Richard III

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101

ORIGINAL: Punk Reaper

The series the Tudors was fiction..... Bad fiction, unfortunately most people seem to take their history from crap tv shows and Hollywood... Yeh I'm looking at you Mel Gibson!

+1. Braveheart being the most obvious pack of nonsense.
It should have been called BraveFart, as the film was just a load of hot air.

Back to Richard. Richard has been treated badly by history, and his vile murderer and usurper Henry Tudor had a very shaky claim to the the throne through his father, John of Gaunt.

Richard was a brave and noble King, who died as he had lived....valiantly.

Let us hope he is given a State Funeral and that history is re-adjusted back to fact and not the fairytale nonsense of Shakespeare's play, which I loathe.

Richards last reputed words on this earth were 'Traitors, Traitors, Traitors'!! before succumbing to the fatal blow. The desperation and betrayal of those words echo down the centuries.

Here was one of our warrior kings who almost got to the coward Henry Tudor personally, fighting his way through his escort, killing his standard bearer before being unhorsed, and eventually cut down.

Det In Requiescant In Pace




Image
warspite1

I find all this fascinating - not least that there seems to me to be so many people who have a real hard-on for the idea that Richard III was so badly wronged.

I understand from the TV program that many members of the Richard III society were adamant (before the skeleton was found) that Richard III did not have a deformity of the spine and that that too was a Tudor myth.

As for me I have no idea, and certainly the fact that Richard's body has been found does not change anything at this stage, but I would love to know more about this now.

One thing I do know - he was our King and Head of State and he deserves a state funeral.

I thought you sir, of all people, would be 'up' on this tumultuous part of our history!!!!

The last 'English' King to sit on the throne of England!!![&:]

I'm speechless!!!!!![:D]
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Empire101

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101




+1. Braveheart being the most obvious pack of nonsense.
It should have been called BraveFart, as the film was just a load of hot air.

Back to Richard. Richard has been treated badly by history, and his vile murderer and usurper Henry Tudor had a very shaky claim to the the throne through his father, John of Gaunt.

Richard was a brave and noble King, who died as he had lived....valiantly.

Let us hope he is given a State Funeral and that history is re-adjusted back to fact and not the fairytale nonsense of Shakespeare's play, which I loathe.

Richards last reputed words on this earth were 'Traitors, Traitors, Traitors'!! before succumbing to the fatal blow. The desperation and betrayal of those words echo down the centuries.

Here was one of our warrior kings who almost got to the coward Henry Tudor personally, fighting his way through his escort, killing his standard bearer before being unhorsed, and eventually cut down.

Det In Requiescant In Pace




Image
warspite1

I find all this fascinating - not least that there seems to me to be so many people who have a real hard-on for the idea that Richard III was so badly wronged.

I understand from the TV program that many members of the Richard III society were adamant (before the skeleton was found) that Richard III did not have a deformity of the spine and that that too was a Tudor myth.

As for me I have no idea, and certainly the fact that Richard's body has been found does not change anything at this stage, but I would love to know more about this now.

One thing I do know - he was our King and Head of State and he deserves a state funeral.

I thought you sir, of all people, would be 'up' on this tumultuous part of our history!!!!

The last 'English' King to sit on the throne of England!!![&:]

I'm speechless!!!!!![:D]
warspite1

No, I'm afraid that was old mother warspite's bag - there was nothing she couldn't tell you about the English Royal Family... Boy at times like this it makes me realise how much I miss her [:(]

I get my love of history from her, but I must confess I do like a few more battleships, tanks and s*** in my history lessons than what the Plantagenents / Tudors could provide [:)]
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Empire101
I shall re-examine my sources and get back to you asp with the facts and references, pronto

That's all I can ask. Thanks.
Image
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

I find all this fascinating - not least that there seems to me to be so many people who have a real hard-on for the idea that Richard III was so badly wronged.

I understand from the TV program that many members of the Richard III society were adamant (before the skeleton was found) that Richard III did not have a deformity of the spine and that that too was a Tudor myth.

As for me I have no idea, and certainly the fact that Richard's body has been found does not change anything at this stage, but I would love to know more about this now.

One thing I do know - he was our King and Head of State and he deserves a state funeral.

I thought you sir, of all people, would be 'up' on this tumultuous part of our history!!!!

The last 'English' King to sit on the throne of England!!![&:]

I'm speechless!!!!!![:D]
warspite1

No, I'm afraid that was old mother warspite's bag - there was nothing she couldn't tell you about the English Royal Family... Boy at times like this it makes me realise how much I miss her [:(]

I get my love of history from her, but I must confess I do like a few more battleships, tanks and s*** in my history lessons than what the Plantagenents / Tudors could provide [:)]

Surely Warspite, the thought of all those heavily armoured knights thundering towards the enemy in full armour, their pennants streaming in the wind, the thought of man against man in some horrendous swirling mass of hacking, slashing and gouging in a sea of mud and blood, as the valiant efforts of one knight succumb to another,... must excite the senses sir??

It must get your blood up.....just a little?
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Empire101
I shall re-examine my sources and get back to you asp with the facts and references, pronto

That's all I can ask. Thanks.

It will be my pleasure sir![:)]
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Empire101
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101




I thought you sir, of all people, would be 'up' on this tumultuous part of our history!!!!

The last 'English' King to sit on the throne of England!!![&:]

I'm speechless!!!!!![:D]
warspite1

No, I'm afraid that was old mother warspite's bag - there was nothing she couldn't tell you about the English Royal Family... Boy at times like this it makes me realise how much I miss her [:(]

I get my love of history from her, but I must confess I do like a few more battleships, tanks and s*** in my history lessons than what the Plantagenents / Tudors could provide [:)]

Surely Warspite, the thought of all those heavily armoured knights thundering towards the enemy in full armour, their pennants streaming in the wind, the thought of man against man in some horrendous swirling mass of hacking, slashing and gouging in a sea of mud and blood, as the valiant efforts of one knight succumb to another,... must excite the senses sir??

It must get your blood up.....just a little?
warspite1

Well now you describe it like that I'm quite turned on [X(]

Maybe this Richard III stuff will help me get more interested, but at the moment, warfare - proper warfare - starts with the Napoleonic era and ends at Nagasaki (with special allowance for Korea and the Falklands).
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Well now you describe it like that I'm quite turned on [X(]

Maybe this Richard III stuff will help me get more interested, but at the moment, warfare - proper warfare - starts with the Napoleonic era and ends at Nagasaki (with special allowance for Korea and the Falklands).

What about Cannae, Harlech, Blenheim, Towton etc etc?

I'll be round later on my trusty steed in my chainmail.......


Image
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Empire101

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Well now you describe it like that I'm quite turned on [X(]

Maybe this Richard III stuff will help me get more interested, but at the moment, warfare - proper warfare - starts with the Napoleonic era and ends at Nagasaki (with special allowance for Korea and the Falklands).

What about Cannae, Harlech, Blenheim, Towton etc etc?

I'll be round later on my trusty steed in my chainmail.......


Image
warspite1

I got into Roman times a little thanks to Rome Total War, but struggled to follow that up (I tried reading Rubicon but it was all a bit too difficult) [&:]

I guess I like "Deranged johnny foreigner person tries to take over the world and the British save the day" type scenario e.g. Napoleonic War, WWII and latterly WWI.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I guess I like "Deranged johnny foreigner person tries to take over the world and the British save the day" type scenario e.g. Napoleonic War, WWII and latterly WWI.

Only a maniac or Johnny Foreigner would'nt subscribe to that view of history sir!!?

Reminds me of a certain mindset peculiar to the British;-

Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.

General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!

Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...

General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

sullafelix
Posts: 1521
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:17 am

RE: Richard III

Post by sullafelix »

George more than deserved his tub of wine. He had been a traitor several times over before he was finally killed.

No one who was as bad off physically as Shakespeare makes him, could have fought in all the battles Richard did and wield a shield and a battleaxe.

I am a Richardist, but even I have a problem with the princes in the tower. The total lack of any writing about them nor really a peep at the time of their demise is staggering. Of course the Tudor's used it as fodder but I have never seen any other mention of it at the time. Before Richard's death there is a huge gap of silence about them.

The percentage of chidren their age that just died from natural causes at the time is staggering. Why wasn't it just let out that they died from the "pox" etc., instead of silence. This more than anything makes me believe that they were done away with.

Even older histories written circa 1900-1960 ( possible even earlier ) sometimes were on the side of Richard being maltreated by the winners history.

So I don't think you could say the idea is " revisionist ".
Windows 7 home premium 64
Intel quad core I7
16 gig
AMD R9 200 series

Di! Ecce hora! Uxor mea me necabit!
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Well now you describe it like that I'm quite turned on [X(]

Maybe this Richard III stuff will help me get more interested, but at the moment, warfare - proper warfare - starts with the Napoleonic era and ends at Nagasaki (with special allowance for Korea and the Falklands).

What about Cannae, Harlech, Blenheim, Towton etc etc?

I'll be round later on my trusty steed in my chainmail.......


Image
warspite1

I got into Roman times a little thanks to Rome Total War, but struggled to follow that up (I tried reading Rubicon but it was all a bit too difficult) [&:]

I guess I like "Deranged johnny foreigner person tries to take over the world and the Americans save the day" type scenario e.g. WWII and latterly WWI.

Fixed that for you, mate. [8D]
Image
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Empire101




What about Cannae, Harlech, Blenheim, Towton etc etc?

I'll be round later on my trusty steed in my chainmail.......


Image
warspite1

I got into Roman times a little thanks to Rome Total War, but struggled to follow that up (I tried reading Rubicon but it was all a bit too difficult) [&:]

I guess I like "Deranged johnny foreigner person tries to take over the world and the Americans save the day" type scenario e.g. WWII and latterly WWI.

Fixed that for you, mate. [8D]
warspite1

Hee Hee - wondered who would react to that [:)]
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Richard III

Post by wodin »

Warspite...tut...tut....I too bypassed Korea..Until I read a book..then I realised my mistake..
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: sulla05

George more than deserved his tub of wine. He had been a traitor several times over before he was finally killed.

No one who was as bad off physically as Shakespeare makes him, could have fought in all the battles Richard did and wield a shield and a battleaxe.

I am a Richardist, but even I have a problem with the princes in the tower. The total lack of any writing about them nor really a peep at the time of their demise is staggering. Of course the Tudor's used it as fodder but I have never seen any other mention of it at the time. Before Richard's death there is a huge gap of silence about them.

The percentage of chidren their age that just died from natural causes at the time is staggering. Why wasn't it just let out that they died from the "pox" etc., instead of silence. This more than anything makes me believe that they were done away with.

Even older histories written circa 1900-1960 ( possible even earlier ) sometimes were on the side of Richard being maltreated by the winners history.

So I don't think you could say the idea is " revisionist ".

Good points there Sulla.

George had repaid his brothers love only with plotting and treachery, so Edward IV had to act in the end.
George got his just desserts.

I too have a problem with the Princes, and years ago I was firmly of the opinion that Richard just did away with them to cement his claim to the throne.

But now, although I still think the Prince's came to a horrible end, I am of the opinion that one of Richards supporters did them in, and then Richard was presented with a fait accompli so to speak.

My favourite suspect is Cecily Neville, Richards mother.
An extremely clever and powerful woman in her own right, she so hated the idea of power falling into the hands of the Woodvilles that I feel she would have contemplated murder to put another of her sons on the throne.

Her campaign to declare the Prince's in the tower illegitimate by the fact that Edward IV, her own son was illegitimate speaks volumes.
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Richard III

Post by wodin »

from a young age I was fascinated with Knights and castles so it's surprising I never wargame the period and have never really studied the period (really all I've done is watch documentaries like The History of Britain etc etc). I think it's something I must do at some point.
User avatar
decaro
Posts: 4004
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:05 pm
Location: Stratford, Connecticut
Contact:

RE: Richard III

Post by decaro »

Will this re-ignite the War of the Roses?

British Cities Battle for Richard III's Remains
Leicester, York stake rival claims

(Newser) – Centuries after the Wars of the Roses, Richard III is still dividing Britain. Two cities are feuding over who gets to rebury newly-discovered remains said to be his. Leicester, home to the parking lot where the bones were found, says it's the rightful owner; York, meanwhile, argues that the king represented the House of York, grew up in the city, and said he wanted to be buried there ...

http://www.newser.com/story/162463/brit ... gn=rss_3_2
Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.[center]Image[/center]
[center]"The Angel of Okinawa"[/center]
Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Richard III

Post by wodin »

It's WAR!!!...well in a solicitors office I expect..

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Will this re-ignite the War of the Roses?

British Cities Battle for Richard III's Remains
Leicester, York stake rival claims

(Newser) – Centuries after the Wars of the Roses, Richard III is still dividing Britain. Two cities are feuding over who gets to rebury newly-discovered remains said to be his. Leicester, home to the parking lot where the bones were found, says it's the rightful owner; York, meanwhile, argues that the king represented the House of York, grew up in the city, and said he wanted to be buried there ...

http://www.newser.com/story/162463/brit ... gn=rss_3_2
User avatar
catwhoorg
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Location: Uk expat lving near Atlanta

RE: Richard III

Post by catwhoorg »

York has enough history sites, so much so its more than a day to visit even the major ones.

Leicester needs the help, let him stay there.

[:D]


(as for gaming in the period, Kingmaker was a great draw at my old wargames club. Quick enough for an evening, and very social)
Image
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: wodin

from a young age I was fascinated with Knights and castles so it's surprising I never wargame the period and have never really studied the period (really all I've done is watch documentaries like The History of Britain etc etc). I think it's something I must do at some point.


It is a fascinating period of history Wodin.
There was an SPI game that I played many many years ago called 'Empire's of the Middle Ages', way ahead of its time.
Unfortunately it needed 5-7 players sitting round a table which I only managed to do a couple of times.

But it was TREMENDOUS fun!!![:D]

Image
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

York has enough history sites, so much so its more than a day to visit even the major ones.

Leicester needs the help, let him stay there.

[:D]


(as for gaming in the period, Kingmaker was a great draw at my old wargames club. Quick enough for an evening, and very social)

He should go to Westminster Abbey!!!![;)]

Ah, Kingmaker.....(nostalgic sigh).....wonderful!![:)]
[font="Tahoma"]Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
[/font] - Michael Burleigh

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”