The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > British Royal History

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #361  
Old 10-04-2013, 12:15 AM
LauraS3514's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA, United States
Posts: 213
It's too bad that virtually all the portraits we have of Richard III trace back to one that was over-painted by Tudor artists to make him look older and almost sinister. Richard was only 32 when he died, and a description of him from his lifetime called him "the handsomest man in the kingdom, saving only the King his brother" (Edward IV, known in his youth for his great beauty.) The Society of Antiquaries portrait is probably more accurate than either the one in the Royal Collection or the National Gallery (above). X-rays have shown that the RC one was extensively over-painted at some point to make the king look more like the evil legend he was becoming - and the NPG is a copy of the RC portrait. The Antiquaries portrait was also over-painted, but they allowed it to be cleaned and restored in 2007 revealing that the king was very fair complected with light auburn hair and gray eyes.

Richard III Society**|**LEARN MORE
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #362  
Old 10-05-2013, 02:30 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,349
Oh you're a Ricardian.

Either was Richard has always been good looking in all his portraits, much better looking that his beady eyes brother with the double chin. Even the facial reconstruction that was done resembles the portraits from years ago.
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #363  
Old 10-05-2013, 03:25 PM
LauraS3514's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA, United States
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Oh you're a Ricardian.
After much research and study, yes. I didn't start out as one but as I dug deeper I found that most of what was "fact" was simply the propaganda of an insecure conqueror blackening the character of his predecessor. I majored in history in college because I loved looking not only at the facts of what happened, but how those facts were presented and transmitted to posterity. "Spin" is definitely NOT a modern-day invention! Even today, the theory that if you tell a lie often enough and loudly enough it will become "truth" is alive and well - especially if you make it difficult or illegal for ordinary people to find out the real truth. Just look at modern politics! "Truth" and "fact" are not the absolutes we like to think they are. I had a wonderful American history teacher in High School: we spent about a week studying the history of the western expansion from the viewpoint of the Native Americans. Talk about eye-opening!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #364  
Old 10-06-2013, 12:52 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,349
I am a BA in history as well. I don't believe the Tudor propaganda nor do I believe the Ricardian view that Richard is some misunderstood saint. Negatives about him were being started before Henry returned to England, he just built on what was already out there. Neither Richard nor Henry were evil or saints, they were medieval Kings and usurpers, one just did it better than the other.

Aneurin from The White Queen resembles Richard a little to me except his eyes which are much bigger. From all the portraits I have seen of English Kings the only ones who look attractive are Henry VII and Richard III. Though one of Richard's famous portraits makes him look older, it still resembles other portraits as well as the modern facial reconstruction. He looked like a better looking version of Edward IV.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #365  
Old 10-06-2013, 10:28 PM
LauraS3514's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA, United States
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I am a BA in history as well. I don't believe the Tudor propaganda nor do I believe the Ricardian view that Richard is some misunderstood saint. Negatives about him were being started before Henry returned to England, he just built on what was already out there.
True, BUT the path many of the negative rumors took followed the travels of one John Morton, close confidant of Margaret Beaufort and later Henry VII's chancellor and Archbishop of Canterbury. Shortly after Richard was crowned, Morton and Margaret Beaufort were implicated in an attempt to "rescue" Edward IV's sons (who were possibly not meant to survive) and Morton was put in the custody of the Duke of Buckingham (and Margaret into her husband's custody, bad move Richard) - and the rumors of the boys' deaths started near Buckingham's estate. It was after this thwarted "rescue" that the boys were probably moved out of London. During Buckingham's rebellion later that fall (was Morton using him to prepare the way for Tudor?) the bishop escaped to France and hey! what do you know, rumors that the boys were dead started appearing in France.

As Henry VII's chancellor Cardinal Morton was the inspiration for the "Morton's Fork" taxation policy: "If the subject is seen to live frugally, tell him because he is clearly a money saver of great ability, he can afford to give generously to the King. If, however, the subject lives a life of great extravagance, tell him he, too, can afford to give largely, the proof of his opulence being evident in his expenditure." Henry VII took in a lot of taxes! (And managed to financially cripple much of the old nobility in the process...) And of course, the Star Chamber attained its sinister reputation under Morton & Henry.

Cardinal Morton also had a young man in his household, seven years old in 1485: one Thomas More. It is believed by some scholars that the "History of Richard III" attributed to More in the 1520s was actually written mostly by Morton. Oh, and did you know that Cardinal Archbishop Morton's nephew was in charge of the records in the Royal archives in HVII's reign? The same archives that are mysteriously missing most of the documents that would have existed for RIII's reign? Including the minutes of the council meetings that resulted in Richard being offered the throne by the council and Three Estates? and the evidence proving Edward IV's marriage to Lady Eleanor Butler, parts of which were detailed in Titulus Regis? Coincidence? And no, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Well, history has been written (and re-written) by the winners as long as humans have been around.

Before the death of Edward IV Richard had a sterling reputation as an excellent soldier, and a fair and just "Lord of the North" known for his loyalty to his family. Was he a "saint"? Absolutely not. Not even most of the members of the RIII Society go that far, media reports to the contrary (and no, I'm not a member of the Society although I do read, but not post on, their forum.) If you strip away the Tudor myth and look at the pre-1483 sources Richard Duke of Gloucester comes across as a decent, pious man who just wanted to live his life in service to his brother in the North where he was loved. Circumstances placed him on the throne, and while that may have changed him I can't believe his character would change that drastically in just a few months to that of the Tudor monster. During his reign, some of his laws included the institution of bail, creating a form of legal aid for the poor, lifting the ban on printing books, and requiring that laws be published in English instead of French or Latin. He also had the remains of soldiers killed during one of the battles of 1471 (which one escapes me at the moment) exhumed and reburied in consecrated ground - from BOTH sides. He also had Henry VI reburied in St. George's Chapel, moving him to rest in royal ground. All of this was similar to the kinds of things he'd been doing all along in the North. He hadn't changed.

Sorry for being long-winded...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #366  
Old 10-07-2013, 01:34 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,349
I'm lazy and I don't read long posts on the internet.
I will make this as short as possible:
Pro Richard historians see things one way, anti Richard historians see it another way.
Here is one variation of Richard and instituting bail debate I found on another board:
Quote:
No. This is just one of those half-truths that have been repeated for such a long time that people take it as 'fact'. The concept of bail had always been a long established and widely practiced part of the English legal system dating back to around Edward III's time. And why wouldn't it? Jailing people for long periods of time was not only very expensive, but also increased the risk of prisoners escaping. By releasing defendants on bail with the condition that they return for their trials, everybody involved in the process benefited as since it saved time, resources, and, of course, the time spent being locked up in a dungeon. Now, all that Richard did was to extend the original statute to allow Justices of the Peace to grant bail (except to those already formally indicted). No doubt it was a step forward, but Richard III hardly invented this "groundbreaking new concept".
I can't comment on this issue personally because I honestly don't know anything about it.
Pre 1583 people liked him until he stole the throne from his nephews, then people started to turn against him and it wasn't just friends of Margaret Beaufort. Circumstances did not place him on the throne, he took it from the rightful heir. All the negatives going around Richard after he became King are all not to blame on one Tudor or another, he had bad PR. rumors were spreading about him in regards to his nephews disappearance, his wife's death, his niece...and he couldn't counteract them. The Yorkist split when he became King, also something that can't be blamed on Margaret or her son. Everyone had propaganda then and now, Richard had some as well; didnt he accuse Elizabeth of witchcraft? And is it possible that the people like Thomas More actually believed some of what they were writing and telling others? Shakespeare pulled his out of his butt, but a couple of kids disappear while under the protection of their uncle, it's not a giant leap to assume he did something to them.
In the end he was a usurper and the brother of a usurper who was defeated in battle by a usurper; Henry did what Richard did he just did it better.
Lastly I never said he became a monster after he became King, what i believe is he wasnt some saintly misunderstood man whose every negative is a creation of a Tudor or someone related to a Tudor.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #367  
Old 10-08-2013, 10:08 PM
LauraS3514's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA, United States
Posts: 213
Well, we'll never know for sure this side of eternity...unless somewhere in a long-forgotten dusty backroom, tucked into some dusty old tome, contemporary documents are found stating exactly what happened to those boys. Titulus Regius - an Act of Parliament for goodness sake! - was lost for over a century so who's to say a carefully-worded letter from young Richard to his mum Elizabeth Wydville Grey, sometime called Queen of England, telling her what a wonderful time he and Eddy are having with Auntie Margo in Burgundy won't be found tucked away somewhere - or one from Auntie Margo to somebody commending two young "orphans" to their care. Stranger things have happened... Who'd have thought that the bones of Richard III would be found buried under the letter "R" in a carpark on the anniversary of his original burial the very first day of an excavation the "experts" said would find nothing because "everybody knows" he was thrown into the River Soar?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #368  
Old 10-09-2013, 05:36 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Richard III Towton chapel remains are 'found'

BBC News - Richard III Towton chapel remains are 'found'
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #369  
Old 10-10-2013, 02:02 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
When Richard III invaded Scotland

When Richard III invaded Scotland
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #370  
Old 10-13-2013, 07:02 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Richard III burial petition for Leicester hits 34,000 signatures

BBC News - Richard III burial petition for Leicester hits 34,000 signatures
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #371  
Old 10-17-2013, 04:20 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
New twist in mystery of lead coffin found near Richard III’s grave

New twist in mystery of lead coffin found near Richard III’s grave | Leicester Mercury
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 10-19-2013, 05:17 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Seems not a day passes when there's not a Richard III news story!

From The BBC

Richard III judicial review: Plantagenet Alliance wins costs order

BBC News - Richard III judicial review: Plantagenet Alliance wins costs order
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #373  
Old 10-21-2013, 01:39 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Ricardians gather in York to commemorate England’s Last Plantagenet King



Ricardians gather in York to commemorate England’s Last Plantagenet King
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #374  
Old 10-21-2013, 05:01 PM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
Thank you for all your many interesting links, An Ard Ri. There's nothing like the discovery of a controversial and notorious monarch to keep the interest alive and ongoing which is a good thing, in my book.
__________________
A book should be either a bandit or a rebel or a man in the crowd..... D.H. Lawrence
Reply With Quote
  #375  
Old 11-08-2013, 01:56 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Boning Richard III

Boning Richard III
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #376  
Old 11-08-2013, 04:46 PM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
^^^Wow, you really get a visual of Richard's scoliosis from that picture. That looks pretty severe; I'm amazed he was able to wield weaponry with that condition.

I've started reading "The King's Grave" by Philippa Langley; she describes getting goose-bumps, dry mouth and a pounding heart when she neared Richard's grave in the parking lot. I'm certain the rest of the excavation was led by more scientific means rather than visceral reactions, but I wonder if a dowsing stick was included in the equipment.
__________________
A book should be either a bandit or a rebel or a man in the crowd..... D.H. Lawrence
Reply With Quote
  #377  
Old 11-08-2013, 11:44 PM
LauraS3514's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: San Jose, CA, United States
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baroness of Books View Post
^^^Wow, you really get a visual of Richard's scoliosis from that picture. That looks pretty severe; I'm amazed he was able to wield weaponry with that condition.

I've started reading "The King's Grave" by Philippa Langley; she describes getting goose-bumps, dry mouth and a pounding heart when she neared Richard's grave in the parking lot. I'm certain the rest of the excavation was led by more scientific means rather than visceral reactions, but I wonder if a dowsing stick was included in the equipment.
There has been a lot of discussion on the Richard III Society forum to the effect that the way the bones are laid out, i.e. not touching or articulated fully, exaggerates the curve somewhat. There is a photoshopped picture on the Society's site where the bones are squished together a bit to more closely approximate articulation and the curve doesn't look so extreme. That being said, the fact that Richard spent so much of his life on horseback and in battle (he started commanding parts of the royal army for his brother Edward IV at 18 and his favorite weapon was the heavy battle-axe) and he was known and respected as a formidable soldier even after Bosworth proves that his condition didn't slow him down much. Had he prevailed in 1485 and lived longer, arthritis may well have eventually curtailed his activity somewhat. I know my own scoliosis, while not as extreme, bothers me far more now at 52 than it did at 32.

As far as Philippa Langley's intuition, well, stranger things have been known to happen. But there was also quite a bit of good old-fashioned research involving dusty old records by people such as historian John Ashdown-Hill and others that pin-pointed the car park as the location of the church and Richard's grave. The information was there, IF you ignored "tradition". Remember, the University didn't really expect to find anything at the site, let alone a King. Thanks to the funding from the RIII Society, they found more than they could ever have dreamed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #378  
Old 11-11-2013, 07:45 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Richard III: Leicester Cathedral tomb plans 'not up to scratch'

Richard III: Leicester Cathedral tomb plans 'not up to scratch' | Leicester Mercury
__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
  #379  
Old 11-11-2013, 07:55 PM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraS3514 View Post
As far as Philippa Langley's intuition, well, stranger things have been known to happen. But there was also quite a bit of good old-fashioned research involving dusty old records by people such as historian John Ashdown-Hill and others that pin-pointed the car park as the location of the church and Richard's grave. The information was there, IF you ignored "tradition". Remember, the University didn't really expect to find anything at the site, let alone a King. Thanks to the funding from the RIII Society, they found more than they could ever have dreamed.
Add to that, the "R" that marked the spot in the parking lot. How can you go wrong with a major clue such as that?
__________________
A book should be either a bandit or a rebel or a man in the crowd..... D.H. Lawrence
Reply With Quote
  #380  
Old 11-12-2013, 01:45 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Westmeath, Ireland
Posts: 8,952
Burial on hold as per the BBC

BBC News - Richard III's Leicester reburial plans on hold
__________________

__________________
Death of HSH Princess Grace of Monaco,September 14, 1982
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:37 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]