Fascinating article...

I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me. http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra =^..^=

Exceptional article. Thanks, Sandra.
Gilda


On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:05 AM, 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] wrote:


I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me.http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra=^..^=

Brilliant article, Sandra, but I am confused, a not unusual state for me, I don't understand the reference to the alabaster tomb. Was this on top of the grave? I understand that there was a stone on the church floor at the Greyfriars, and then later a pillar with an inscription in the garden, but where and at what period was there a tomb?
I am probably being obtuse here!

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Gilda Felt gildaevf@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:52:22 AM

 

Exceptional article. Thanks, Sandra.

Gilda


On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:05 AM, 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] wrote:


I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me.http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra=^..^=

I had to read the thing again too, Jess. I think, if it looked like John de la Pole's tomb, then the alabaster tomb was placed over the flat stone that already marked Richard's resting place. When Richard was found, he was as he'd been originally buried, so he wasn't disturbed. He simply had, raised over him, an alabaster embellishment like his brother-in-law's of the same year. Presumably it was the latest fashion for high-ranking peeps. Not sure about the pillar. Would it ever have been in the choir with the tomb itself? I've no real idea. It seems, from the article, that pillars and memorials were not always attached to the tomb, but beside it as well. Maybe it was rescued at the Dissolution and placed in the garden? Sandra =^..^ = From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 12:01 PM To: Subject: Re: Fascinating article...

Brilliant article, Sandra, but I am confused, a not unusual state for me, I don't understand the reference to the alabaster tomb. Was this on top of the grave? I understand that there was a stone on the church floor at the Greyfriars, and then later a pillar with an inscription in the garden, but where and at what period was there a tomb?
I am probably being obtuse here!

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Gilda Felt gildaevf@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:52:22 AM

Exceptional article. Thanks, Sandra.

Gilda On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:05 AM, 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] wrote:


I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me. http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra =^..^=

In JAH's book "the Last Days of RichardIII" he says that it is possible that the Friars marked Richard's grave in some way. He also says that it was about the summer of 1494 that Henry initiated the creation of a fitting tomb. The pillar was in the garden of Robert Herrick, who then owned the land formerly the Greyfriars, and he put a commemorative pillar to mark the spot. John gives an account of this in his book.
Mary

Thank you Sandra and Mary. I am off now to look up the relevant section of John's book.
Slapped wrist.

Jess From: maryfriend@... []
Sent: 03/06/2014 15:57
To:
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...

In JAH's book "the Last Days of RichardIII" he says that it is possible that the Friars marked Richard's grave in some way. He also says that it was about the summer of 1494 that Henry initiated the creation of a fitting tomb. The pillar was in the garden of Robert Herrick, who then owned the land formerly the Greyfriars, and he put a commemorative pillar to mark the spot. John gives an account of this in his book.
Mary

I have now fully referred to JAH and the whole situation is clear in my mind.
Is it just me or is JAH just a cut above most other historians as far as research is concerned?
I have read his book twice, but just hadn't taken on board the details of the alabaster tomb. Mind you at least one of those readings was on a transatlantic flight, so that's my excuse.
As John's book was my introduction to reading about Richard, I think in my excitement at all the new information available I may have read rather too quickly in an effort to devour everything.

Jess From: Jessie Skinner janjovian@... []
Sent: 03/06/2014 12:04
To:
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...

Brilliant article, Sandra, but I am confused, a not unusual state for me, I don't understand the reference to the alabaster tomb. Was this on top of the grave? I understand that there was a stone on the church floor at the Greyfriars, and then later a pillar with an inscription in the garden, but where and at what period was there a tomb?
I am probably being obtuse here!

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Gilda Felt gildaevf@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:52:22 AM

Exceptional article. Thanks, Sandra.

Gilda


On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:05 AM, 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] wrote:


I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me. http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra =^..^=

A little item about this discussion has now been posted at http://murreyandblue.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/fascinating-details-about-how-richard-may-have-been-lain-to-rest/ It's a collating of some suggestions as to what may have happened. Sandra =^..^= From: SandraMachin Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:52 PM To: Subject: Re: Fascinating article... I had to read the thing again too, Jess. I think, if it looked like John de la Pole's tomb, then the alabaster tomb was placed over the flat stone that already marked Richard's resting place. When Richard was found, he was as he'd been originally buried, so he wasn't disturbed. He simply had, raised over him, an alabaster embellishment like his brother-in-law's of the same year. Presumably it was the latest fashion for high-ranking peeps. Not sure about the pillar. Would it ever have been in the choir with the tomb itself? I've no real idea. It seems, from the article, that pillars and memorials were not always attached to the tomb, but beside it as well. Maybe it was rescued at the Dissolution and placed in the garden? Sandra =^..^ = From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 12:01 PM To: Subject: Re: Fascinating article...

Brilliant article, Sandra, but I am confused, a not unusual state for me, I don't understand the reference to the alabaster tomb. Was this on top of the grave? I understand that there was a stone on the church floor at the Greyfriars, and then later a pillar with an inscription in the garden, but where and at what period was there a tomb?
I am probably being obtuse here!

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: Gilda Felt gildaevf@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Fascinating article...
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:52:22 AM

Exceptional article. Thanks, Sandra.

Gilda On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:05 AM, 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] wrote:


I may have come late on the scene here, in which case apologies, but I have only just stumbled upon the following article, which is absolutely riveting to me. http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/fit-for-a-king-the-burial-and-reburial-of-richard-iii-with-john-ashdown-hill/ Sandra =^..^=

Jess I think it is because he does so much research. Also if he hasn't got all the evidence to prove a point he never says something was definitely so. In the case of the tomb he says it possible that the friars marked his grave. It is a pity that other historians were not so thorough in their research and not to claim things that they have no evidence for.
Mary