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: Treale

Wasn't the last English King Harold? And how many years until a King stopped speaking French and started speaking English. Did Richard III speak English? Just curious [8|]

Englishness if there is such a term, came about in the early Middle Ages as a concept and cultural identity.

Harold was the the last Anglo-Saxon King.
[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: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
lol you asshat. I didn't know if there were several King Richards.

I think there's a clue in the title of the thread! [8D]
warspite1

I missed that!! Now that is funny.

Why was the film "The Madness of King George" not called "The Madness of King George III"?

Because Americans would assume they missed the first two parts and so not bother seeing the sequel.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Empire101
Englishness if there is such a term, came about in the early Middle Ages as a concept and cultural identity.

You've got to admit-it beats the hell out of the immediately preceding canibalism-ness. Just.
Image
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
lol you asshat. I didn't know if there were several King Richards.

I think there's a clue in the title of the thread! [8D]
warspite1

I missed that!! Now that is funny.

Why was the film "The Madness of King George" not called "The Madness of King George III"?

Because Americans would assume they missed the first two parts and so not bother seeing the sequel.

The fourth one was the best anyways. The ones with laser beams and bat wings out of his back. Yeah. That was cool.
Image
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: Richard III

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel
lol you asshat. I didn't know if there were several King Richards.

I think there's a clue in the title of the thread! [8D]
warspite1

I missed that!! Now that is funny.

Why was the film "The Madness of King George" not called "The Madness of King George III"?

Because Americans would assume they missed the first two parts and so not bother seeing the sequel.

Most Excellent! (and sadly true)
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 13846
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: Treale

Wasn't the last English King Harold? And how many years until a King stopped speaking French and started speaking English. Did Richard III speak English? Just curious [8|]

I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Treale

Wasn't the last English King Harold? And how many years until a King stopped speaking French and started speaking English. Did Richard III speak English? Just curious [8|]

I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
warspite1

Well certainly not French - the Normans (largely descended from Vikings - Norsemen) did not really consider themselves French at all. Welcome to the hotch potch of European history.
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 »

Richard liked the boys..
User avatar
Toby42
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Central Florida

RE: Richard III

Post by Toby42 »

So was England better or worse for the Norman Conquest?
Tony
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Treale

So was England better or worse for the Norman Conquest?
warspite1

Difficult to answer of course because although we know how things turned out under the Normans, there is no way of knowing how would they have gone under continued Anglo-Saxon rule? My gut feel is that the Norman Conquest was a positive in terms of this country's development.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
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 »

Much like the Romans, it is almost impossible to imagine what the modern nation would be like without that conquest.
Image
User avatar
Orm
Posts: 27751
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: Sweden

RE: Richard III

Post by Orm »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Treale

So was England better or worse for the Norman Conquest?
warspite1

Difficult to answer of course because although we know how things turned out under the Normans, there is no way of knowing how would they have gone under continued Anglo-Saxon rule? My gut feel is that the Norman Conquest was a positive in terms of this country's development.
Right now I feel the opposite. But I can be convinced to change my thoughts about this.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Treale

So was England better or worse for the Norman Conquest?
warspite1

Difficult to answer of course because although we know how things turned out under the Normans, there is no way of knowing how would they have gone under continued Anglo-Saxon rule? My gut feel is that the Norman Conquest was a positive in terms of this country's development.
Right now I feel the opposite. But I can be convinced to change my thoughts about this.
warspite1

There was a brilliant BBC series a few years back called The Normans. I have it on order - should arrive next week - and I will post some of the points raised in the program.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 13846
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Richard III

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
warspite1

Well certainly not French - the Normans (largely descended from Vikings - Norsemen) did not really consider themselves French at all. Welcome to the hotch potch of European history.

Even the Conquerer's children were a blend. But for sure, Henry II was the son of Geoffrey of Anjou, and Henry's wife was from Aquitaine. So Richard I was, at best, 1/4 Norman - the rest mostly French. John's wife was from Angouleme & his son's wife was from Provence. Then Edward I & Edward II had French wives. You have to go to Edward III to find a non-French wife. Then Henry V & Henry VI were back to French again. The Plantagenets were pretty much French.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Richard III

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
warspite1

Well certainly not French - the Normans (largely descended from Vikings - Norsemen) did not really consider themselves French at all. Welcome to the hotch potch of European history.

Even the Conquerer's children were a blend. But for sure, Henry II was the son of Geoffrey of Anjou, and Henry's wife was from Aquitaine. So Richard I was, at best, 1/4 Norman - the rest mostly French. John's wife was from Angouleme & his son's wife was from Provence. Then Edward I & Edward II had French wives. You have to go to Edward III to find a non-French wife. Then Henry V & Henry VI were back to French again. The Plantagenets were pretty much French.
warspite1

But not French in the sense we know today. Could you argue that the 100-years war was in fact a French civil war?

Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
rodney727
Posts: 1457
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:53 pm
Location: Iowa

RE: Richard III

Post by rodney727 »

I often kid my wife and say my ancestors only burnt and pillaged..(mine are mostly all German ). While hers raped burnt and pillaged ( she is mostly Swedish and Norway heritage )
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Treale

Wasn't the last English King Harold? And how many years until a King stopped speaking French and started speaking English. Did Richard III speak English? Just curious [8|]

I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
warspite1

Well certainly not French - the Normans (largely descended from Vikings - Norsemen) did not really consider themselves French at all. Welcome to the hotch potch of European history.
"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943
User avatar
Orm
Posts: 27751
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: Sweden

RE: Richard III

Post by Orm »

ORIGINAL: rogo727

I often kid my wife and say my ancestors only burnt and pillaged..(mine are mostly all German ). While hers raped burnt and pillaged ( she is mostly Swedish and Norway heritage )
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




I remember reading that Edward I was the first Plantagenet who could speak English. Still a second language for him, though. When, or even if, any Plantagenet ever thought of himself as English I don't know. I'd also be curious as to when (or if) any such transition took place. Shakespeare treats the later ones as if they were English, though, and he wasn't too far removed from their times. So, I'm guessing that probably by the time of Henry IV, at least, they thought of themselves as English.

Certainly the earlier ones, such as Henry II & Richard I (Lion Hearted) regarded themselves as either Norman or French, with England a conquered province they were lording it over. That seems to make the Magna Carta sort of a French/Norman document, regulating French/Norman lords & kings, by the way. [X(]
warspite1

Well certainly not French - the Normans (largely descended from Vikings - Norsemen) did not really consider themselves French at all. Welcome to the hotch potch of European history.
Vikings have has an unfairly bad reputation. The main reason for this is that they plundered monasteries and churches. Killed priests and monks. And it was those who wrote the history about the Vikings.

And the Germans has during the history been mostly raped, killed and had their homes burnt. But this is mostly forgotten since the events during the twentieth century takes precedence.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett
User avatar
Empire101
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: Coruscant

RE: Richard III

Post by Empire101 »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Difficult to answer of course because although we know how things turned out under the Normans, there is no way of knowing how would they have gone under continued Anglo-Saxon rule? My gut feel is that the Norman Conquest was a positive in terms of this country's development.
Right now I feel the opposite. But I can be convinced to change my thoughts about this.
warspite1

There was a brilliant BBC series a few years back called The Normans. I have it on order - should arrive next week - and I will post some of the points raised in the program.

It is an EXCELLENT series Mr.W. You will really enjoy it!!

I've got to get all the crap for CB, its taking several books/ages [:(]
[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

Much like the Romans, it is almost impossible to imagine what the modern nation would be like without that conquest.

+1
[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: wodin

Richard liked the boys..

WARNING: LIVE WODIN HAND GRENADE DETECTED. APPROACH WITH CAUTION.
[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”