View Full Version : Did Richard do it?

tony draper
7th Apr 2009, 18:38
Scrag those two wee lads in the Tower? one maintains he did not and is a much malinged King.

7th Apr 2009, 18:50
My wife says he didn't. How she should have this information available to her I don't know, but (a) she's usually correct, and (b) I'm always wrong, so I think we can consider the subject closed.

Next theme: did Adam buy his fig leaf at Prada ?

Union Jack
7th Apr 2009, 18:53
Well, Mr D, Henry Ford is supposed to have said "History is more or less bunk", but where's your evidence?:ok:


PS Thank Goodness Richard wasn't maligned!:)

7th Apr 2009, 18:58
Did Richard do it?


Finally bump that Judy bird off?

May the Lord be praised!

tony draper
7th Apr 2009, 19:00
Your missus probably read the same book as I,The Daughter of Time,Richard was innocent I tell you ,well of the deaths of the Princes in anyway,but he was a man of his time and therefore was obliged to scrag a few to defend himself
The great lie was promulgated by those bloody welsh Tudors and by that scoundrel Thomas Moore who contrary to what Hollywood would have you believe was a thoroughly nasty piece of work.

7th Apr 2009, 19:06
As Alan Bennett says, "The trouble with history is that it's just one f*cking thing after another."

tony draper
7th Apr 2009, 20:47
Well as nobody has put forward a valid argument to the contrary one shall inform the television news media that hundreds of Professional Pilots agree Richard the Third was Innocent and would all happily have him as their wingman anytime.

7th Apr 2009, 20:55
Your missus probably read the same book as I,The Daughter of Time,Either that, or Mrs. OFSO went to the same school as me where we "did" Richard III.

Much of his bad reputation came from lies spread by Thomas More from what I can remember. And no, he probably didn't do 'em in.

Herr Drapes, there is a society with the aim of restoring Richard III's good name.



Little Blue
7th Apr 2009, 21:05
Henry Tudor was one of historys greatest liars, along with Joseph Goebbels, if Edmund Blackadder is to be believed !
(Or Henry Tulip, as Edmunds mum referred to him.)
That's good enough for me !


7th Apr 2009, 21:20
I don't remember Blackadder commenting on Goebbels :} But then, I can't remember a thing about O Level History :p



7th Apr 2009, 21:24
I blame the scapegoats.

7th Apr 2009, 21:25
He did ruin some perfectly good Malmsey, though, by dissolving Clarence in it.

After an excellent landing etc...

Edited to correct bad spelling.

Sir George Cayley
7th Apr 2009, 22:04
History is always written by the victor. Just as the history of the early 21st C will be written in Arabic...if certain people have there way.

Richard had a minor bone deformity due to deficiences of certain minerals, he was not the prototype for the Hunchback of Notre Dame.

I think it no longer matters what actually went on then. The perceived truth is so ingrained as to be permanent.

Thin of how Diana's death will be viewed once this period is reduced to paragraphs in a book?

Good news is that PPrune will live forever!

Sir George Cayley

Buster Hyman
8th Apr 2009, 00:46
Didn't their carriage crash whilst trying to outrun the papparazzi steeds?

8th Apr 2009, 01:58
R3 got bad press because, as already said, history is written by the victor, in this case the Tudors in the form of Thomas More. Then Shakespeare did him in again. The only surviving male Plantagenet, the Earl of Warwick, was apparently a person of diminished facilities ("he could not tell the difference between a goose and a capon"), was locked up from age 11 to 26, at which point H7 had him executed for treason, thus removing the Plantegenet threat for posterity.

Ruthless times. It all makes rather interesting reading.

8th Apr 2009, 08:35
Seems to me that the Earl of Warwick got a pretty rough deal.
How could he be guilty of treason if he was locked up for so long.
Fabricated evidence I think. Lies and dammed lies done for him.
He was of limited facilities? A bit thick then? Is that a crime?
If so, most of the population are equally guilty nowadays!
Essex would be a barren wasteland by now.
B*gger Richard the turd, Let's hear it for the Earl of Warwick.
Compensation claim to follow for wrongful imprisonment and

8th Apr 2009, 08:36
the Earl of Warwick, was apparently a person of diminished facilities ("he could not tell the difference between a goose and a capon"), was locked up from age 11 to 26 - ruthless times ?

Things don't change. Prince John, shut away from age 11 because of his shameful epilepsy, kept in a house on Sandringham royal estate, never visited by his mother Queen Mary, never acknowledged, and who died in January 1919. No obits in the press, no public announcement.


8th Apr 2009, 08:38
All well and good OFSO, but they didn't chop HIS head off did they?

8th Apr 2009, 08:53
Sorry Mr Draper, but he was an all round bad egg- would Larry Olivier and the bard mislead one?

Surely not!

8th Apr 2009, 08:57
Wasn't he Welsh? Or maybe a Yorkshire Pudding?

8th Apr 2009, 11:04
I would be very disappointed that someone with the magnificent first name of Richard could stoop so low (bad back excepted).

tony draper
8th Apr 2009, 13:31
I'm afraid the Bard had his nose further up the Tudors nether regions than even the Sainted Moore.

8th Apr 2009, 13:47
Well he would, 'cos look who paid him.

Interesting to look at the UK armorial, and see which bits hark back to the Plantagenets and the Tudors. Squinting roughly, the winners ultimately got the short end of the stick.

8th Apr 2009, 13:55
I was in Robin Hood's mob, he always maintained John did it. :ok:

8th Apr 2009, 14:08
Storminnorm wrote
All well and good OFSO, but they didn't chop HIS head off did they?

Fast for'ard in time: a few years ago, wasn't there a nice Australian girl called something like Kanga who got pushed out of a window 'cos she was mistress to a certain HRH who got embarrased by her ? Ended up in a wheelchair as a result, blabbed a bit too much, and ended up in an early grave ? Cause of death, NF.

And I haven't even mentioned Dodi....

Nothing changes, mate. Get in the way of the wrong branch of the Saxe-Coburgs and you get crushed.


8th Apr 2009, 14:26
The "Lonely Death of Kanga" article is here:

The lonely death of Charles's other mistress | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1076026/The-lonely-death-Charless-mistress.html)

No, axes are no longer in use, nor need to be......