Messages

46

Forum Announcements / Re: Forum Members Not Heard From in a Long While

« on: August 16, 2014, 04:11:50 PM »

Ha ha ha well Imperial Angel, there is a blast from the past. I was only thinking about you the other day. Yes, those were the good old days weren't they !
I think people drifted off from here after the second grave was found and the remains identified but that's just my humble opinion. Goodness me, so many interesting and fun posters have drifted away. Etonexile and the divine Martyn to name but two oh and how can I forget Eddie uk. - sigh - those were the days.

47

The Tudors / Re: Richard III and the Princes in the Tower

« on: August 15, 2014, 01:32:28 PM »

Hi Jehan. I am a Ricardian - purely because this time period has always fascinated me and I have always had a predilection for the underdog. I wouldn't say that I was one of the "ardent" group of Ricardians. I do not believe Richard killed the boys but if evidence came up absolutely that he did then of course I would change my mind. You see, their murder is not an established fact just as there is no established proof positive evidence that they were whisked away from the Tower to a place of safety.
Their murder is NOT an absolute fact - initial rumours said only that they were dead, these rumours did not accuse Richard. Conversely, there were rumours also insisting that the boys were alive. Saying that, Richard is the clear "favourite"as the "murderer"......
  *   They disappeared whilst under his care.
  *     They disappeared after the "Usurpation".
   *     He made no attempt to produce the boys to clear his name.
HOWEVER... all of this is based on RUMOUR...
There isn't even an agreement on cause of death if they were killed so you can take your pick from below.
  * Poisoned.
  * Starved to death.
  * Put to the sword.
  * Drowned in Malmsey..( yep, just like good old Uncle George!! ).
  * Bled to death at the hands of an over zealous doctor.
  * Accidently fell from the bridge leading to the Tower.
  * Smothered between two feather beds, or a feather bed and a pillow, depending on which source you favour.
 A school of thought is that the boys were removed from the Tower to a place of safety ( well Richard of Shrewsbury at least because some believe that Edward had died by this time although, again, there is little to no evidence to back this up). There is no reliable evidence to place the boy/boys in England after Richard's accession so maybe we could look to Aunt Margaret Burgundy? !
There is extant a bill/receipt for clothing for "My Lord (s) Bastard from this time and Edward was known as Edward Bastard but this receipt could be referring to John, Richard's illigitimate son.
 As somebody has already posted, had Henry VII found the boys alive, he would swiftly and surely have had their heads separated from their shoulders...Kings 'eh..tsk tsk.:-)
To finish, there is one thing I am absolutely sure of and that is the bones in the urn are not those of the boys. ( and even if they were, it doesn't prove who killed them or how they died).
Happy Friday one and all.
Kimx

48

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: August 07, 2014, 08:49:16 AM »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-28687107

The reburial of Richard III

49

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: July 31, 2014, 03:06:43 PM »

Hi Maria Sisi, if you scroll back to post 198 ( its on the previous page), you will see a pic of the statue at Middleham kindly posted by Carisbrooke.
 As for your other question.... £££££s or if you would rather..$$$$$ and kudos I guess. But that is only my opinion.

50

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: July 31, 2014, 08:50:56 AM »

Here is a much more dynamic statue of Richard...
http://www.richardiiiworcs.co.uk/images/leicester/1020842.jpg

51

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: July 31, 2014, 08:43:29 AM »

Thats ok Maria Sisi :-)
I know what you mean about Philippa Langley on the documentary. When I first saw it my instant reaction was "oh gawd, she is a bit over the top" but thinking about it afterwards, this has been her passion for over 15 years. She, along with John Ashdown Hill have persevered with getting the archaeological dig going and her persistance has paid dividends.
Thought this might interest you.....the Richard III Vi$itor Centre has now opened.......seems he is getting a role in Star Wars.
http://www.annettecarson.co.uk/357052365/2085370/posting/richard-iii-visitor-centre-leicester.
As for the Richard statue at Middleham ( which by the way, is a lovely little village/town and well worth a visit), well, I think its a bit "meh". Best translation of "meh" is a shrug of the shoulders :-)

52

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: July 30, 2014, 04:40:58 PM »

Maria Sisi, please do some research on Scoliosis before you post...Scoliosis does NOT equal hunchback. WOuld you call Usain Bolt a hunchback for he has scoliosis. Kyphosis is what people refer to as "hunchback" if you wish to use that derogatory term.
Richard's scoliosis was such that it would have been disguised by well cut clothing, he may only have had a slight "lift" in one shoulder and it wouldnot have been noticeable when dressed.

53

Books about the Romanovs and Imperial Russia / Re: Four Sisters by Helen Rappaport

« on: June 15, 2014, 02:08:14 AM »

All Ms. Rappaport's books are extremely readable and this book should grace the shelves of all who are interested in the Romanovs. I found it delightful.

54

Iberian Royal Families / Re: King Juan Carlos & Queen Sofia of Spain

« on: June 02, 2014, 05:20:45 AM »

Am I naive? I really didnot see this coming.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27662301

55

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: May 24, 2014, 11:06:41 AM »

Interesting piece...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-26790933

56

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: May 23, 2014, 06:27:49 AM »

At last.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-27537836.

Hopefully, he will now get a dignified re-interment.

57

The Windsors / Re: George I & his wife Sophia-Dorothea of Zelle

« on: May 07, 2014, 04:06:04 AM »

Also, Dr Lucy Worsley is fronting a series about the Georgian/Hanoverian Kings on BBC 4..it is rather good.

58

The Tudors / Re: Henry VII

« on: May 06, 2014, 08:55:50 AM »

Better looking!!! He had a squint.
Anyhoo, can I recommend this book;
" Winter King, Dawn of Tudor England" by Thomas Penn.
I have read that there is a field of thought that Henry Tudor/Tydier/Tydderr was possibly NOT a "Tudor" at all !!! If anyone is interested I will find and post the info I have. I think I read it in John Ashdown Hill's book.
Oh and I don't think Henry's dealings with the supposedly "half - witted" Earl of Warwick was very magnanimous.

59

The Tudors / Re: Romance between Elizabeth of York and Richard III?

« on: May 06, 2014, 08:36:00 AM »

Ok hasn't anyone thought up the fact that this idea of love between Elizabeth and Richard makes them both look bad? Not only does it trump on history of Elizabeth's actual marriage being a good one but it makes Richard and Elizabeth willing participants in incest of one of the worst degrees. Why would any Richard defender  want to use such a thing to try and make him look better?

Ok.
This is based on the letter "found" by Buck and it is no longer extant but there is evidence to suggest that it had been tampered with not least by Buck's nephew. ( sorry, I cannot find the source for this at the moment in my massive pile of "stuff". :-) ).
The letter suggests that it was very much Elizabeth who was "chasing" Richard and not vice-versa, to wit - she asks Norfolk to intercede, i.e. put in a good word for her.

Elizabeth would bring no suitable dowry to the marriage and there would be no profitable foreign alliance.

The sheer absurdity of marriage plans with a niece declared illegitimate would make a travesty of Titulus Regis.

Denial by Richard of any marriage plans ( which is preserved verbatim in the records of the Mercers.)

At this time,Richard was planning a marriage with Joanna of Portugal ( note she was of Lancastrian "blood" ) with Elizabeth to wed Manuel of Portugal who was cousin to Joanna.

60

The Tudors / Re: Richard III remains found & identified

« on: May 03, 2014, 02:23:28 PM »

Local to me and it is very beautiful "in the flesh" so to speak.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-27266728

And these two sculptures. I thought the mounted knight looked like a cross between Noggin the Nog ( a very old childrens' programme ) and a load of lego bricks, but they are actually rather good close up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-27189358