in battle, mutilated and dumped in Leicester to eventually have a car park stuck on top of him.
Found again, identified, then fought over for whatever reasons, petty politics or personal gain may come from it, and finally dumped back in Leicester somewhere else.
Televised..
And its sited as a reason for tourists a to go there?
If thats the best thing they can come up with I will save my time, watch the documentary and not go there.. ;D
-
I've been reading quite a lot on the re burial. The pro-York camp have been very emotional about the whole thing. If you cut out the white noise it seems to come down to that by law the remains must be reinterred in the nearest consecrated ground. In other words Leicester cathedral. I believe this was on the licence granted to let the dig go ahead.
I'm not an expert, and the only knowledge I have is from the interweb.
As a Yorkshire man I was surprised they didn't bury him in York but I don't see it as an issue.
Wouldn't middleham have been more appropriate or Gloucester
-
...and originally burying him, a king, in a Multi storey car park..that´s wrong on so many Levels.
Factually incorrect, but I laughed out loud anyway. lol
To be honest. I think the guy would be rather disappointed...
With suggestions/evidence emerging that he might not have been as Bad as history (written mostly by the victors presumably) painted him as well.
You missed out 'unceremoniously stored in a cardboard box in a storeroom for months' but yes it's not really how we would expect things to go.
He probably was as bad as history painted him, yet not so much worse than those around him; the fault is that history has painted a pretty rosy and cuddly image of everyone else at that time, rather than bringing them down to his level. As for the murders... I suspect it wasn't him, but I doubt he would have hesitated too long had there been some tangible advantage to be gained in any case. That being said nobody apparently turns a hair at his brother drowning their other brother in a vat of wine.
For all that though he was certainly progressive and modern in terms of policy and legislation delivered in his short reign, and he doesn't get credited for that. He was of course the last English king too.
;)
It beggars belief that we have succumbed to deeply to crass commercialism as to bury the last Plantagenet King of England measured by his viability to profit and tourism!!??
Agreed... although his viability for profit and tourism has guaranteed he gets some sort of send-off, certainly a better one than what he would get otherwise. I have no strong views on the 'where' - his wife is in Westminster, his parents at Fotheringhay and the original funeral service was held in Leicester, without which he probably would have suffered even more indignity at the time.
The whole thing has the capacity for royal embarrassment (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11268218/Richard-III-DNA-shows-British-Royal-family-may-not-have-royal-bloodline.html), so I doubt he will get any establishment presence on the day either.
Nevertheless the whole affair has proved that we English are still as cut-throat and despicable nowadays as we have painted King Rich to be... ;)
-
Oh come on! One man's crass commercialism is another man's tasteful range of collectible coffee mugs, coasters and tea towels. It's hard to begrudge Leicester its 'win'. Think of the poor sods at the local tourist board or the advertising agency that handles their account. Sans Richard what do you have?
Visit Leicester cos it's er....
Ok, er... Visit Leicester cos it's not Nottingham!
Visit Leicester it's nowhere near as shit as Brum!
Visit Leicester it's arguably no more dull than, say, Norwich and the incidence of grisly serial killings is significantly lower.
Have a little pity on the poor sod lumbered with that.
-
It's a nice reminder of what a comfortable society and lifestyle we have in Britain right now, that people have the time and energy to get all worked up about something like this. If the various societies are able to whip themselves into a frenzy over something so utterly irrelevant as where to stick the bones of a guy killed half a millennium ago, it shows they've got very little else to worry about.
-
The whole thing is a fake..the clue is in him being buried under a car park. They didn´t have cars let alone places to park them back then
-
I dunno, I think the Princess was around then.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/6d/b3/34/6db3346cd18e8211f3b837211c15e6a5.jpg)
-
The whole thing is a fake..the clue is in him being buried under a car park. They didn´t have cars let alone places to park them back then
And in the disabled spot... coincidence? I think not. ::)
It's a nice reminder of what a comfortable society and lifestyle we have in Britain right now, that people have the time and energy to get all worked up about something like this. If the various societies are able to whip themselves into a frenzy over something so utterly irrelevant as where to stick the bones of a guy killed half a millennium ago, it shows they've got very little else to worry about.
Hey! Some of those folk fought and died in numerous re-enactments of Bosworth, just so future generations have the freedom to make such choices. No wait, I'm getting mixed up with WWII...
;)
Oh come on! ...
"Leicester! Now with added Richard III!" For once I'm grateful there's such a thing as Cockney Rhyming Slang. :D
-
Will Pippa Middleton be twerking at this ceremony?
-
I've been reading quite a lot on the re burial. The pro-York camp have been very emotional about the whole thing. If you cut out the white noise it seems to come down to that by law the remains must be reinterred in the nearest consecrated ground. In other words Leicester cathedral. I believe this was on the licence granted to let the dig go ahead.
This ^
They had to agree where to bury him before he was identified, no clauses added if they found someone 'special', they could have not found him remember....
-
This ^
They had to agree where to bury him before he was identified, no clauses added if they found someone 'special', they could have not found him remember....
It may be a bit of a rhetorical question but if you don't mind me asking, who made the statement?
Darrell.
-
At York or Westminster, he risked being lost amongst competing narratives. Let's face it, there's not much in Leicester to detract from his story ;)
Leicester Cathedral is spitting distance from where he was found and they've produced a good quality RIII exhibition centre.
So I'm quite content with it all.
-
It may be a bit of a rhetorical question but if you don't mind me asking, who made the statement?
If I recall correctly it's not so much a statement as part and parcel of the paperwork that has to be completed before for any dig commences. Ministry of Justice rules, the Burial Act 1857 and APABE guidelines all have to be followed, i.e. human remains must be reburied within two years unless an extension for study can be obtained, they have to be re-buried in an accepted place of burial, stuff like that. Christian burial sites have additional rules and stuff on top of that. So before shovel hits ground it's all sorted about what's going to happen to anything found.
-
Will Pippa Middleton be twerking at this ceremony?
This ^
-
Apparently the procession will take in Fenn lane, so they will be going past the actual battle site. They'll want to sweep it though, I was down there this morning and its still covered in crap.
Don't want the procession getting stuck in a field. Again.
-
Apparently the procession will take in Fenn lane, so they will be going past the actual battle site. They'll want to sweep it though, I was down there this morning and its still covered in crap.
Don't want the procession getting stuck in a field. Again.
"A hearse! A hearse! My kingdom for a hearse!"
-
"A hearse! A hearse! My kingdom for a hearse!"
lol
-
I dunno, I think the Princess was around then.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/6d/b3/34/6db3346cd18e8211f3b837211c15e6a5.jpg)
Oh yes, who can forget the Austin Princess available in authentic medieval wattle'n'daub beige or garderobe tan liveries...
-
Since the burial of deformed and monstrous tyrants who have divided the nation is very much in vogue can someone finally get around to burying Rupert under a car park in Wapping? Preferably alive. It would be a huge crowd pleaser.
-
Rupert!!! ?? I didn´t think much of the bright yellow checked trousers and scarf combo, but burying him alive?
His mate Raggety is much more deserving..
-
Rupert!!! ?? I didn´t think much of the bright yellow checked trousers and scarf combo, but burying him alive?
His mate Raggety is much more deserving..
I fear that burying Raggerty would just see him spread his roots underground!
-
I fear that burying Raggerty would just see him spread his roots underground!
....at least then his Family tree would be easier to prove..... ::)
-
....at least then his Family tree would be easier to prove..... ::)
lol lol
Darrell.
-
....at least then his Family tree would be easier to prove..... ::)
Rumour has it that Raggerty may have sprouted from the wrong side of the seed bed :o
-
Don't want the procession getting stuck in a field. Again.
Subtle... like it. lol
-
It may be a bit of a rhetorical question but if you don't mind me asking, who made the statement?
Darrell.
As Arlequin has said it is a legal requirement before the excavation could take place.
My original wording could have clearer- sorry.
-
As Arlequin has said it is a legal requirement before the excavation could take place.
My original wording could have clearer- sorry.
No, no, don't be daft..... it's probably me just not thinking straight lol
Darrell.
-
Rumour has it that Raggerty may have sprouted from the wrong side of the seed bed :o
..but after branching out, going nuts and barking up the wrong tree (euphamism alert?) apparently he turned over a new leaf.
-
..but after branching out, going nuts and barking up the wrong tree (euphamism alert?) apparently he turned over a new leaf.
Okay, this is getting a bit twisted now...
-
Okay, this is getting a bit twisted now...
Maybe I was barking up the wrong tree when I argued that his burial should be in York Minster...... got coat, heading out of door!
Darrell.
-
Atheling, I think you had the right piece of forest after all. Based on everything I've read about Richard, he would have preferred York for his final resting place. He had a special relationship with the city, which remained loyal to him even after his death.
-
On the theme of Richard III,,
https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/england-of-richard-third
Don´t expect too much (I completed the course when it first came out) the "tutors" don´t always answer (even when directly PM´d) or join in much the Student discussion, especially if you query the given line and the accuracy of thier assumptions, and they do assume a lot.
Some, well a lot, of the "students" have a hollywood view of the period which can sidetrack or bog the discussions down and are best ignored ..There´s better informed discussion here.
But, that said, it´s free and you can get a completion certificate (for the outlay of 25 quid)
This one´s
http://www.saylor.org/courses/hist302/
better..if you have the time and have completed two other courses first.
-
Now it´s really getting beyond a joke..
http://kriii.com/king-richard-iii-updated/
What´s next? An anchor Tattoo, piercings and pink Highlights?
-
They've changed the eye and hair colour based on the latest research.
What's the big deal, Paul?
-
Y'know 530 years, same style, same colour and then wham! Welcome the new you! Big day out coming up too, it's only natural he'd want to pamper.
;)
-
Blonde hair ??? I thought Richard was dark, like his father (in contrast to his brother, Edward IV, who was blonde). The famous portrait shows dark hair.
-
The earliest one shows a sort of mid-brown, somewhat less dark than the famous one... but still not 'strawberry blonde'. ::)
-
The reinterment of Richard III. Proudly brought to you by Clairol.
-
The most important thing, is this time, remembering where they put him.
Otherwise in a few more hundred years we will have this repeated all over again.
Better record keeping please, and watch were you put the disabled parking..
-
They've changed the eye and hair colour based on the latest research.
What's the big deal, Paul?
This;
The earliest one shows a sort of mid-brown, somewhat less dark than the famous one... but still not 'strawberry blonde'. ::)
and, they were bleating at some Point that he was (like a lot of People) blonde as a child and his hair darkened .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11268218/Richard-III-DNA-shows-British-Royal-family-may-not-have-royal-bloodline.html
According to Dr T King
The DNA evidence indicates that he has a high probability of having blue eye colour and blond hair. That would be a childhood hair colour, and hair can darken with age.
Note high probability but not conclusive proof.
Ignored by the press (and not further mentioned by leicester) he ( Dr Turi King) explained that the gene is primarily associated with hair colour in youth, rather than adulthood, and provided a chart of hair colour possibilities for Richard. The latter two were firmly in the brown spectrum.
As part of thier trying to prove the paintings of him didn´t fit with the blonde marker;
There are no contemporary portraits of Richard — they all post–date his death by about 25 to 30 years onwards
So what, the artists all thought "hair colour? F it..well go for something dark cos like, who could possibly remember what hair colour he actually had after such a Long time after his death"
They´ve (Leicester) possited that the potraits Show him with dark hair as "it is a medieval way to protray his evil nature". This is, in short, Cobblers. There´s no evidence of artists doing this, to say they did ignores the facts entirely. Edward II and Richard II, both highly disliked and deposed are protrayed with guess what? Blonde hair.
In fact, they seem a bit scizophrenic about the paintings..on one Hand they use gobble -de -Asian to say the artists were using artistic licence but on the other Hand;
A further result is that the DNA-predicted hair and eye colour are consistent with Richard’s appearance in an early portrait
So what..one painting was okay-ish but now it´s crap cos it doesn´t fit with thier Publicity, sorry, narrative based on evidence?
Ok..he had a blond marker gene but to say he was barbie doll blonde at death on the Basis of that ignores what everyone sees around them (and thier original Statements that fitted with the paintings ) ..children with blonde hair tend not to have blonde hair later in life due to increase of eumelanin, which changes hair colour...it gets darker. If he´s this blonde in their representation, how blonde was he as a child? White blonde! ? Did they have peroxide back then?
Thier result ignores recent gene tests that Show nearly a third of those recently tested in Europe and shown to have a ‘blond’ marker, were not in fact blond, there´s a 70% Chance that he was blonde at death but barbie doll blonde. ??
Protraying him as being barbie doll blonde at time of death is speculation and without 100% proof, is artistic licence..as bad as they have accused the medieval painters of.
As I posted above, they (leicester) do a course on "England of richard III" which was (and probably still is) chocker full of mistakes, suppositions and assumptions...They were happy to discuss "safe" stuff but question them on something that they had obviously supposed with no evidence to back it up, it all went very quiet. Seems par for the course ..if anyone questions it..ignore them, or call nutter or jealous.
The reinterment of Richard III. Proudly brought to you by Clairol.
:).. At least the hearse will be okay. If it gets a flat they can use Leicester Publicity Units tyre Lever. The same one they use to make the "Facts" fit thier narrative.
-
Found the paper....
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141202/ncomms6631/full/ncomms6631.html
Figure 2: Hair and eye colour prediction from genetic data
The question is; Why go for the barbie doll blonde when other choices are available, ones that are closer the painting ?
It isn´t 100% definate, not the obvious choice but what the hell..it Looks sensational !!!
(Sensational as in create a Sensation ie; create Publicity? )
-
Just reading a bit from the paper,
Para 4
Modelled radiocarbon dating was also consistent (1456–1530AD at 95.4% probability)
Consistant? Really..was it? Both the independant Radio carbon tests came up with those Dates?? Did they ?
Wasn´t there something about fish and using a statistical probabiltiy table to "determine" the date?
-
I take it his new look hasn't grown on you at all? :D
-
The reinterment of Richard III. Proudly brought to you by Clairol.
Nah, Injury Lawyers 4U. "Have you had an accident on the battlefield recently? Head stoved in and it wasn't your fault?" :D
Paul: I can sympathise. o_o
-
I take it his new look hasn't grown on you at all? :D
it´s not entirely that, it´s more the retrospective "fact finding" and dropping of anything that doesn´t fit with the narrative.
On one Hand artistic representations, writings or paintings, are totally or in part ignored, on the other used to confirm what´s been found, and seemingly as the wind changes.
If, they are now using the Windsor portrait as being Close to what his hair colouring was (the first dolls head had black hair to fit with the generally accepted view) then they should not only consider that the puppets hair is a wee bit too blonde in comparison and the obvious lack of deformity (dropped shoulder) which could mean the painting is an innacurate representation or the deformity was quite mild..something which a full reconstruction using the Skeleton could Show.
-
Tea and Chocolate Hobnobs anyone?
-
It must be kharma for poking Paul with a stick, however gently... I've just finished reading Mike Ingrams' 'Battle Story: Bosworth' so I completely get what Paul is saying... talk about shaping history round your own ideas.
::)
I get that in history today you have to come up with something new and fresh constantly, but I always thought you formed ideas from the evidence regardless, not have an idea then pick and choose from the evidence to support it.
It's a shame too as there were a few things I didn't know in there, which I was forced to go check because some of the rest was a bit dodgy. Still he got me thinking, so that's a plus.
-
No I get the concept, I just don't see how it relates to Paul's emotive stance.
RIII make the point that his hair may well have become darker as time went on or been dark all along, i.e. they are openly describing blond as an option, based on Turi King's DNA analysis, not the definitive version.
It's hazardous to make assumptions on Turi King's agenda solely based on media reports. So I think I'll wait for her paper to be released before joining Paul on the outrage bus.
-
No I get the concept, I just don't see how it relates to Paul's emotive stance.
I never get "emotive" or create an "outrage bus"..those, like some of the Retro-fitting of facts by Leicester Uni, are on your part, assumptions.
Yes, they are openly describing blonde as an Option..I´ve no Problems with that but barbie blonde?
I´ve already linked to her paper on the DNA Analysis.
Found the paper....
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141202/ncomms6631/full/ncomms6631.html
Figure 2: Hair and eye colour prediction from genetic data
The question is; Why go for the barbie doll blonde when other choices are available, ones that are closer the painting ?
It isn´t 100% definate, not the obvious choice but what the hell..it Looks sensational !!!
(Sensational as in create a Sensation ie; create Publicity? )
in which she says;
77% probability of having blond hair
and
However, current hair colour DNA predictions resemble childhood hair colour and it is important to note that in certain blond individuals, hair colour can darken during adolescence
The combination of "77% probability" and "hair can darken" added to what´s shown in the painting would suggest, logically, that the hair colour wasn´t barbie blonde as they have protrayed on the puppet.
-
Tis alleged that blondes have more fun. Lost on me I've never fancied 'em myself. Perhaps LAF could get an internet petition going to change it to something more generally acceptable like a lovely Titian or a Farah Fawcett style ash blonde?
-
I never get "emotive" or create an "outrage bus"..those, like some of the Retro-fitting of facts by Leicester Uni, are on your part, assumptions.
Yes, they are openly describing blonde as an Option..I´ve no Problems with that but barbie blonde?
Maybe your understanding of the word assumption differs to mine, as I consider my post to have been a reasonable description of posts that use such emotive language 'bleating',
they were bleating at some Point that he was (like a lot of People) blonde as a child and his hair darkened
.
When someone starts using words like 'bleating' when they aren't talking about sheep then emotive is exactly the word that comes to mind.
Then when someone poses a string of rhetorical questions, such as,
Consistant? Really..was it? Both the independant Radio carbon tests came up with those Dates?? Did they ?
Wasn´t there something about fish and using a statistical probabiltiy table to "determine" the date?
Then outrage is precisely the word that comes to mind.
If you want to talk of misrepresentation, you might wish to review your use of Barbie blond to describe what is clearly strawberry blond hair.
Hello pot this is kettle over...