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

It's the usual state of affairs in the historical world, too many pundits mouthing off. Found this, which seems to show a writer unable to make up his mind. LL    
http://www.loyaltybindsme.org/2011/09/review-richard-iii-by-michael-hicks.html

It's all a bit handbags at dawn, isn't it? Reading that review, I have to ask - has Hicks lost his marbles? It doesn't even sound like the same person.

Who does Hicks think was buried at the site known to be Richard's grave, who had the same DNA as Richard, was the same age as Richard, appropriate battle injuries and who looked like Richard? It makes no sense whatsoever - has professional jealousy addled his brain?

Incidentally, I am about halfway through the Paul Murray Kendall book, which was reprinted recently. That's not one to rush, and is thankfully free of stupid statements and basic errors.

I am sure you will be fascinated to see this rearview of the famously Spindly and Warped Usain Bolt, who also has scoliosis:

Kendall's R3 and Josephine Tey's Daughter of Time are my Richardian bibles. Kendall also wrote The Yorkist Age and Warwick the Kingmaker, both recommended. LL

Reading this:

http://www.amazon.com/Anne-Neville-Richard-Englands-Forgotten/product-reviews/0752441299/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?showViewpoints=1

I suspect anything Hicks has to say on the subject of Richard III should go in the nutter box.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-25760383

There's why Prof Hicks has spat his dummy.

An informative comment in the Guardian on this nonsense:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/27/richard-iii-remains-leicester-doubt-car-park-academics#start-of-comments

I happened to have a bit of spare time on my hands tonight, so I decided to run the numbers on just how many of Joan Beaufort's descendants were running around during the Wars of the Roses long enough to be buried at Bosworth. Out of 58 descendants old enough to have been involved & who fit all the mtDNA criteria, I could only place TWO at Bosworth: Richard III & his cousin (my ancestor) Ralph de Greystoke. Since Ralph de Greystoke died in 1487 & was buried at Kirkham Monastery, that leaves a grand total of one descendant of Joan Beaufort who could have been buried in Leicester: Richard III. Good job of casting aspersion on this particular aspect of the find, Michael Hicks. Good job!

I suspect Hicks is the history professor version of a troll.

Leicester Cathedral's plans to redesign its interior to accommodate the final resting place of Richard III have finally been approved.

The proposals had to be revised after the Cathedrals Fabrics Commission for England – responsible for Church of England cathedrals – flagged a number of issues with the plans in September last year.

Members of the cathedral, along with city mayor Sir Peter Soulsby and other dignitaries, met with representatives from the commission in January to discuss amendments to a number of aspects of the designs.

Yesterday, the commission announced it had agreed to approve the plans following a meeting on March 20.



Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Richard-III-Leicester-Cathedral-given-blessing/story-20890069-detail/story.html#ixzz2xckeCfq4

Hope they get the whole thing resolved PDQ so that His Grace can be reinterred to rest in peace.

Hopefully, the review judges will put an end to the nonsense and the poor sod can finally get buried properly. I am sure he should get a State funeral, strictly speaking, but I suspect that would cause all sorts of constitutional problems. Not least that the English succession has been kerflucked ever since he was killed.

Oh, this explains something that was puzzling me:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-26819086



The tomb will be placed behind a repositioned altar (the grey cube in front of screen)

The grey cube represents the new altar - I was wondering if they were proposing to put him in what looks rather like a grey coolbox.

Thanks for that Bonny. I also thought that he would be in that spot.

Managed to get hold of my friend in Leicester who says that the reason Michael Hicks is tantying is because no-one asked him to be on any of the various panels etc re Richard. He's feeling unloved! LL     

I'm not surprised he was left out, considering some of the sh*te he's come out with on the subject of Richard in the past, from what I've read recently, LL.

It's one of the most STUPID things I've ever seen a supposed 'expert' come out with.

Incidentally, I wouldn't bother watching the last part of the Plantagenets with Professor Robert Bartlett on iplayer or whatever, LL, it wasn't very good. Richard was done and dusted in five minutes or so. Brother Eddie dies, cue creaking dungeon doors and spooky music, vanishing princes and usurping evil uncle. About the only positive thing was that he was praised for dying bravely.

Mind you, huge chunks of brother Eddie's reign were missed out too, so the casual viewer had NO idea why any of this happened. I suspect Bartlett was happier at the start of the series, addressing the audience over Eleanor of Aquitaine's throne, that sort of thing.

I haven't bothered watching any of the Plantaganet series, bonny, one gets used to the back end of the family being dealt with as quickly as possible. I prefer to watch Judge Judy! LL    

He also got into a bit of a tangle with the Scottish Wars of Independence, LL, though he did admit that Edward I's plan to wipe Scotland out of history went a bit wrong and has had the opposite effect from that intended.

Sounds like it is going to be an interesting program. Hope it goes onto Youtube later.

I am sure the body double will have been trained to ride horses in armour, etc., they won't just have got hold of a young guy with a bad back and left him to wave a sword around.

It may stop the current nonsense about Richard being physically weak and warped. This seems to be the new meme from the Tudor lot as they can no longer claim his appearance terrified children; indeed, he's turning into a bit of a rock star. Remember LL's report about the exhibition of The Head on tour?

Young girls (teenagers) wanted their photograph taken beside him, and it was clear that the interest in him is very strong here in Gloucester.

It gets rather confusing sometimes; I can't think of any other long-deceased monarch who is still spoken about in the present tense.

I am sure the body double will have been trained to ride horses in armour, etc., they won't just have got hold of a young guy with a bad back and left him to wave a sword around.

You are definitely right, Bonny.

Boys from noble and royal families were taught to ride horses from a very young age, weren't they? Also to wear armor and wield weapons as they got older?

I believe so, Lily, almost as soon as they could walk.

The idea of Richard being anything less than physically strong is silly, anyway, he wouldn't have survived as long as he did if he was. He probably wouldn't have died at Bosworth if he hadn't been struck down from behind, but that's another story.

I'm sure we've all met slightly-build, wiry blokes who are as tough as old boots, and stronger than many more heavily-built men.

30kg of armour isn't as bad as it might seem...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12225096

quote:

The Ministry of Defence is looking at a range of other new technologies designed to ease the heavy burden on a soldier's back.

The kit they carry into battle can often weight more than 75kg (165lb).

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/188986/British-soldiers-suffer-injuries-from-too-heavy-weights



Since last year infantry soldiers, Paras and Royal Marines have had to haul equipment weighing about 10 stone, nearly twice as heavy as the packs yomped by soldiers in the Falklands 28 years ago, according to a report in Jane’s Defence.

 Oh my. That's outrageous.   

Richard, as a prince, would have started his military training at about 8 years of age. This woild meanm his body would be very well honed, and he would have been very strong. He would have spent hours every day, tilting at the quintain, learning to fight on and off horseback, skills with sword, morningstar, lance etc. Re armor, one of the reasons the Freach lost Azincourt was their armor was very heavy and the weight of that and the horse armor caused them to sink into the very muddy ground (the English brought their wet weather with them!), thus making them easy targets for the archers and the mounted cavalry, whose armor was made from the lighter Milanese steel, made in Italy, and whose horses were often smaller than the huge horses ridden by the French. LL

I feel sorry for the poor horses.   

That makes complete sense LL. Thank you.   

Azincourt from Olivier's 1944 film, the French charging down on the English.


I am trying to find a pic that shows the French Dauphin being lowered onto his horse by winch! LL