Thread: Richard The Third

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

He was 30 when he got the crown and 32 when he was slain. Short life of trouble.

Of course this was back when a nations leader was expected to lead the army into battle rather than sit behind a desk.

Originally Posted by Theseus

Of course this was back when a nations leader was expected to lead the army into battle rather than sit behind a desk.

He was in fact the last English king to die in battle.

Originally Posted by Theseus

Of course this was back when a nations leader was expected to lead the army into battle rather than sit behind a desk.

When you are fighting off people who want to take your throne, you don't have much choice in the matter

If you are interested in getting a feel for what life was like, you might want to start reading Michael Jecks.
He is a historical scholar who writes crime novels set in the despenser timeframe. He prides himself of being accurate in his descriptions of life of the common people while also staying true to historical events. And he begins / ends his books with an explanation of where his story fits in the historical timeframe, and what the policital context surrounding the story is.

He is a very good writer. One thing that becomes obvious rather quickly is that the ruling class was only interested in the rest of society as a means to an end. There was a profound lack of empathy and respect for 'fellow humans' throughout that timeframe. If someone was trying to gain / retain power, it was never because of any ideological reasons, but only because they saw themselves as king of the hill.

Article I read said he was smacked in the head with a Halberd? would ruin you day for sure.
Halberd - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Bruno

He is a very good writer. One thing that becomes obvious rather quickly is that the ruling class was only interested in the rest of society as a means to an end. There was a profound lack of empathy and respect for 'fellow humans' throughout that timeframe. If someone was trying to gain / retain power, it was never because of any ideological reasons, but only because they saw themselves as king of the hill.

That doesn't sound different than modern times!

Couldn't resist...

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

Article I read said he was smacked in the head with a Halberd? would ruin you day for sure.
Halberd - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From the accounts of the wounds, it looks like there were at least a couple of wounds that would have been fatal on their own: the halberd on as well as what is probably a sword wound. Not to mention the numerous smaller wounds probably caused by knives, etc. And then after he was dead they really went to town on the corpse.

Bad day indeed.

The BBC has a good little interactive thingy for anyone interested in more details of the skeleton.

BBC News - Richard III: The twisted bones that reveal a king

"Bloody thou art, bloody will be thy end."