Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anne Neville and the murder of the Princes.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post

    There are too many Richard fawners in the world for my liking, up to and including that bint who cried her eyes out when she found that he did indeed have a back deformity ....

    Hahaha yep - classic telly that was. She was absolutely gutted when the skeleton revealed the scoliosis,

    I agree there are too many trying to rewrite history when it comes to Richard, but I also don't think he's quite the cackling, hunch-backed Shakespearean version either. Despite his back deformity he was an incredibly brave solider - led his army from the front, and it took a lot of them to bring him down. He was also loyal to his brother Edward and I'm still not 100% convinced he did directly order the killing of the princes. Yeah, I know it was on his watch and to his benefit but I'm still not certain of it.

    But as for Anne Neville 'being a prime candidate' as Nick suggests - not single shred of evidence to suggest she was involved.

    "COOMMAAAAAAANNNNDOOOO!!!!!"
    - Mad Jack Churchill.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post
      It were Richard dat did it!

      Let's blame everyone but good old Dick! Even though he was responsible for their wellbeing. They disappeared on his watch, he had the motive and opportunity to get rid of them.

      There are too many Richard fawners in the world for my liking, up to and including that bint who cried her eyes out when she found that he did indeed have a back deformity and effeminate bone structure, and it wasn't Tudor propagandist artists who doctored his likeness or lied in his portrayal by a certain Bard.

      The ghost of Josephine Tay is gonna haunt you for that! Dibble....
      The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

        She was wife of the rightful king, Richard III. He was always loyal to Edward IV, despite it being known Ed IV was born out of wedlock. It may be that she could not bear anymore children, and killing the princes could have been done out of spite. It does appear he might of courting the princes mother or sister, and one could easily believe that said loyalty would have put Edward V on the throne as a result.

        While I agree Philippa Gregory may be more fiction than fact, she has studied the period enough to have more insights into the period than most. If Amme Meville was at every execution of the Queens relatives, she is a prime candidate imho.
        An interesting theory , but it's still only speculation. I would argue that Henry VI, despite his mental lapses,was still the rightful king and Edward a usurper.
        "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
        Samuel Johnson.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by marktwain View Post

          The ghost of Josephine Tay is gonna haunt you for that! Dibble....
          Yeah! And I'll crap and pee on her (Tey) ectoplasma, clean it up and flush it down the pan of bullshit, fictional history.
          ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
          All human ills he can subdue,
          Or with a bauble or medal
          Can win mans heart for you;
          And many a blessing know to stew
          To make a megloamaniac bright;
          Give honour to the dainty Corse,
          The Pixie is a little shite.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

            Hahaha yep - classic telly that was. She was absolutely gutted when the skeleton revealed the scoliosis,

            I agree there are too many trying to rewrite history when it comes to Richard, but I also don't think he's quite the cackling, hunch-backed Shakespearean version either. Despite his back deformity he was an incredibly brave solider - led his army from the front, and it took a lot of them to bring him down. He was also loyal to his brother Edward and I'm still not 100% convinced he did directly order the killing of the princes. Yeah, I know it was on his watch and to his benefit but I'm still not certain of it.

            But as for Anne Neville 'being a prime candidate' as Nick suggests - not single shred of evidence to suggest she was involved.
            I'll bite.

            I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is.
            How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
            Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

            Comment


            • #21
              Keep in mind people that Richard III was an experienced warrior. He served as Warden of the North for his brother. The Lowland Scots were very good at what they did.

              Pruitt
              Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

              Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

              by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

                Hahaha yep - classic telly that was. She was absolutely gutted when the skeleton revealed the scoliosis,

                I agree there are too many trying to rewrite history when it comes to Richard, but I also don't think he's quite the cackling, hunch-backed Shakespearean version either. Despite his back deformity he was an incredibly brave solider - led his army from the front, and it took a lot of them to bring him down. He was also loyal to his brother Edward and I'm still not 100% convinced he did directly order the killing of the princes. Yeah, I know it was on his watch and to his benefit but I'm still not certain of it.

                But as for Anne Neville 'being a prime candidate' as Nick suggests - not single shred of evidence to suggest she was involved.
                Shakespeare was going by accounts of what Dickey 3 looked like. I'm sure that the informant/artist wasn't an Orthopaedic surgeon and that Shakespeare was as accurate as could be for the time in depicting him. And if the depiction of Dickey's deformity and effeminate bone structure was pretty accurate, perhaps his cackle was too.
                Last edited by Dibble201Bty; 28 Nov 18, 23:53.
                ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
                All human ills he can subdue,
                Or with a bauble or medal
                Can win mans heart for you;
                And many a blessing know to stew
                To make a megloamaniac bright;
                Give honour to the dainty Corse,
                The Pixie is a little shite.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                  I'll bite.

                  I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is.
                  Surely her presence at the executions does not,of itself, implicate her in the murders,even assuming she was. What, after all ,would she gain ? She could just have been the dutiful wife.
                  "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                  Samuel Johnson.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BELGRAVE View Post

                    Surely her presence at the executions does not,of itself, implicate her in the murders,even assuming she was. What, after all ,would she gain ? She could just have been the dutiful wife.
                    Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

                    That said, my history in this case is suspect. I'm relying on a TV series to educate me on a subject that has at in essence Entertainment, rather than Education as its heart.

                    If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho. If it was artistic license, then my hypothesis is wrong.
                    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post


                      While I agree Philippa Gregory may be more fiction than fact, she has studied the period enough to have more insights into the period than most. If Amme Meville was at every execution of the Queens relatives, she is a prime candidate imho.
                      "I'll bite.

                      I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is."




                      You most certainly did say she is a 'prime candidate' and I have quoted your post above.
                      Last edited by Tuck's Luck; 04 Dec 18, 20:13.
                      "COOMMAAAAAAANNNNDOOOO!!!!!"
                      - Mad Jack Churchill.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

                        "I'll bite.

                        I did not say Ann Neville was a prime candidate, unless she was actually at the execution at every member of a certain family. Then she undoubtedly is."




                        You most certainly did say she is a 'prime candidate' and I have quoted your post above.
                        You've highlighted the whole sentence when 'unless' was the most important criteria in that statement.
                        How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                        Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                          You've highlighted the whole sentence when 'unless' was the most important criteria in that statement.
                          Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



                          The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

                          Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

                          If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

                          ..........


                          I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?




                          "COOMMAAAAAAANNNNDOOOO!!!!!"
                          - Mad Jack Churchill.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

                            Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



                            The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

                            Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

                            If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

                            ..........


                            I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?



                            In Merrie Olde England, public executions were the finest form of live entertainment & it was de rigeur for the Haute Polloi to attend each performance....

                            Medieval people had a different attitude to blood, gore, and dismemberment than we finicky post Victorian ones.
                            Last edited by marktwain; 05 Dec 18, 15:16.
                            The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Tuck's Luck View Post

                              Sorry - I didn't mean to highlight that particular sentence to be honest - it was very late and I up working on a job and came on here for a bit of distraction!



                              The post I meant to highlight was this one: From your post 24 above:

                              Richard III was not at all the executions, but Anne apparently was. If Anne willingly attended executions of her foes, she will be a prime candidate.

                              If Anne was actually at all the executions, she is almost certainly guilty imho.

                              ..........


                              I just don't get that leap - so she attended executions, so therefore she must be guilty of murdering the princes, I don't see how those dots join up?



                              Executions were not just common in medieval Britain, they were extremely prevalent and often instant. You need to know when the trial actually happens to attend, and executions were often minutes after sentence. If Anne was at a trial, she was also there for a sentence. Further, if a queen was at a medieval trial, and if she wanted a particular sentence, we can be fairly sure her wishes would be carried out. People these days do not realise how much power royalty had in the medieval period.
                              How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                              Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                                Executions were not just common in medieval Britain, they were extremely prevalent and often instant. You need to know when the trial actually happens to attend, and executions were often minutes after sentence. If Anne was at a trial, she was also there for a sentence. Further, if a queen was at a medieval trial, and if she wanted a particular sentence, we can be fairly sure her wishes would be carried out. People these days do not realise how much power royalty had in the medieval period.
                                Yes, but it's one hell of an extrapolation to conclude that, therefore, Queen Anne must have been herself homicidal: let alone being responsible for the death of the Princes.
                                "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                                Samuel Johnson.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X