Forum home Road cycling forum The cake stop

Richard the Third

random manrandom man Posts: 1,514
edited April 2015 in The cake stop
Not rhyming slang but a dead king.

I just don't understand why there's such a fuss about burying him.
«1

Posts

  • sungodsungod Posts: 12,314
    should've left him in the car park, where i note there's plenty of space for the current lot including sundry princes, dukes, earls, barons, viscounts et alia

    vive la révolution!
    my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny
  • bianchimoonbianchimoon Posts: 3,939
    sungod wrote:
    should've left him in the car park, where i note there's plenty of space for the current lot including sundry princes, dukes, earls, barons, viscounts et alia

    vive la révolution!

    agree wholeheartedly
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • ProssPross Posts: 22,362
    People actually spending money on flowers to put under his statue and queuing for 4 hours on a work day to look at a coffin with 500 year old bones. I blame the Diana effect.
  • mm1mm1 Posts: 1,101
    Pross wrote:
    I blame the Diana effect.

    Ah yes, the day the English got in touch with their "feelings".
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    was he in the long stay?
  • chris_basschris_bass Posts: 4,913
    There isn't much else to do in Leicester
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    Pross wrote:
    People actually spending money on flowers to put under his statue and queuing for 4 hours on a work day to look at a coffin with 500 year old bones. I blame the Diana effect.

    You could say that about any historical monument or burial site, by the sound of the comments on here, iSIS have found some new supporters for their destruction of artefacts in Syria and Iraq.

    though the flowers thing is a bit odd.
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    So apart from Richard III... what's Leicester about?
  • solosuperiasolosuperia Posts: 389
    From the Times.
    Philippa Langley of the Richard lll Society says she was drawn to the location of the grave by the letter R in the word "parking" on the Leicester tarmac.
    Surely the letters KING were more of a clue...............
  • WunnundaWunnunda Posts: 214
    From the Times.
    Philippa Langley of the Richard lll Society says she was drawn to the location of the grave by the letter R in the word "parking" on the Leicester tarmac.
    Surely the letters KING were more of a clue...............
    :lol:
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,981
    I guess Richard III was one of those pantomime villains in Shakespeare's works that people fawn over as major works of art. Taking them in context he was an opportunist who courted patronage just like all our current creatives in the high art of today (various orchestras, opera houses, ballet houses/troupes, RSC, etc.). The difference is shakespear was not high art back then and as far as the last of the Plantagenets goes was a major propagandist for the Tudor regime that took over from the Plantagenets.

    Richard III was labelled a deformed, hunchback weakling with a withered arm and a murderer of the two princes. It paid Shakespeare well to paint that image. The actual body showed he had a sideways curvature of the spine that would not show unless naked. No sign of withered arm (both sets of arm bones are pretty similar in size and strength). All in all there is no evidence to support the Tudor views made after their victory.

    All this is history but there are some very active "fans" of Richard III who want to correct the image of Richard III, resurrect what he did. Some argue that if you compare what he did and put in place during his short reign against what a lot of the Tudor and later monarchs did in the same timescale Richard III should be considered a great king. They argue that he put in place quite a high rate of laws and a large number were aimed at the common man. Laws to control the corruption of lower officials such as JPs, laws to control trustees of estates and many others.

    Now I do not understand why the Diana death was such a big deal, I have always been honest in that I do not rate the current royals and rated diana less. I also do not see why there is a big thing about Richard's procession. I think it is way over the top. However I do think he does deserve some kind of passing commemoration. I also think Leicester is the wrong location for it completely. He only died near there and was buried there. His connections is to York or at least London as our current capital should be his alternative resting place to York. Leicester is a fudge to allow the site to be dug, pure and simple.

    The one thing I do believe in is that Richard III was not a villain compared to other kings (many of the Tudors such a Henry VIII, Elizabeth and others were better candidates for vilain status than Richard III). I also believe he should have a kind of state funeral. Also, an end to the role of Monarchy and unelected houses in Parliament.
  • imposter2.0imposter2.0 Posts: 10,864
    random man wrote:
    Not rhyming slang but a dead king.

    I just don't understand why there's such a fuss about burying him.

    More to do with creating a sustainable tourist attraction for the local economy, is my guess...
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,981
    Doesn't Leicester have a good rugby team? See there is something worth going there for. Althought it is better to put him somewhere with more going for it so you can get a few more sightseeing things done at the same time. I mean it is a long way to go just for a dead king, doubt that is much of a draw. Certainly not enough to go to Leicester. I can think of fewer places worse to go to see a dead king, perhaps Slough??
  • GiraffotoGiraffoto Posts: 2,078
    RideOnTime wrote:
    So apart from Richard III... what's Leicester about?

    There's the National Space Centre, and (I'm told) it's a good place to eat out. Can anyone confirm this second point?

    Also . . . .
    It's not a funeral, it's a reburial. He had his funeral, albeit probably a few prayers while he was hastily shoved in a hole in the ground, and you only get one of them.
    Specialized Roubaix Elite 2015
    XM-057 rigid 29er
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,981
    Did he have a funeral or was his body just dumped in the ground so he could not be found and buried in his Yorkist stronghold to be a martyr for future usurping? Just a question, I do not know the answer.

    Either way it is the first burial with honours of a King so to many it is a funeral. I am sure he will have many of the funereal rites said over him. Which may or may not have happened back in the days after his death.
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    Doesn't Leicester have a good rugby team? See there is something worth going there for. Althought it is better to put him somewhere with more going for it so you can get a few more sightseeing things done at the same time. I mean it is a long way to go just for a dead king, doubt that is much of a draw. Certainly not enough to go to Leicester. I can think of fewer places worse to go to see a dead king, perhaps Slough??

    Ok, so we have

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
  • capt_slogcapt_slog Posts: 3,289
    I went to see the coffin come through Market Bosworth, about it's third stop after leaving the Bosworth Field Centre (where the battle was). It was a long wait for very little, but a good atmosphere (for a 'funeral'), market etc. If it had been raining, I wouldn't have bothered.

    I think Leicester itself is ok. I used to drive into it quite regularly on a Saturday and just park in a back street, but these days it's a proper sod to get into with a car. The whole idea of the roads, as with most cities now, seems to be to get you through or past it. Never eaten there other than nipping into pizza hut.


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    RideOnTime wrote:
    Doesn't Leicester have a good rugby team? See there is something worth going there for. Althought it is better to put him somewhere with more going for it so you can get a few more sightseeing things done at the same time. I mean it is a long way to go just for a dead king, doubt that is much of a draw. Certainly not enough to go to Leicester. I can think of fewer places worse to go to see a dead king, perhaps Slough??

    Ok, so we have

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
    Pizza Hut
  • capt_slogcapt_slog Posts: 3,289
    RideOnTime wrote:
    RideOnTime wrote:
    Doesn't Leicester have a good rugby team? See there is something worth going there for. Althought it is better to put him somewhere with more going for it so you can get a few more sightseeing things done at the same time. I mean it is a long way to go just for a dead king, doubt that is much of a draw. Certainly not enough to go to Leicester. I can think of fewer places worse to go to see a dead king, perhaps Slough??

    Ok, so we have

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
    Pizza Hut

    :lol:


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • random manrandom man Posts: 1,514
    I guess Richard III was one of those pantomime villains in Shakespeare's works that people fawn over as major works of art. Taking them in context he was an opportunist who courted patronage just like all our current creatives in the high art of today (various orchestras, opera houses, ballet houses/troupes, RSC, etc.). The difference is shakespear was not high art back then and as far as the last of the Plantagenets goes was a major propagandist for the Tudor regime that took over from the Plantagenets.

    Richard III was labelled a deformed, hunchback weakling with a withered arm and a murderer of the two princes. It paid Shakespeare well to paint that image. The actual body showed he had a sideways curvature of the spine that would not show unless naked. No sign of withered arm (both sets of arm bones are pretty similar in size and strength). All in all there is no evidence to support the Tudor views made after their victory.

    All this is history but there are some very active "fans" of Richard III who want to correct the image of Richard III, resurrect what he did. Some argue that if you compare what he did and put in place during his short reign against what a lot of the Tudor and later monarchs did in the same timescale Richard III should be considered a great king. They argue that he put in place quite a high rate of laws and a large number were aimed at the common man. Laws to control the corruption of lower officials such as JPs, laws to control trustees of estates and many others.

    Now I do not understand why the Diana death was such a big deal, I have always been honest in that I do not rate the current royals and rated diana less. I also do not see why there is a big thing about Richard's procession. I think it is way over the top. However I do think he does deserve some kind of passing commemoration. I also think Leicester is the wrong location for it completely. He only died near there and was buried there. His connections is to York or at least London as our current capital should be his alternative resting place to York. Leicester is a fudge to allow the site to be dug, pure and simple.

    The one thing I do believe in is that Richard III was not a villain compared to other kings (many of the Tudors such a Henry VIII, Elizabeth and others were better candidates for vilain status than Richard III). I also believe he should have a kind of state funeral. Also, an end to the role of Monarchy and unelected houses in Parliament.

    A lot of this seems to have been glossed over amid all the funeral fuss, so thanks TM.
  • random manrandom man Posts: 1,514
    Imposter wrote:
    More to do with creating a sustainable tourist attraction for the local economy, is my guess...

    Which is why they didn't want York to get him - they get plenty of tourists already :wink:
  • random manrandom man Posts: 1,514
    Giraffoto wrote:
    There's the National Space Centre, and (I'm told) it's a good place to eat out. Can anyone confirm this second point?
    Excellent for a curry, not surprisingly.
  • RDWRDW Posts: 1,900
    RideOnTime wrote:
    RideOnTime wrote:
    Doesn't Leicester have a good rugby team? See there is something worth going there for. Althought it is better to put him somewhere with more going for it so you can get a few more sightseeing things done at the same time. I mean it is a long way to go just for a dead king, doubt that is much of a draw. Certainly not enough to go to Leicester. I can think of fewer places worse to go to see a dead king, perhaps Slough??

    Ok, so we have

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there

    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
    Pizza Hut
    Don't they have that Red Leicester cheese? Maybe on the pizzas?
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,981
    I doubt red Leicester is made in Leicester. Not many cows grazing the shopping centre I reckon.
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    edited March 2015
    Dead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
    Pizza Hut
    National Space Centre
    Curry available
    Chinese food available


    I think Walkers are from Leicester? crisps that isDead King
    Rugby Team
    Tights are made there
    Pizza Hut
    National Space Centre
    Curry available
    Chinese food available
    Kasabian
  • DesB3rdDesB3rd Posts: 285
    A lot of this seems to have been glossed over amid all the funeral fuss,

    I've noticed quite the opposite. "Richard's revisionists" have had so much air-time of late that they attracted their own parody article - http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/richard-iii-a-great-guy-apart-from-killing-those-kids-2015032396561
  • GiraffotoGiraffoto Posts: 2,078
    Where did we get "tights are made there" from?

    +1 for red Leicester cheese - even on a pizza.
    Specialized Roubaix Elite 2015
    XM-057 rigid 29er
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,981
    You mean the Richard III re-re-visionists. It was the Tudors (with the creative help of Shakespeare's play) who were the first revisionists. All that propaganda about weakling with the hunchback and withered hand. Turns out it was a sideways curvature that was only evident when naked and did not significantly hinder his movement. Indeed contemporary reports have him with a high prowess on the battlefield. The old stories about killing Henry VI, the two princes, etc. also lack credibility. The Henry VI killing was thought by modern historians to be ordered by Edward IV who had just returned to London after victory at the battle of Tewkesbury. It has been accepted that only a king can order regicide and that Richard was the Constable of England which meant it was his role to carry out the orders of the King (Edward IV).

    Those were complicated times, indeed IMHO the history of England/Briton/Britain up to mid Tudor times have been more interesting than later periods. Well to me that is. It is a real confusion of hereditary and kingship. I seriously doubt that the line of kingship resulting in our current monarch was the only way to get to today. I am not sure it is even the right line. Perhaps th Tudor regime should not have happened? What would an England be if RIchard III had survived Bosworth and gone on as king? Certainly his activity since having kingship conferred on him was at a high rate and progressive for those times.
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    RIchard III had survived Bosworth and gone on as king? Certainly his activity since having kingship conferred on him was at a high rate and progressive for those times.

    Is this a subtle way of implying Richard III is actually Richard I
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    It needs to be substantive that Red Leicester is actually made in Leicester before it can go on the list...
Sign In or Register to comment.