KING RICHARD III found under parking lot

Richard III was a fine administrator for his brother, Edward IV. He was invited by parliament to succeed to the throne since Edwards son was only 12 and incapable of ruling. The accusation that he murdered his nephews was a calumny invented by Henry VII to try and secure the throne for the Tudors but seems to be totally without substance, particularly as there was no need for such removal which could only hurt his reputation.

Shakespeare, who was patronised by the tudors, obviously found it in his interest to continue accusations against Richard and, since he was a great playwright, his portrayal has survived.

Hopwfully the discovery of the body may help rescue the reputation of this much maligned man
 
Thanks for bringing this to our attention , its always fascinating stuff when they find the remains of historical characters .
 
I have never ever heard one good thing about King Richard III of England. From Shakespeare forward, historian after
historian has spoken of how he was one of the most wicked English monarchs ever to sit upon the throne, stark raving murderous mad.

How can we be certain that all of this effort to tidy him up is nothing more than revisionist inclinations by his distant remaining family and fans of despotic repressive monarchists?
 
Last edited:
He was the last English King to die in battle, there was one Scottish King who had that honour in the 16th century.
 
KiltedSoldier said:
He was the last English King to die in battle, there was one Scottish King who had that honour in the 16th century.
Click to expand...

I did not know that, mate. Tell me, what do you and your mates think of all of this discovery of King Richard III?

And what is the impression of him in Scotland? Maligned and misunderstood or a depostic, murdering tyrant?
 
ArrowMan said:
I have never ever heard one good thing about King Richard III of England. From Shakespeare forward, historian after
historian has spoken of how he was one of the most wicked English monarchs ever to sit upon the throne, stark raving murderous mad.

How can we be certain that all of this effort to tidy him up is nothing more than revisionist inclinations by his distant remaining family and fans of despotic repressive monarchists?
Click to expand...

Arrowman, we can't be certain, but I'd like to point out two things. First, the Tudors and Shakespeare, who relied on the Tudors for patronage, had no reason to paint Richard in a good light. Had they done so, it would have called into question their own legitimacy, and possibly emboldened members of the Plantagenet House that Richard led to attempt to seize the throne back. So there was every reason to trash his reputation. Second, Richard, and the Tudors, lived in a time of absolute monarchy. They were the power, not a figurehead like her majesty, Elizabeth II. Even if Richard is guilty of the charges levied against him, the Tudors and other houses of the day did the same and worse.
 
Arrow - I don't think Scots cared much about Richard, what happened to him or the Tudors taking over - I agree with others his name was blackened for political reasons. Scotland's King would just hope the English kept to themselves and left Scotlavd alone King James ? 3 or 4th died in battle fighting the English st Flodden in the 16th century
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top