The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Why do Yorkshire want Richard III?

They left him under a carpark, couldn't be that important to them surely?

Scroll to see replies

We once thought we'd left our child in Tesco, dear........

Didn't help when you rang up Asda to ask if they'd seen a troll anywhere. I was so upset that I didn't sleep for a week.//.wdsf.a.

For the lovely newcomers to Under The Bridge - we found little Angelina Trollington in the boot of the car a few weeks later. :lol:
How have you 2 managed to hack into the rep system?! :eek:

Well probably because Richard was a member of the House of York
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
How have you 2 managed to hack into the rep system?! :eek:

Well probably because Richard was a member of the House of York


Young honey bear, we are in control of TSR.

The car park was built later, it wasn't there at the time. Also, since York lost the battle, they couldn't exactly control where he was going to be buried. You could have just looked these facts up on the internet yourself.
Original post by Tian1Sky
The car park was built later, it wasn't there at the time. Also, since York lost the battle, they couldn't exactly control where he was going to be buried. You could have just looked these facts up on the internet yourself.


Original post by Plantagenet Crown

Well probably because Richard was a member of the House of York


True. However, the Wars of the Roses were most certainly not a conflict between Yorkshire and Lancashire. In fact, the Yorkist power base was centred strongly in the south, while Lancastrians were strong in the north and, later, the midlands. These were family names (based on nobler titles only), not geographically relevant terms.
Original post by Lady Trollington


Why don't you respond to my points instead of just posting rubbish.
Original post by Tian1Sky
Why don't you respond to my points instead of just posting rubbish.


Because Richard III is clearly a lie.

Why don't you post rubbish instead of trying to establish points? :frown:
Original post by Lord Trollington
Because Richard III is clearly a lie.

Why don't you post rubbish instead of trying to establish points? :frown:


Because then I wouldn't have trolled you :colone:
Original post by Tian1Sky
Because then I wouldn't have trolled you :colone:


WELL then.

You cannot troll the Lord of Under The Bridge, young troll-ling!
Original post by Lord Trollington
WELL then.

You cannot troll the Lord of Under The Bridge, young troll-ling!


I can and I did.
Original post by tian1sky
i can and i did.


neg rep for you.
Original post by Lord Trollington
neg rep for you.


Troll confirmed.
Original post by Good bloke
True. However, the Wars of the Roses were most certainly not a conflict between Yorkshire and Lancashire. In fact, the Yorkist power base was centred strongly in the south, while Lancastrians were strong in the north and, later, the midlands. These were family names (based on nobler titles only), not geographically relevant terms.


Yeah I know, when first learning about this I remember thinking how weird it was for the south west to be strongly Lancastrian. However, in life Richard was especially fond of the North and packed his household with northerners which further strengthened the sense of a north-south divide. IMO he would have wanted to be buried more up north than Leicester.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 15
Avatar for Robin18
Robin18
9
He was the son of Richard, Duke of York, and thus belonged to the House of York and throughout a great deal of his Yorkist brother Edward IV's reign, he was based in the North of England. He was the Duke of Gloucester and so obviously he is linked to several places in the country so many places can claim the right to hold his body but I don't think Leicester has as strong a claim. I don't believe that he should have been buried in Leicester because he was found there; if Queen Elizabeth II's remains were discovered in Ukraine in many years time, they would return her to England. Also his death marked the defeat of the House of York so I doubt he'd want to be remotely near the location of the Battle of Bosworth but that's just what I'd be thinking. :tongue:
Original post by Robin18
He was the son of Richard, Duke of York, and thus belonged to the House of York and throughout a great deal of his Yorkist brother Edward IV's reign, he was based in the North of England. He was the Duke of Gloucester and so obviously he is linked to several places in the country so many places can claim the right to hold his body but I don't think Leicester has as strong a claim. I don't believe that he should have been buried in Leicester because he was found there; if Queen Elizabeth II's remains were discovered in Ukraine in many years time, they would return her to England. Also his death marked the defeat of the House of York so I doubt he'd want to be remotely near the location of the Battle of Bosworth but that's just what I'd be thinking. :tongue:


At least the House of York was still conserved by making Elizabeth of York queen :biggrin:
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
At least the House of York was still conserved by making Elizabeth of York queen :biggrin:


tl;dr
Original post by Lady Trollington


I remember that scene, she was berating Anne Neville :lol:

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you