King Ricard III

BothellFebruary 5, 2013

His remains have been found and a DNA match and other forensic evidence confirms it is him. I am very interested in English history and think he was maligned by Shakespeare and Tudor historians. The saying goes that history is written by the winners. Henry VII who defeated Richard III had a much less valid claim to the throne and a mother from h-e-l-l who both did some very unsavory things to get and keep the throne. Henry or more likely his mother were probably responsible for the deaths of the princes in the tower. If we think politics are rough now, read up on the plotting, murdering & mayhem that went on back then.

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
labrea_gw

Have you ever read the Book Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey it's quite entertaining? A detective novel that investigates Richard the III.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 1:11AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
youngquinn_gw

that is a very big jump Bothell that henry or Mumsie were responsible for the princes' deaths

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 2:17AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tobr24u(z6 RI)

Let' s not pick on my ancestors...

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 5:06AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
esh_ga

I think it's amazing that they found him under a parking deck ....

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 7:58AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

My kingdom for a parking space...

Fascinating that such an historical figure has been found and identified.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 9:55AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
marshallz10(z9-10 CA)

First parking deck to be turned into a national shrine, I am sure.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 10:33AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

What I haven't figured out is how they pinpointed the grave. They didn't have to dig up that much of the parking lot to find him.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 10:39AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ohiomom

I have actually been following the story on this discovery, yeah call me a nerd, and they knew where the old Greyfriar Monastery was and apparently they knew what they were looking for ... a stone marking where the choir section was where only "people of importance" would have been buried. So I think they knew where to dig and yes I think it is fascinating that they found the remains of Richard.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 12:44PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Embothrium(USDA 8 Sunset 5 WA)

This was on the radio yesterday, a guy wrote a book about it and is promoting it.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 12:50PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

From the BBC News Magazine (Sept 2012) -- Richard III: The people who want everyone to like the infamous king Richard III only ruled England for two years, but it is his alleged role in the disappearance of his young nephews - the "princes in the tower" - that made him infamous.

Many historians say he remains a likely candidate for their murder, but the Richard III Society believes that Tudor propaganda is to blame for his negative image.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 1:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chisue

Nice to know 'spin' isn't something new -- and can be 're-spun' over centuries. Who can claim to know 'the truth'? it's just what's *believed* at any given time.

I have to give some credit to a guy who can sell himself to the widow of the man he's just murdered! Shakespeare -- or that other guy LOL LOL -- at his twisted best.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 3:23PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
rob333

I find it completely interesting DNA evidence is what confirmed the result. That his sister's descendents were the ones they could identify their DNA with his. Really? Amazing that the lineage is still intact. Take him for instance:

"Succession

Richard and Anne had one son, born in 1473, Edward of Middleham, who died (April 1484) not long after being created Prince of Wales. Richard also had two acknowledged illegitimate children: John of Gloucester, also known as "John of Pontefract", and a daughter Katherine who married William Herbert, 2nd Earl of Pembroke, in 1484. Michael Hicks and Josephine Wilkinson have suggested that Katharine's mother may have been Katherine Haute, on the basis of the grant of an annual payment of 100 shillings made to her in 1477."

Here is a link that might be useful: wiki, but it still shows what I mean

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 4:57PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
marshallz10(z9-10 CA)

Interesting reconstruction of the head/face of the king based on the skull recovered in the excavation. He doesn't look like a villain.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 5:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
epiphyticlvr

I have actually been following the story on this discovery, yeah call me a nerd

Ditto OM. I'm in the nerd club with you. I love archeology and history and this has fascinated me since I first heard about it.

    Bookmark   February 5, 2013 at 6:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

I love this stuff. fascinating...
I am not sure how Richard can be exonerated since he did usurp his nephew's crown and have him declared illigetimate-by act of parliament- so hard to get around that. Since the York line was so far down in the sucession-it should have been the Mortimers descendents of Edward III's second son Lionel Duke of Clarence and you also have to skip over the Lancasters decendents of the 3rd son. Picky picky I suppose.

    Bookmark   February 6, 2013 at 12:22AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Bothell

Hi history geeks! I didn't mean to abandon this - it's so interesting, but for whatever reason I had no remote access today. Back to our story. Richard assumed his brother, Edward's throne after it was determined that Edward's marriage may not have been legal & under the laws of the time, his sons, deemed illegitimate, could not succeed him after his death. Whether this was at Richard's doing or not, he was crowned King. The 2 princes were lodged in the Tower of London, which was not only a prison/dungeon but also a royal residence where they were kept. Meanwhile, Henry's mother, Margaret had been working on her son's behalf trying to put forward his claim to the throne. He hadn't been in England since he was a child and she was raising arms/support on his behalf. She, at one point, was under house arrest (because of her plotting) and her husband, Lord Stanley, was to keep charge of her. She had arranged for her son, Henry, to be betrothed to the sister of the princes, Elizabeth of York. If her plotting was successful and Henry became king, do you think he'd want 2 princes with better claims than his alive & laying claim to the throne? So the princes vanished, quite probably by murders arranged by Margaret, to help her son's claim. Oh one more thing, at the Battle of Bosworth, Richard was abandoned by Lord Stanley & his troops. So, who had the most to gain from the deaths of the princes? By the way, Henry did marry Elizabeth and by some accounts, her life was made miserable by that harpy, her mother-in-law, Margaret. End of our tale!

    Bookmark   February 6, 2013 at 12:55AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Bothell

Labrea: sorry, I wasn't ignoring your book suggestion. No, I haven't read Daughter of Time, but as I've had it suggested from several different sources in the past 2 days, it's now on my Kindle & I'm looking forward to reading it.

Young Quinn: Hope I've answered your question about why I'm picking on Henry & Mumsy aka the Harpy.

    Bookmark   February 6, 2013 at 1:00AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sylviatexas1

another rave review of 'Daughter of Time';
I read it years ago & loved it.

    Bookmark   February 6, 2013 at 10:35AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

Bothell-David Hume makes interesting reading on all this stuff and he would not agree with your assesment things especially in view of the fact that Margaret Beauford supposedly arranged for the marriage of her son Henry in collusion with Elizabeth Woodville mother of the bride(Elizabeth of York) and also mother of the murdered boys, that this was in the works while Richard was king so Elizabeth W. was coluding with the Lancasters. Why would Elizabeth Woodville agree to the marriage of her daughter to the man who had her sons murdered? She was as redoubtable a force in her own right as Margaret B.

    Bookmark   February 6, 2013 at 1:41PM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
Opinions? Anyone?? Everyone???
Let me say how much I enjoyed the discussion on the...
ronalawn82
Deserter - Bergdahl
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bowe-bergdahl-to-be-charged-with-desertion-his-attorney-says/ Finally...
paprikash
The Infamous Tom Cotton...
A case of confusion? Or a case of general ignorance? You...
jodik_gw
You asked why he didn't sign the 47 letter
I also received a similar statement from Senator Alexander,...
rob333
Water - the next oil
It's raining; that'll soften things up and take away...
duluthinbloomz4
Sponsored Products
Replacement Fan Blades & Arms: Hunter Sawyer Art Sunflower Blades (5-Pack) 25681
$59.97 | Home Depot
ELK Lighting 66432-1 Chadwick Pendant - 6W in. Bronze - 66432-1
$252.00 | Hayneedle
King 450TC Madison Flat Sheet - IVORY
$129.90 | Horchow
Two King 300TC Pillowcases - HONEYDEW
$135.00 | Horchow
Rave King Bed, Night Stand & Double Chest Set
$1,299.99 | zulily
Elk Lighting Sagemore 18140/2 2 Light Wall Sconce - 18140/2
$160.00 | Hayneedle
Metalarte | Zoom P Floor Lamp
YLighting
Cone III Blue Fusion Jack LED Mini Pendant
$200.88 | Bellacor
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™