Tweet
Graham, can you remember seeing a photo of a statue of Richard's father? Short, tigerish-looking man. It might give us the best idea of what Richard would have looked like standing, since he did apparently very much take after his dad. I saw it in a book but can't find it online.
-
-
So, is there evidence did he not have a helmet on, or did they knock it off to administer lethal blows do you think?Comment
-
I think they must have knocked his hemet off. There were nine wounds to his skull from different weapons, dagger, knife, sword, halberd. He probably literally went down fighting.Comment
-
From what I can gather, and looking at actual items, the helmet would easily lift off. Don't think the wounds Richard suffered (just look at his skull) could have been inflicted before his helmet was removed, but one version has it that the death-blow (via a halberd) was so extreme that it drove his helmet into the back of his skull. His body was apparently also mutilated after he was stripped naked and thrown over a horse to be taken to Leicester.
I've often wondered what happened to his armour, as this would be extremely valuable.
The only likeness I recall of Richard's father Duke Of York is a stained-glass window in which he is portrayed at prayer. His features suggest he'd cut your throat for a laugh, but maybe I do him an injustice! This picture is also on his Wikipedia entry. He too came to a sticky end, at the Battle Of Wakefield.
GrahamWe are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver BlazeComment
-
Thanks Graham. And he too made a rash sally.
I seem to recall that the book the photo was in did say that images of the father are rare. I'm certain it wasn't the praying one.Comment
-
This seems to be it, though the photo I saw was more eye level, I think.
Comment
-
Hi all,
I think that Richard probably was used to a more active daily routine than modern day people like Mr. Smee, and therefore his vitality was trained to last longer. Kings usually did more than go from counsel room to throne room and back. They took heavy daily exercise as well - something most people (such as your's truly here) should do but don't.
As for what King Henry VII and his court and his immediate family would have thought of all this, the fact that Richard was mutilated after death, shown naked to the public, and buried (originally) by some charitable monks secretly demonstrates that Henry intended to shame his defeated enemy, the head of his rival clan. He probably would have been furious at all this - but so what! I am sure that when his surviving son died of syphilis in 1547, on the royal throne as Henry VIII, many people in England secretly rejoiced.
Just think of how the daughter of Sir Thomas More thought of it, or relatives of Anne Boleyn, Katherine Howard, Thomas Cromwell, or even Cardinal Wolsey. Or families of the executed victims of the "Pilgrimage of Grace"?Think they really felt sad that Henry VIII was dead?
JeffComment
-
Hi Jeff,As for what King Henry VII and his court and his immediate family would have thought of all this, the fact that Richard was mutilated after death, shown naked to the public, and buried (originally) by some charitable monks secretly demonstrates that Henry intended to shame his defeated enemy, the head of his rival clan.
Time-honoured practice, that. It was important - necessary in fact - to diminish, discredit and otherwise slur the defeated if you were about to step into his shoes. It's all about securing your right to rule.
It's what happened when William the Bastard [as he was commonly known] did when he defeated Harold for instance - it's often the way. There are certain things which almost appear to be symbolic of bad kingship; and they turn up over and again in the aftermath of rulership conflicts. The breaking of familial bonds and rules is one of them; so you could argue [and I'm sure people already have] that the allegations of kin-slaying against Richard III are intended to reinforce the idea of Richard as a bad king. Aethelraed II, the 'Unready' who's also appeared on this thread if memory serves, was charged with similar - complicity in his brother's murder - by the bitter Chronicler at Abingdon, from whose biased account much of Aethelraeds post-mortem reputation originates.
It's a hard life, being a king.
Comment
-
Went to bed last night and realized that is likely what happened since you mentioned they dragged him off the horse. I'm sure it wasn't done gently.Originally posted by Rosella View Post
Terrible death. I hope it killed him quick.
Would like to pose a question to you across that big pond over there.
Why isn't the Queen going to the funeral? I don't really understand. It's an important event concerning her own country and it seems like everyone is turning out. After all, it IS English history and truly one of the great Kings. That does not mean I'm a Richard III supporter, I'm not sure regarding those princes yea or nay, but he IS one of the most notable and he seems to have been at the very least, valiant.Last edited by Beowulf; 03-23-2015, 11:05 AM.Comment
-
Hi Beowulf,Originally posted by Beowulf View Post
The New York Times had a photograph and article inside Section I today of the funeral. Rather sparse, compared to say that of a recently sitting monarch, but it had it's dignity.
The problem of the Queen not attending seems tied to the notoriety of Richard III. The entire issue of whether or not his reputation is true or not was somewhat ignored by the Bishop who delivered the eulogy. I think this was wise, as the issue is probably never going to be set to rest about those two Princes in the Tower. It really does not help matters that Elizabeth II is connected more to King Henry VII by Tudor-Stuart-Hanovarian-Saxe Coburg Gotha - Windsor descent than to York descent. Still a message from Her Majesty might have been a nice touch.
JeffComment
-
A message from the Queen has been prepared, and shall be read at Thursdays re internment ceremony.
Monty
Monty
https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif
Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622Comment
-
People keep saying that he's being re-interned. The poor guy's only been out a few months. Seems a shame to lock him up again so soon.
Comment
-
A very carefully composed message, no doubt, which will be the epitome of dutiful neutrality, as it must be in the circumstances. Still, at least there'll be a message.Originally posted by Monty View PostA message from the Queen has been prepared, and shall be read at Thursdays re internment ceremony.
Monty
Comment
-
A message from a Mr Stanley is expected to arrive at the very last moment.Comment
-
Well, that makes sense. I can understand that. It would look like a statement of approval. Gee, public appearances speak volumes never intended or said.Originally posted by Mayerling View Post
I do wish we had more info on it over here. I have to scour the net for it and have mostly picked up what I have seen from Englishmen on Twitter. English reporters and people who have been to the procession. I really think it's a remarkable piece of history. The whole thing about the princes should not be brought into it. That has not been proven one way or the other.
Think of all the graves and bones under the earth, to have found King Richard III, and identified him absolutely, that is nearly miraculous to me.
It's an amazing event. I'm glad he's getting his horse, finally. That was no way to treat a King.Comment
Comment