Re: Breaking News!!!! Richard III's Body Found!

**bb1** Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:42 pm

Of course not, Lily. I will give you three guesses who is footing the bill for their nonsense.

**lily** Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:23 pm

I'm sure I will guess it in a moment and it won't be Gonc's legal defense fund. biggrin

**bb1** Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:32 pm

The York harpies got legal aid for this nonsense, so we're paying their bills. And as the University, etc., are state-funded, we're indirectly paying the defence bills as well.

**lily** Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:34 pm

Bonny, I realized that and, of course, if they had to fund it themselves they would not be doing this.

People do feel entitled though...... mad

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:00 pm

http://englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/perkin-warbeck-man-who-would-be-king.html

An interesting piece.

The more I read about any of these confusing events involving Missing Princes and Pretenders, the more I come to think that there is actually only one simple, logical explanation for any of it.

That the boys were removed from the Tower by King Richard and their mother, when the pair were on speaking terms, and at least one of the boys grew to adulthood. And Perkin Warbeck WAS Prince Richard.

**lily** Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:00 pm

That is what I also think. Why would a mother want to lose her 2 precious jewels and continuation of the line if she could avoid it?

It is a mesmerizing story.

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:09 pm

For me, it's what Elizabeth Woodville didn't do once H7 was on the throne and married to her daughter, Lily.

She should have proclaimed that her marriage had been legal, and that Missing Princes had been murdered by Evil Uncle Dickie.

She didn't; she said nothing, and was packed off to a nunnery by her son-in-law to end her life in poverty for her pains.

I suspect the solution to Missing Princes + Pretenders is very simple, and has been staring us in the face for centuries. And whoever is in an urn in Westminster Abbey, it isn't Missing Princes; given that the Tower area was like a small town and had been inhabited for many generations.

**lily** Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:40 pm

Very true Bonny. She was a true mother in that the safety of her beloved sons mattered more than her own life?

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 5:50 pm

And if she knew at least one of them was alive, then there was always a chance they might get the throne off her odious son-in-law at some point in the future...

**Lamplighter** Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:31 pm

Re the bones in Westminster Abbey, they were supposedly found under the bottom step of a staircase. It was a rather macabre practice to 'sacrifice' children, usually bastards or orphans in the foundations of new buildings to keep evil spirits away. Some people believe that this is exactky what was done, that they were murdered and offered up to appease the usurper's uneasy soul. But which usurper - Richard, whose title to the crown was ratified by Parliament or H7 who killed an anointed king? And before anyone says England was a truly Christian country, that was, and still is, somewhat a debatable point. William II, son of the Conqueror, was rumored to be a practicing sorcerer/witch and the Order of the ~Garter was also supposedly a Coven, as there are only even 12 members and a grand master. LL

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 6:41 pm

Or William I, who took the English crown and built the White Tower in the first place? Or the Anglo-Saxon kings who had built fortifications there?

It was quite a common pagan practice, I seem to recall.

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:24 pm

I can't remember where I read it, LL, you'll know more about this than me, but someone (I forget who) reckoned that one of the pointers to the boys NOT having died in the 1483-85 period was that no Masses or prayers were held for their souls.

Not by Richard, H7, their own mother, no-one, despite that having been so important in England at that time.

**Lamplighter** Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:26 pm

With all the science we have today, it would be easy to date the bones, and take DNA to match with Richard's or the man they used to identify Richard. But the Abbey and others refuse to open the casket so, as long as they deny this simple way to settle whether the bones date from the late 15thcentury or earlier, the whole thing is at an impasse. I remnember reading somewhere that when the bones were ;ooked at in the 1930s, some of them were said to not be human. LL

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2274247/Richard-III-unearthed-princes-tower-stay-buried.html

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:39 pm

Isn't there another Plantagenet child AWOL in the Tower - Margaret Pole's grandson?

**Lamplighter** Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:26 pm

bb1 wrote:Isn't there another Plantagenet child AWOL in the Tower - Margaret Pole's grandson?

The children of Blessed Margarate Pole, beatified by Pope Leo XIII in 1886.

1. Henry Pole, 1st Baron Montagu (c. 1492 – 9 January 1539), notable as one of the peers in the trial of Anne Boleyn; married Jane Neville, daughter of George Nevill, 4th Baron Bergavenny, and Margaret Fenne; beheaded by order of Henry VIII. A great-grandson of Henry Pole was Sir John Bourchier, a regicide of King Charles I of England – a great-great-grandnephew of Henry VIII.
2. Reginald Pole (c. 1500 – 17 November 1558), cardinal, papal legate in various regions, including England, and the last Roman Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury.
3. Geoffrey Pole (c. 1501 – 1558), Lord of the Manor of Lordington in Sussex, suspected of treason by King Henry VIII and accused of conspiring with Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor; lived in exile in Europe; married Constance Pakenham, granddaughter and heiress of Sir John Pakenham. John Pakenham was ancestor to Sir Edward Pakenham, brother-in-law to Duke of Wellington.
4. Arthur Pole (c. 1502 – 1535), Lord of the Manor of Broadhurst in Sussex; married Jane Lewknor, daughter of Roger Lewknor and the former Eleanor Tuchet, herself daughter of the 6th Baron Audley and the former Anne Echingham.
5. Lady Ursula Pole (c. 1504 – 12 August 1570), married Henry Stafford, 1st Baron Stafford.

http://www.thetudorswiki.com/thread/2817553/lady+margaret+pole%27s+grandson

**bb1** Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:30 pm

That's it - Lord Montague's son, Henry. He was taken into the Tower with the others then just....vanished.

ETA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Pole,_1st_Baron_Montagu

Lord Montagu's son Henry was committed to the Tower at the same time as his father. It was expected that he would follow his grandmother to the block, but the King did not want to risk unfavorable public opinion[citation needed] and so he was deprived of a tutor and imprisoned in the Tower until his death, possibly from starvation, in 1542 or later.[5]

**bb1** Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:39 am

At least his replacement crown is ready....

http://www.johnashdownhill.com/johns-blog/2014/4/19/the-crown-of-king-richard-iii

Breaking News!!!! Richard III's Body Found! - Page 7 ?format=750w

Breaking News!!!! Richard III's Body Found! - Page 7 ?format=750w

The crown for King Richard III, commissioned by John Ashdown-Hill, is now complete! It will be on public display all day at Tewkesbury Abbey on May 3rd 2014.

**lily** Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:53 pm

That looks rather good.

**Lamplighter** Fri Apr 25, 2014 3:06 pm

The Richard III Society
Promoting research into the life and times of Richard III since 1924
Patron: HRH The Duke of Gloucester KG GCVO
Bringing you the latest important news and events about Richard III.

The Channel 4 programme Richard III: The King in the Car Park has received a BAFTA Television Awards nomination in the category for Television/Specialist Factual 2014 programme. The other nominees are David Attenborough’s Natural History Museum Alive, Martin Luther King and the March on Washington and Story of the Jews (which was also nominated by the Royal Television Society for their awards but which lost out to Richard III: The King in the Car Park). The Awards ceremony will take place on Sunday 18 May.

Good luck to Channel 4, Darlow Smithson and the Looking for Richard project team.

**bb1** Fri Apr 25, 2014 3:13 pm

Thanks, LL, hope it wins. It deserves to, because it isn't like the others. It started out as rather a daft, 'plucky eccentric Brits' sort of story, but as events unfolded, it turned into a record of something rather amazing.

Now, if the courts would just rule on his final resting place....

**Lamplighter** Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:34 pm

Just got this link for a course - there's so much on this thread that I can't remember if we already have this!! LL

https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/england-of-richard-third-2014

**bb1** Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:41 pm

That looks interesting, LL. I cannot remember the programme, but I saw one historian arguing recently that commoners were actually better off in the 15th century than under the Tudors.

It was because the Tudors introduced such crippling taxation, as well as telling people what to think. Common grazing and farming land was stolen by the aristocracy, and when the monasteries were destroyed, it removed a huge social structure and safety net.

Civil strife continued through the Tudor era, so men were just as likely to get killed in some rebellion or other, and women just as likely to die in childbirth.

Also, as if plague, etc., weren't enough to worry about, Tudor's mercenaries brought sweating sickness into England.

**Lamplighter** Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:55 pm

The problem was actually quite simple, the Tudors were parvenus, they jnew nothing about ruling a country, all they wanted was to plunder the Treasury so they could live in magnificent luxury. They were in fact exactling revenge for being marginalised and for being illegitimate usurpers. You get the idea I despise the Tudors? LL

**bb1** Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:08 pm

Well, I've never liked them for what they did OUTSIDE England's borders, never mind to their poor English subjects.

I've got lots more reasons since Richard's arrival in the 21st century. biggrin

I hadn't known till then just how little right H7 to plonk his scrawny ar@e on the English throne, or that just about every bit of previously-accepted history about that period is, in fact, untrue.

**lily** Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:12 pm

This recent information has been wonderful because I have had to turn a lot of things on their head as a result. Brilliant, I say.

Sponsored content