RE: Richard III (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message


wodin -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 2:25:39 PM)

Yeah I did own Kingmaker..I think it was the first wargame I ever bought...




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 6:27:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

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!![:)]

warspite1

Indeed. State Funeral with Westminster Abbey as his final resting place. Now just get it sorted Mr Cameron...




Chickenboy -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 6:53:44 PM)

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:00:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?
warspite1

I am afraid you will have to ask Empire. I am absolutely serious about the Abbey - Richard was our King, our Head of State, and he deserves to be treated as such.




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:06:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?


Well it will not happen, thats why I 'winked'.

There are no hard and fast rules about burial at Westminster Abbey.
Its really upto the individual where they wish to be laid to rest, or in very rare circumstances, the State will bequeath the honour to some individual who has done great service to the country.

I'd like to see Richard back in his homeland ie York, but as long as he gets a proper funeral, thats all that really matters.




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:08:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?


Well it will not happen, thats why I 'winked'.

There are no hard and fast rules about burial at Westminster Abbey.
Its really upto the individual where they wish to be laid to rest, or in very rare circumstances, the State will bequeath the honour to some individual who has done great service to the country.

I'd like to see Richard back in his homeland ie York, but as long as he gets a proper funeral, thats all that really matters.

warspite1

TREASON!!!!!!




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:10:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?
warspite1

I am afraid you will have to ask Empire. I am absolutely serious about the Abbey - Richard was our King, our Head of State, and he deserves to be treated as such.


Well I'd like to see him buried in Westminster Abbey Mr. W, but I don't think the powers that be would even consider it until the Prince's in the Tower puzzle is sorted out....and that sir, will probably never be got to the the bottom of.




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:13:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?


Well it will not happen, thats why I 'winked'.

There are no hard and fast rules about burial at Westminster Abbey.
Its really upto the individual where they wish to be laid to rest, or in very rare circumstances, the State will bequeath the honour to some individual who has done great service to the country.

I'd like to see Richard back in his homeland ie York, but as long as he gets a proper funeral, thats all that really matters.

warspite1

TREASON!!!!!!



Now where have I heard that before??

Ah yes...'TREASON..TREASON TREASON'......or was it...'A horse, a horse, my Kingdom for a horse'...... its so confusing all this fact and fiction....one could almost believe Henry VII was a good and just king....or was he???


Lord Percy Percy:- My Lord, you have nothing to worry about; The Prince's are dead.

Richard, Duke of Gloucester:- WHAT!!!! OH MY GOD.....WHAT HAVE YOU DONE PERCY???

Lord Percy Percy:- Ummm....ahhhh, you did say you wanted them murdered and done away my Leige.

Richard, Duke of Gloucester:- No you idiot, I said I wanted them taken further away, not murdered and done away...... you imbecile.
Christ this is going to look bad 600 years down the line.




Chickenboy -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:16:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
Henry VII was a good and just king....or was he???


Doubtful. He was English, wasn't he? [:'(]




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:21:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Why the "wink" emoticon re: a burial at Westminster Abbey? Wasn't he a king? Are there some unspoken rules about which kings or other regents will be granted that favour (sic) or honour (sic)?
warspite1

I am afraid you will have to ask Empire. I am absolutely serious about the Abbey - Richard was our King, our Head of State, and he deserves to be treated as such.


Well I'd like to see him buried in Westminster Abbey Mr. W, but I don't think the powers that be would even consider it until the Prince's in the Tower puzzle is sorted out....and that sir, will probably never be got to the the bottom of.

warspite1

But but......

a) The Princes in the Tower is irrelevant - Richard III was our Head of State, our Monarch.
b) Innocent until proven guilty.
c) If we are going to get all silly about minor indescretions like Nepoticide, then what about Henry VIII lopping heads off left, right and centre or the Catholics burning the Prodies or the Prodies burning the Catholics?




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:31:50 PM)

Well yes you are right of course Warspite.

But history has decreed Richard III was a villian, and that idea is imbedded in the minds of too many.

All the Kings and Queens of Europe were nonchalantly killing off relatives with an equal or better claim than their own, or in some instances just killing people they thought 'might' be a threat at a later date, but their crimes are long forgotten.

As to Westminster, you are preaching to the converted, but I don't think it will happen.[:(]




catwhoorg -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:32:43 PM)

Richard III was indeed King, however it is not that common for monarchs to be buried at the Abbey.

The one argument I think that has great weight for such a move is that his wife is interned there (Anne Neville).




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:33:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
Henry VII was a good and just king....or was he???


Doubtful. He was English, wasn't he? [:'(]


Now then, now then!! What have we ere??[:D]




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:36:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Richard III was indeed King, however it is not that common for monarchs to be buried at the Abbey.

The one argument I think that has great weight for such a move is that his wife is interned there (Anne Neville).


I did not know that!!!

That changes everything....he MUST be buried alongside the wife he loved so much.

Thats the irrefutable fact that means he must....nay demands sir, that he has a State Funeral and be buried at Westminster Abbey




catwhoorg -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:37:29 PM)

To paraphrase Terry Pratchett, Richard III died of natural causes. Being walloped repeated by a sword IS natural causes for a king.




Orm -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:38:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Richard III was indeed King, however it is not that common for monarchs to be buried at the Abbey.

The one argument I think that has great weight for such a move is that his wife is interned there (Anne Neville).


I did not know that!!!

That changes everything....he MUST be buried alongside the wife he loved so much.

Thats the irrefutable fact that means he must....nay demands sir, that he has a State Funeral and be buried at Westminster Abbey


How much would this cost and who should pay?




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:45:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Richard III was indeed King, however it is not that common for monarchs to be buried at the Abbey.

The one argument I think that has great weight for such a move is that his wife is interned there (Anne Neville).


I did not know that!!!

That changes everything....he MUST be buried alongside the wife he loved so much.

Thats the irrefutable fact that means he must....nay demands sir, that he has a State Funeral and be buried at Westminster Abbey


How much would this cost and who should pay?

warspite1

Cost doesn't come into it - I repeat, he was our King and deserves a state funeral - to hell with the cost. We just paid a bzillion pounds for the Olympics, we can afford to give Richard a proper send off.




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:49:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101


quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Richard III was indeed King, however it is not that common for monarchs to be buried at the Abbey.

The one argument I think that has great weight for such a move is that his wife is interned there (Anne Neville).


I did not know that!!!

That changes everything....he MUST be buried alongside the wife he loved so much.

Thats the irrefutable fact that means he must....nay demands sir, that he has a State Funeral and be buried at Westminster Abbey


How much would this cost and who should pay?

warspite1

Cost doesn't come into it - I repeat, he was our King and deserves a state funeral - to hell with the cost. We just paid a bzillion pounds for the Olympics, we can afford to give Richard a proper send off.



Indeed sir!!!! I could not agree more!!




Toby42 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:51:06 PM)

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|]




MikeBrough -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:51:37 PM)


quote:

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]




Empire101 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:54:18 PM)


quote:

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.




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 7:54:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough


quote:

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.




Chickenboy -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 8:03:24 PM)


quote:

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.




Chickenboy -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 8:03:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough


quote:

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. [sm=Cool-049.gif]




Zorch -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:12:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeBrough


quote:

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)




Curtis Lemay -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:27:20 PM)


quote:

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 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:32:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

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.




wodin -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:43:42 PM)

Richard liked the boys..




Toby42 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:45:33 PM)

So was England better or worse for the Norman Conquest?




warspite1 -> RE: Richard III (2/8/2013 9:53:17 PM)


quote:

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.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125