Forgot to say that atleast there was a couple of good things to come out of King Richard's reign.

1. Londoners named poo after him.

2. We can remember the colours of the rainbow thanks to him, well his subsequent demise anyway.

I don't think that "crookback" is the same as "hunchback". "Crookback" is clearly a shortening of "crooked back", which is what he had, and which is how such a condition would appear, and be naturally described. But, wasn't "crookback" his nickname anyway? And did Shakespeare use that word? I thought his phrase was "bunch-back'd". I can understand why as this is only one consonant away from "hunch-back'd" people might jump to conclusions, but Shakespeare was hardly a careless writer, and so whilst the usage of the description "bunch-back'd" [imay[/i have been familiar Shakesepeare's audience, or he may have just invented it, the fact seems to be that he didn't use "hunch" and that is I think certainly no accident.

Thomas More described Richard thus:
"'He was little of stature, ill fetured of limmes, croke backed, his left shoulder much higher than his right,"
... which is interesting, as it uses both the "crooked back" description, as well as expanding on it by pointing out one shoulder was higher than the other.

Richard III was Richard of Gloucester.
His father was Richard of York, he died at the battle of Wakefield in 1460, surely 'twould be he who is noted in the colours of the rainbow thing?

We have to exercise a great deal of caution when quoting Thomas More about anything to do with the Plantagenets, as he was allied to (or at the very least had to be very careful about) the Tudor cause ... until he fell out with Henry VIII about the Church of England.
He was only seven when Richard died and started his history of Richard 27 years after Richard's death ... and the history is considered by some historians as more of a moral tale than what we would term a history.

Nonetheless, you have a point and now his skeleton has been recovered, we'll see some genuine evidence one way or the other.

Going by last nights programme he was a bloody tough bloke, fair and quite handsome. Who seemed to have the respect of the people of the North. I think it is amazing that they have managed to find him and i hope he gets a re-burial befitting his status.

I recorded that programme and will be watching this evening with interest.

Presumably though not including those who smote his skull with a halberd or drove a dagger into his brain

Yeah, likely that was the forces under Stanley, who hung about waiting to see who was going to win before he joined in.
He was a right turncoat that one, first on one side and then the other.
His joining in was what did for Richard, and handed the throne to Henry Tudor who rewarded him handsomely.
He copped it in the end though, as the same Henry Tudor (i.e. Henry VII) had him beheaded for supporting the Perkin Warbeck claim.
He changed sides just once too often.

It wasn't the best programme I have ever seen but it had enough info to keep me interested. Although the woman from the Richard lll society was a bit OTT. I found myself feeling a lot of sympathy for him though and wanting to know more about him. As I said earlier I hope he gets a reburial befitting his status.

Well at the moment that's not going to be the case. It seems bleedin' obvious to me that he should be buried in York Minster, being a big supporter of it financially and being the last King of the House of York.

Whereas as matters stand, he's going to be buried somewhere in Leicester. With all due respect etc. might as well put him back in the car park.

But you can do something about it:
[urlhttp://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/38772[/url

Re Edward IV's legitimacy: not sure as he was very atypical York scion.

Didn't Richard 111 "bring in" no taxation without recourse to Parliament? Need to check.

No, we only ever got as far as Richard 3.

Will we all get a day off for the funeral?

If nowt else it'll give Osborne an excuse for triple dip

And apparently his bare as his naked body was thrown over the saddle of a horse and paraded around for all to have a gander at, wound marks on his pelvic bones would suggest post death stab wounds there.

Fairly brutal era to be a King and the description of how he fell at Bosworth is well worth reading.

Facinating story this. I would have thought that his remains would have been lost forever. Especially following stories of his coffin being used for various things including a pigs trough. Being able to locate the remains at the first serious attempt is good work too especially as many at first just thought they were using guess-work.

As it has been reported that King Alfred's suspected remains might be the next to be exhumed, where will it all end? Should historians be allowed to go round looking for the remains of historical figues?

Maybe he doesn't realise the English monarchy is part of our heritage and is worth every penny!

I watched the two dimwits on Yorkshire TVs Calendar tonight prattle on about bringing his body back to be buried in York Minster. It was the House of York and many cities and towns in Yorkshire supported the other side the House of Lancaster and then Henry Tudor. Leicester plan to bury him in there cathederal, no doubt establishing some sort of shrine ala theme park around him. Richard was not the tyrant he was made out to be by the people who wrote his history, the Tudors look at his suit of armour in the Tower and no way was a hunchback cripple some would have us to believe. As for killing the young princes in the Tower, in a time when killing was a way of securing power, the Tudors did not shy away from killing anyone Elizabeth I killed thousands of catholics just to prove a point.

I would put the poor sod back where he has lain undisturbed since he lost his the battle, his crown and his life. I think we should repect the dignity of his final resting place or do we start a mass moving around of old bodies to fit in with some modern " relics " charter and some one has seen £££££ signs

Northampton will no doubt enter the race to bury him as he was born there, not York , Leeds or Middleham

I agree with those sentiments.

I watched the last 14 mins of the programme last night (the first part somehow not having been recorded, humphhhh).
Judging by the number of wounds to the head, you'd guess that as soon as Richard had been knocked down, everyone wanted to have a slash at him ... "I killed him", "No, it was my stab that killed him", "Look mate, when I hit 'im with me halberd, that's what took him out".

Sounds similar to the final moments of a certain Libyan dictator...We were as animalistic then as we are today.

Sounds similar to the final moments of a certain Libyan dictator...We were as animalistic then as we are today.

Seeing as they are historians then yes obviously.

archaeologists, surely?

Do not go in for petitions but on this occasion i shall.