/ Richard III

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Only a hill - on 04 Feb 2013
Looks like it's definitely him:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-21063882#TWEET580899

How long will the site remain a car park, I wonder?
Darren Jackson - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:
>
> How long will the site remain a car park, I wonder?

Dunno. Have they got a hunch?
iksander on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Darren Jackson: My kingdom for a parking space
Darren Jackson - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to iksander:

Just imagine what that parking space will be (Bos)worth?
Steve John B - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Darren Jackson: 'king 'ell!
dissonance - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

> How long will the site remain a car park, I wonder?

i thought fairly likely since they are shifting the grave to the cathedral instead.
puppythedog on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill: Best comment that I have seen is that the DNA tests are back and ATOS can confirm that Richard III is fit to work.
Sir Chasm - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to puppythedog: A hearse, a hearse, my kingdom for a hearse.
Tom Last - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

In the deep bosom of the car park buried...
abseil on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Darren Jackson:

This was the archaeologists' crowning achievement. We don't need to be scept(re)ical any more - we can reign in our doubts. Perhaps they'll dig up the car park and Plant(agenet) some trees: it could even become a haven for monarch butterflies.
DNS on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:


Nice to see the science confirm the obvious physical evidence, viz:

Head injury; spinal curve; no horse.
Only a hill - on 04 Feb 2013
Flinticus - on 04 Feb 2013
Saw the over-hyped ad for this programme: what a load of crap. Really, so what if they found the remains. We knew he was dead long ago. Worse than Timeteam.
Darren Jackson - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Flinticus:
>
> Worse than Timeteam.

Not at all. Time Team would have spent three days digging various pits all over Leicester, without discovering anything of any significance. In the final two hours of the programme, Phil Harding would get lucky when he'd direct a JCB to dig a trench straight across the skeleton of the King; scattering his bones all over the place, in the process. They'd then announce that the skeleton was probably the remains of a peasant and spend the remainder of the show discussing a tiny piece of pottery that may have been of 'ceremonial importance'.
Mark Westerman - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Comment 4 made me laugh:

Why did they bury him under a carpark?
kevin stephens - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Loads of "Richard the Thirds" in my local super-market carpark; bloody dog walkers
Philip on 04 Feb 2013
When the bones were first found the Now Show on Radio 4 did a humour sketch with a play on the words of his speech from the eponymous play. I can't find it now - if anyone has a link, it was quite amusing.
hokkyokusei - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to DNS:
> (In reply to Only a hill)
>
>
> Nice to see the science confirm the obvious physical evidence, viz:
>
> Head injury; spinal curve; no horse.

Did they check for horse DNA though?
Daithi O Murchu - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

wont he be re interred in Westminster or the cathedral or the tower or somewhere fitting his past status?
ballsac - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Daithi O Murchu:

sadly not - the licence they got from the Dept of Juctice to search for remains specified that any remains were to be intered at the closest consecrated ground to the site of the recovery.

its fairly standard Archeological practice these days.

i was hoping for Westminster Abbey, or, even better, York.

ads.ukclimbing.com
Trangia - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Will he get a State Funeral?

I love State Funerals. They are such fun! All those horses, sailors and guardsmen. Flag draped coffin on a gun carriage. Gun salutes and wailing crowds!

It'll be good for tourism and Virgin Atlantic shares will rocket.
dek - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:
How long had he been there?... Fkin Blue Badge abuser!
Denni on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

Phillipa Langley on the C4 tv programme (on at the mo) is really bloody melodramatic and annoying.

Blue Straggler - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Maybe now they will re-release the criminally out-of-circulation film of Richard III adapted by and starring Ian McKellen and a whole bunch of top-flight Hollywood thespians (no matter from my PoV as I got lucky last week and scored a copy for 99p in Cash Converters, usually you'd have to pay about £50 for it!)

Fits into the alternate histories thread actually, that film (iirc from seeing it just once in 1996, they set Richard III in a sort-of 1930s Fascist London :-) )
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Denni:
> (In reply to Trangia)
>
> Phillipa Langley on the C4 tv programme (on at the mo) is really bloody melodramatic and annoying.

+1

My God but she is ruining an interesting show with her "it's all about meeee" crap.

Trangia - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
> (In reply to Denni)
> [...]
>
> +1
>
> My God but she is ruining an interesting show with her "it's all about meeee" crap.

Boohoo! He was a hunchback.......! :(

She's not a Shakespearean actress by any chance is she?
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:

I think she probably has no archaeological qualifications given that she's not involved in any of it other to wander around like Lady Macbeth, wringing her hands and wailing.
Only a hill - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:
We only managed 15 minutes before changing channel...
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Don't blame you.

In between the amateur dramatics there is some interesting stuff
Kipper - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Denni:
> (In reply to Trangia)
>
> Phillipa Langley on the C4 tv programme (on at the mo) is really bloody melodramatic and annoying.

A bit more worrying, it appears that one of the more qualified people has put a pick axe through the ex-king's skull. Top quality work!

Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Kipper:
> (In reply to Denni)
> [...]
>
> A bit more worrying, it appears that one of the more qualified people has put a pick axe through the ex-king's skull. Top quality work!

Well if he wasn't dead before...
doz generale - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Chris huhne's wife has offered to pay Richard IIIs parking fine.

Simon4 - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to doz generale: Richard III was not riding that horse when it went past the speed limit, that is a foul lie. It is well known that his last words were "A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a speed-limited horse".
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to doz generale:

Under duress no doubt

Where do you park a horse in Leicester these days?
Cú Chullain - on 04 Feb 2013
Call me a cold-hearted bastard, but I think you've got to be a bit weird to be emotionally invested in a chap who died 500yrs ago.
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Cú Chullain:

Yes - utterly unrealistic. I'm sure a few of her colleagues and associates can be seen suppressing laughs when she flounces around.
Rampikino - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

Uh oh he got a knife up the arse too. The indignity!
Denni on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

I don't know why I am continuing to watch this, I really want to jump in the telly and give her a good shake!

Not massively keen on Mr hair bear bunch either but will happily watch the sexy glasses wearing intelligent lady :0)
Simon4 - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Rampikino:

> Uh oh he got a knife up the arse too. The indignity!

What Chris Huhne? He's a bit of a chancer, but that seems rather extreme.

Kipper - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Cú Chullain:
> Call me a cold-hearted bastard, but I think you've got to be a bit weird to be emotionally invested in a chap who died 500yrs ago.

The wife's just asked - "Who's she? His widow?".



ads.ukclimbing.com
Trangia - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Cú Chullain:
> Call me a cold-hearted bastard, but I think you've got to be a bit weird to be emotionally invested in a chap who died 500yrs ago.

Well, there's a few around who are emotionally invested in a chap who died on a cross 2000 yrs ago......
bigbobbyking - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

Anyone know how the DNA test works? If you take assume 17-20 generations bewteen the relative and Richard III, that means the living relative had ~130,000 - 1,000,000 anscentors alive at the time of Richard III. Just wondering what the false positive rate is at that distance...
balmybaldwin - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to dek:
> (In reply to Trangia)
> How long had he been there?... Fkin Blue Badge abuser!

To be fair, he doesn't look like he can walk far

bouldery bits - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

As a man with an archaeology degree:

This is utter tosh.
RCC - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to bigbobbyking:
> (In reply to Only a hill)
>
> Anyone know how the DNA test works? If you take assume 17-20 generations bewteen the relative and Richard III, that means the living relative had ~130,000 - 1,000,000 anscentors alive at the time of Richard III. Just wondering what the false positive rate is at that distance...


Mitochondrial DNA profile.

Mitochondria are inherited through the maternal line and do not recombine. So if you can find a direct (maternal) descendent then you would be looking for an identical profile, barring any mutations in the markers (which is pretty unlikely after only 500 years).
RCC - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to RCC:
> So if you can find a direct (maternal) descendent...

Obviously that should read "a direct descendent of Richard IIIs mother following only maternal lines...".

I guess that was the really difficult bit. Must have been incredibly hard to track down a suitable individual.





OwenM - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to Denni:
> (In reply to Trangia)
>
> Phillipa Langley on the C4 tv programme (on at the mo) is really bloody melodramatic and annoying.
She's only there because she raised the funds to pay for the dig in the first place. I agree bloody annoying woman.

dek - on 04 Feb 2013
In reply to balmybaldwin:
> (In reply to dek)
> [...]
>
> To be fair, he doesn't look like he can walk far
Always thought that lone Speedbump was suspicious....

Ghastly Rubberfeet on 05 Feb 2013
Wiley Coyote - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to Blue Straggler:
> (In reply to Only a hill)
>
> Maybe now they will re-release the criminally out-of-circulation film of Richard III adapted by and starring Ian McKellen and a whole bunch of top-flight Hollywood thespians , usually you'd have to pay about £50 for it!)
>
Flippin' 'eck. I've got that somewhere on VHS. Better put it with the Extreme Rock
Jonny2vests - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to iksander:
> (In reply to Darren Jackson) My kingdom for a parking space

Now is the Winter of our discount tents.
Skyfall - on 05 Feb 2013
Sooo, everyone on that prog (only saw the end) was saying Richard III was much misunderstood and a really nice lad actually (other than clearly being up for a scrap). However.... watching the Starkey prog shortly after, there didn't seem that much doubt that he killed (or had killed) the princes in the tower.

Wonder how the current Royals felt about this as well?
John Willson - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to Skyfall:

There's so much circumstantial and downright dicredited 'evidence' on both sides on this issue that historians (and others) have down the ages been able to pick and choose what they do and don't take into account. Starkey, great tv presenter though he is, has always been noted for his selectivity on the issue (as was Churchill, for that matter).

Quite some years ago, Channel 4 staged a mock tv trial of RIII with Starkey acting for the prosecution and an RIII Society member (I think) for the defence. Starkey was trounced on that occasion, with a large not guilty majority verdict resulting.
Skyfall - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to John Willson:

I did read a little about it years ago but should pick up some books again - it's an interesting part of our history.
Cú Chullain - on 05 Feb 2013
Given the access the cameras had to every stage of the process, I can only assume the whole project was a joint venture between C4 and the University of Leicester, with C4 providing the dosh and insisting that Phillipa Langley and her nutty chums were involved in order to promote a ludicrous 'docudrama' angle, as if the discovery of the lost remains of a medieval king wasn't interesting enough on its own.

All those responsible should be buried in a car park, underneath a giant statue of Lord Reith.


Rampikino - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to Cú Chullain:

I believe the engaging Ms Langley has some kind of film script she is working on.

Will be a bit odd:

Act One - Start digging. Find Richard.

Hmm. A bit too soon.

Explosions? Car chase?
digby - on 05 Feb 2013
In reply to ballsac:

> sadly not - the licence they got from the Dept of Juctice to search for remains specified that any remains were to be intered at the closest consecrated ground to the site of the recovery.
>
> its fairly standard Archeological practice these days.

It's a king of England! I think they might do something a little more significant than that!
ballsac - on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to digby:

i know, i'm not that keen on the idea myself - personally i think he should be buried in any of three places:

a) Westminster Abbey, as he was an annointed King of England, and his wife and Brother are there.

b) York Minster, as he was brought up near there, his powerbase was there, he funded a good deal of civil and religous York, and his Son is buried somewhere in Yorkshire.

and c) Fotheringay near Peterborough, where he was born, and where his mother, father and eldest brother are buried.

i do believe he should recieve a full burial service, as the conditions of his original burial suggest that he may not have recieved one - no coffin, no shroud, no nothing, just a hole in the ground. he was buried in a 'proper' place, but it all looks rather huried...

i'm not sure a full state funeral is appropriate, but certainly a funeral that acknowledges that this was an annointed King of England who had personally fought in France and Scotland.

sadly, the current monarch is believed to have no interest whatsoever in any of her forebears before about Edward VII, and is perplexed as to why anyone else does. her religous beliefs mean that she thinks he should be buried in consecrated ground, but she has no interest that goes futher than that...
colina - on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to Trangia:
> (In reply to Only a hill)
>
> Will he get a State Funeral?
>
> I love State Funerals. They are such fun! All those horses, sailors and guardsmen. Flag draped coffin on a gun carriage. Gun salutes and wailing crowds!
>
> It'll be good for tourism and Virgin Atlantic shares will rocket.

may even make it a bank holiday and get a day off.bring it on



mockerkin on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill:

>> One of my local pubs is called "The Gloucester" after Richard 111 when he was only a duke & not a king. He used to stay there. The pub dates from 14th century.
Also, how come he was made Duke of Gloucester when he had never even been there? Because the king's favourites would be dubbed duke of this or that county with no regard as to whether they knew anything about the place.
Hence the so called "Duke of Cumberland" who killed innocents in Scotland in the name of Cumberland. He only saw the county as he was passing through it on his way to murder. Now we have Scots folk who think that just because of his title that it was us Cumbrians who did those awful deeds.
ads.ukclimbing.com
OwenM - on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to Only a hill: Just around the corner from where he was found is (or was) a pub called the Richard the third. This is a Victorian building it stands on the site of another Inn called the "Blue Boar Inn" after Richards standard a rampant blue boar. He is reputed to have stayed there before the battle as Leicester castle was already a ruin at that time.
mockerkin on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to OwenM:

>> Well that gives the city some beta.
Andy Say - on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to ballsac:
> (In reply to digby)
>
>


> sadly, the current monarch is believed to have no interest whatsoever in any of her forebears before about Edward VII

Not sure that our current monarch has much of a link at all to Richard III.
janiejonesworld - on 06 Feb 2013
In reply to mockerkin: the duke of cumberland is regarded as a military hero down our way, don't listen to the sore loser's propaganda. First truly convincing study of the bayonet in modern warfare

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.