Richard III Appeal 24-25 Aug

[Paul]

BTW: Is it just me or are the majority of those interested in WotR actually supporting the York?

Lancaster all the way!!!!!

They might have found him:

http://www2.le.ac.uk/news/blog/2012/september/richard-iii-press-conference-2013-live-updates-from-11.00am

Nice of them to give a nice pic of Richards flag as well. Ok, it´s only one half but photoshop will deal with that 

[Atheling]

Lancaster all the way!!!!!
Nice of them to give a nice pic of Richards flag as well. Ok, it´s only one half but photoshop will deal with that 

Cough....

Might be 

Darrell.

[dm]

House of Lancaster....pah!!!! a pox be upon them all ............

[Arlequín]

@Arlequin: so you always make sure, you end up on the losing side?

I largely end up on the losing side with most things I play... 

Henry VII married Elisabeth not Anne.

Yep, I wasn't paying attention there...

He might have been ruthless at times, but who wasn't at that time? As for the princes, we don't know for sure and what if they had shown signs of behaving like Joffrey Baratheon?

Sure, look at his contemporaries; Louis XI, the various Popes, Cardinals and of course the Borgias, Ferrante of Naples, Ferdinand and Isabella... none of them were above 'removing' opponents.

But we don't know, what would have happened afterwards, may be one of his successor would have still joined the protestant side, perhaps with bit less opportunistic motivation creating something real and not this Anglican Church chimera.
First of all his marriage with Joana of Portugal would have taken place and perhaps he would have invaded France (which is always a good thing).

I'm not saying that England wouldn't have become protestant, just not in the way that it did; the CofE wasn't exactly radically protestant, more catholicism-lite. Many things would have been different though, although I guess we'd arrive at pretty much the same present day though. 

PS: I do think the marriage between Edward IV and Elisabeth Woodville was not lragal as Edward already had a marriage contract with Lady Elenor (born Talbot, widowed Butler), the daughter of the Earl of Shrewsbury. The way the Tudor propaganda tried to change her name into one elisabeth Lucy or Wayte gives a hint, that there was something substantial behind it.

The Tudors weren't overly involved in the Edward IV 'betrothal' scandal, it was in their interests to promote the Queen (Elizabeth) as being legitimate. The whole thing apparently began with his mother, Cecily Neville, who intimated that Edward wasn't the son of the Duke of York and stemmed from a liaison with a household archer and that George and Richard were the only two legitimate sons of the Duke. 

This was later changed to nullify Edward's own children, hence denying them the throne as 'double bastards' if you like. It's pretty complicated and there seems to have been a seperate attempt by Richard to silence the scandal that his mother had started, while still furthering his claim to the throne; Edward was legitimate, his children were not. It was a pretty clumsy effort all round.

It's fascinating stuff though!

  

[Atheling]

The Tudors weren't overly involved in the Edward IV 'betrothal' scandal, it was in their interests to promote the Queen (Elizabeth) as being legitimate. The whole thing apparently began with his mother, Cecily Neville, who intimated that Edward wasn't the son of the Duke of York and stemmed from a liaison with a household archer and that George and Richard were the only two legitimate sons of the Duke. 

This was later changed to nullify Edward's own children, hence denying them the throne as 'double bastards' if you like. It's pretty complicated and there seems to have been a seperate attempt by Richard to silence the scandal that his mother had started, while still furthering his claim to the throne; Edward was legitimate, his children were not. It was a pretty clumsy effort all round.

It's fascinating stuff though!

Mike Jones, a key Medieval academic (I based the background of the Battle of Verneuil game at Salute on his theories) came up with some interesting evidence recently:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GEN-MEDIEVAL/2004-01/1074328485

http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/di46/studyday.html

Darrell.

[Patrice]

perhaps he would have invaded France (which is always a good thing.

Invading France would have been almost impossible after the fall of Burgundy, but thanks to this thread I just found that Richard III was a friend of Brittany which he could have supported when things went really bad in 1487-88 if he were still king.

article (in French, a short explanation in English):
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/abpo_0399-0826_1995_num_102_4_3838

[Atheling]

Invading France would have been almost impossible after the fall of Burgundy, but thanks to this thread I just found that Richard III was a friend of Brittany which he could have supported when things went really bad in 1487-88 if he were still king.

article (in French, a short explanation in English):
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/abpo_0399-0826_1995_num_102_4_3838

It's a damn good job the British, Canadians, Americans, Polish and Free French etc did on June 6th 1944    .

Darrell.

[Arlequín]

Invading France would have been almost impossible after the fall of Burgundy, but thanks to this thread I just found that Richard III was a friend of Brittany which he could have supported when things went really bad in 1487-88 if he were still king.

article (in French, a short explanation in English):
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/abpo_0399-0826_1995_num_102_4_3838

Burgundy fell?    

I doubt an invasion of France, but a contingent in support of Philip the Handsome, would surely have happened. Richard's sister, Margaret was active in seeking support for her step-daughter and subsequently her step-grandson and an alliance with Maximilian of Austria would seem likely too. While the major fighting in Flanders, Picardy, Hainault and Artois had died down, it was to be a battleground until 1493. I can't see Richard not getting involved

[Atheling]

Burgundy fell?    

Or was she pushed?

Yeah, but by Duke Charles (the Bold)!!  

I doubt an invasion of France, but a contingent in support of Philip the Handsome, would surely have happened. Richard's sister, Margaret was active in seeking support for her step-daughter and subsequently her step-grandson and an alliance with Maximilian of Austria would seem likely too. While the major fighting in Flanders, Picardy, Hainault and Artois had died down, it was to be a battleground until 1493. I can't see Richard not getting involved

This is a very good point. The offering of military support to other 'nations' by the English Crown wasn't exclusive to Burgundy. Expeditions were launched on land and sea with some regularity and the upper echelons of society weren't averse to exploiting any chance to forward their policies be they expansionist, political or simply to create a diversion. Richard III was no fool and it would go against the grain of 'Yorkist' policy (As Richard of Gloucester, Richard had vehemently opposed his brother Edward's withdrawl from France in 1475) to think that he would not try to exploit the in-fighting in Northern France.

As amature historians (I certainly fall into this bracket!) and for the sake of our painting, modelling and wargaming which we rightly love, tend to come up with political and military speculation, often based on sound facts....... well, I'll let the Bard explain the rest, "in our imaginary forces work".  I leave you with more words of warning....

"For 'tis your thoughts that now must deck our kings,
Carry them here and there; jumping o'er times, 30
Turning the accomplishment of many years
Into an hour-glass: for the which supply,
Admit me Chorus to this history;
Who prologue-like your humble patience pray,
Gently to hear, kindly to judge, our play."

And from Prof David Grummet:

"This whole exercise is, of course, one of imagination. By trying to read motives or feelings into these texts we are stretching the very limits of the historian’s craft."

It's fine to speculate, often as wargamers we rely on speculation. But I suppose we must admit to ourselves that at the end of the day, it is just that, speculation.

Just my two pennies worth.

Darrell.

[janner]

I'm comfortable with one level of speculation in academic pieces, after that it's a house of cards 

But, hey, here we're playing with small metal and plastic chappies, so anything goes 

[Atheling]

I'm comfortable with one level of speculation in academic pieces, after that it's a house of cards 

But, hey, here we're playing with small metal and plastic chappies, so anything goes 

 

Darrell.

[Arlequín]

Speculation is the fun part... although with Medieval History, there's usually more speculation than history. 

[Atheling]

Speculation is the fun part... although with Medieval History, there's usually more speculation than history.  

I repeat for those who may not have understood what i was getting at:

"For 'tis your thoughts that now must deck our kings,
Carry them here and there; jumping o'er times, 30
Turning the accomplishment of many years
Into an hour-glass: for the which supply,
Admit me Chorus to this history;
Who prologue-like your humble patience pray,
Gently to hear, kindly to judge, our play."[/i]

"in our imaginary forces work".

It's fine to speculate, often as wargamers we rely on speculation. But I suppose we must admit to ourselves that at the end of the day, it is just that, speculation.

Getting the idea?    

Darrell.

[Gibby]

So, Richard eh? Pretty exciting stuff! 

[Stuart]

WOOHOO! 

Dear Viewer,
 
As you previously contacted us regarding a programme on Richard III, we thought you might be interested to hear of the decision by Channel 4 to commission a programme due to the high volume of requests received.
 
For more information on the programme, please follow the link below:
 
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/channel-4-to-broadcast-hunt-for-richard-iii
 
Kind regards
 
Sandra Carter
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries