History Trivia / RichardIII

29th Apr '16 12:10:52 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[BeamMeUpScotty Beam Me Up, Scotty]]: "Off with his head! So much for Buckingham." For many years one of Richard's most iconic lines -- but not part of Shakespeare's play. It was added in 1700 by leading-man Creator/ColleyCibber.

to:

* [[BeamMeUpScotty Beam Me Up, Scotty]]: BeamMeUpScotty: "Off with his head! So much for Buckingham." For many years one of Richard's most iconic lines -- but not part of Shakespeare's play. It was added in 1700 by leading-man Creator/ColleyCibber.
29th Apr '16 12:10:37 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* HeyItsThatGuy: Richmond is played by Dominic West (in his film debut, no less).
** Also, Hastings is played by [[Series/DowntonAbbey Jim Carter]], and Stanley by [[Series/SherlockHolmes Edward Hardwicke]].
** In the Olivier version, Tyrrell is Creator/PatrickTroughton (the second incarnation of Series/DoctorWho).
12th Apr '16 10:43:01 PM MasoTey
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[BeamMeUpScotty Beam Me Up, Scotty]]: "Off with his head! So much for Buckingham." For many years one of Richard's most iconic lines -- but not part of Shakespeare's play. It was added in 1700 by leading-man [[SmallNameBigEgo Colley Cibber]].

to:

* [[BeamMeUpScotty Beam Me Up, Scotty]]: "Off with his head! So much for Buckingham." For many years one of Richard's most iconic lines -- but not part of Shakespeare's play. It was added in 1700 by leading-man [[SmallNameBigEgo Colley Cibber]].Creator/ColleyCibber.
8th Apr '16 10:14:31 AM MrThorfan64
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Also, Richard never himself formally accused his mother of being an adulteress; his claim to the throne was based on his brother's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville being illegal due to a previous (secret) marriage to Eleanor Butler. Whether or not that was proven, Edward's long pattern of horn-dog behavior made it easy for people to believe. On the other hand, Richard's adherents (notably Dr. Ralph Shaw (or Shaa), in a public sermon given at St. Paul's Cross) had already floated rumors of the Duchess of York's misconduct, hinting that Richard resembled his father far more than Edward did.
** Also, the fate of the Princes was never certainly determined, and some years after Richard's death, Perkin Warbeck came forward claiming to be the younger prince (a claim supported by the princes' aunt Margaret of Burgundy). What ''is'' proven is that all the other heirs of the House of York were exterminated by Henry VII, except for the few killed by his son Henry VIII. The only one they didn't get was Margaret, who was safely out of their reach in Burgundy.

to:

** Also, Richard never himself formally accused his mother of being an adulteress; his claim to the throne was based on his brother's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville being illegal due to a previous (secret) marriage to Eleanor Butler. It was Clarence who tried using the accusation of his brother's illegitimacy to gain the throne. Whether or not that was proven, Edward's long pattern of horn-dog behavior made it easy for people to believe. On the other hand, Richard's adherents (notably Dr. Ralph Shaw (or Shaa), in a public sermon given at St. Paul's Cross) had already floated rumors of the Duchess of York's misconduct, hinting that Richard resembled his father far more than Edward did.
** Also, the fate of the Princes was never certainly determined, and some years after Richard's death, Perkin Warbeck came forward claiming to be the younger prince (a claim supported by the princes' aunt Margaret of Burgundy). What ''is'' proven is that all the other heirs of the House of York were exterminated by Henry VII, except for the few killed by his son Henry VIII.VIII (one child even disappearing in a way similar to the Princes in the Tower. The only one they didn't get was Margaret, who was safely out of their reach in Burgundy.



** And "false, fleeting, perjur'd Clarence" had been part of an armed rebellion against his brother Edward, among other increasingly lunatic stunts until his murder of a servant girl drove the elder Edward to order his death. Richard argued ''against'' Clarence's execution despite his previous feuds with Clarence, and when the verdict was announced Richard left the court for his estate in Middleham. Contrary to the claims of the play, there was no belated commuting of the sentence -- Edward wanted Clarence dead, for reasons that had nothing to do with prophecies.

to:

** And "false, fleeting, perjur'd Clarence" had been part of an armed rebellion against his brother Edward, among other increasingly lunatic stunts until his murder of a servant girl drove the elder Edward to order his death. Richard argued ''against'' Clarence's execution despite his previous feuds with Clarence, and when the verdict was announced Richard left the court for his estate in Middleham.Middleham, which is thought to be one of the reasons he was on such bad terms with the Woodvilles, blaming them for George's death. Contrary to the claims of the play, there was no belated commuting of the sentence -- Edward wanted Clarence dead, for reasons that had nothing to do with prophecies.
1st Apr '16 12:43:16 PM Geoduck
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** In the Olivier version, Tyrrell is Patrick Troughton (the second incarnation of Series/DoctorWho).

to:

** In the Olivier version, Tyrrell is Patrick Troughton Creator/PatrickTroughton (the second incarnation of Series/DoctorWho).
4th Sep '15 5:15:42 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Edward, far from being the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard admittedly did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis,]] but it only gave him a curved spine and wasn't nearly enough to be noticeable as a hunched back, and he wasn't even at court when Edward died.

to:

** Edward, far from being the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard admittedly did have [[HistoryMarchesOn [[DatedHistory scoliosis,]] but it only gave him a curved spine and wasn't nearly enough to be noticeable as a hunched back, and he wasn't even at court when Edward died.
28th May '15 9:09:47 AM Ciara25
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** And "false, fleeting, perjur'd Clarence" had been part of an armed rebellion against his brother Edward, among other increasingly lunatic stunts until his murder of a servant girl drove the elder Edward to order his death. Richard argued against Clarence's execution despite his previous feuds with Clarence, and when the verdict was announced Richard left the court for his estate in Middleham. Contrary to the claims of the play, there was no belated commuting of the sentence -- Edward wanted Clarence dead, for reasons that had nothing to do with prophecies.

to:

** And "false, fleeting, perjur'd Clarence" had been part of an armed rebellion against his brother Edward, among other increasingly lunatic stunts until his murder of a servant girl drove the elder Edward to order his death. Richard argued against ''against'' Clarence's execution despite his previous feuds with Clarence, and when the verdict was announced Richard left the court for his estate in Middleham. Contrary to the claims of the play, there was no belated commuting of the sentence -- Edward wanted Clarence dead, for reasons that had nothing to do with prophecies.
16th Mar '15 5:35:01 AM CrimsonZephyr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** A rather dodgy case in the claim that Richard "murdered" Anne's father and (former) husband. While Richard did kill them, they were summarily put to death for treason against (Yorkist-ruled) England for leading separate Lancastrian invasions that were crushed. This was [[FairForItsDay something of the norm for the Wars of the Roses]] and arguably more akin to executing Hitler for trying the Beer Hall Putsch than stabbing someone in the back alley of a pub.

to:

** A rather dodgy case in the claim that Richard "murdered" Anne's father and (former) husband. While Neither was formally put to death, and there is no mention of Richard did kill them, they were personally killing either of them. Warwick was likely killed with his army at Barnet without ever encountering either of the York brothers on the battlefield, and Edward of Westminster has two conflicting stories regarding his death at Tewkesbury. In one, he dies with his slaughtered army. In the other, he's brought before the Yorkists, mouths off to Edward IV, and is summarily put to death for treason against (Yorkist-ruled) England for leading separate Lancastrian invasions that were crushed. This was [[FairForItsDay something of along with the norm for captured Lancastrians by the Wars of the Roses]] and arguably more akin to executing Hitler for trying the Beer Hall Putsch than stabbing someone in the back alley of a pub.king.
8th Mar '15 7:53:39 AM Ciara25
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Edward, far from being the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard admittedly did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis,]] but not nearly enough to be noticeable as a hunched back, and he wasn't even at court when Edward died.

to:

** Edward, far from being the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard admittedly did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis,]] but not it only gave him a curved spine and wasn't nearly enough to be noticeable as a hunched back, and he wasn't even at court when Edward died.
8th Mar '15 7:35:52 AM Ciara25
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* YouFailHistoryForever: Where to begin? ([[WrittenByTheWinners Admittedly, Shakespeare really didn't know any better..]])
** Edward, far from the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard was not a hunchback, and wasn't even at court when Edward died.
*** Turns out that Richard did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis.]] So the hunchback theory is not that far off.

to:

* YouFailHistoryForever: Where to begin? ([[WrittenByTheWinners Admittedly, Shakespeare really didn't know any better..better, or couldn't afford to write Richard more sympathetically...]])
** Edward, far from being the frail old man the play depicts, died unexpectedly in his early forties. Richard was admittedly did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis,]] but not nearly enough to be noticeable as a hunchback, hunched back, and he wasn't even at court when Edward died.
*** Turns out that Richard did have [[HistoryMarchesOn scoliosis.]] So the hunchback theory is not that far off.
died.



** Buckingham's rebellion was intended to put Buckingham himself on the throne, ''not'' restore the throne to Edward V. It is possible, of course, that he knew that the young King was already dead; alternatively, the idea of a Yorkist and Woodville king might have been utterly distateful to him, a long-time adherent of the Lancastrian cause and an embittered oppoent of the Woodville faction. Buckingham quickly transferred his support to Henry Tudor, however, perhaps having been convinced of the impossibility of receiving the support either of the Yorkist nobles (as he was rebelling against the Yorkist King Richard) or of the Lancastrians (as he had been for so long identified with Richard's interests).
** Also left out were the facts that Elizabeth and her family, the Woodvilles, were not of noble lineage and were ''very'' unpopular with both nobles and commoners. The elder prince was educated by her brother and many feared that as king, Edward V would be a Woodville pawn. Also, that both of England's previous civil wars had begun because of a child-king holding the throne, and the prospect of another one terrified the beleaguered country. Richard, as a grown man with a proven record of good governing, an heir already in place, and a reputation for being no friend of the much-disliked Woodvilles, looked like a great solution to all those problems, which is why Parliament offered him the throne. (Well, that and the Yorkist army investing London.)

to:

** Buckingham's rebellion was intended to put Buckingham himself on the throne, ''not'' restore the throne to Edward V. It is possible, of course, that he knew that the young King was already dead; alternatively, the idea of a Yorkist and Woodville king might have been utterly distateful distasteful to him, a long-time adherent of the Lancastrian cause and an embittered oppoent opponent of the Woodville faction. Buckingham quickly transferred his support to Henry Tudor, however, perhaps having been convinced of the impossibility of receiving the support either of the Yorkist nobles (as he was rebelling against the Yorkist King Richard) or of the Lancastrians (as he had been for so long identified with Richard's interests).
** Also left out were are the facts that Elizabeth and her family, the Woodvilles, were not of noble lineage and were ''very'' unpopular with both nobles and commoners. The elder prince was educated by her brother and many feared that as king, Edward V would be a Woodville pawn. Also, that Additionally, both of England's previous civil wars had begun because of a child-king holding the throne, and the prospect of another one terrified the beleaguered country. Richard, as a grown man with a proven record of good governing, an heir already in place, and a reputation for being no friend of the much-disliked Woodvilles, looked like a great solution to all those problems, which is why Parliament offered him the throne. (Well, that and the Yorkist army investing London.)
This list shows the last 10 events of 24. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Trivia.RichardIII