Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: That Programme!

Didn't watch it. I am sure Dr Starkey is a highly intelligent man, and that his stage performance as a pompous ass is just that. However, Atenolol has brought my blood pressure down to a healthy level and I have no desire to damage my health by watching him act it again.

Brian

--- In , "Brian Wainwright" <Brian@g...> wrote:
> Didn't watch it. I am sure Dr Starkey is a highly intelligent man, and that his stage
performance as a pompous ass is just that. However, Atenolol has brought my blood
pressure down to a healthy level and I have no desire to damage my health by watching
him act it again.
>
> Brian
>
Intelligent maybe, but credible historian - nah!
No historian worth his salt would choose Sir Thomas Mores version of events (lovely man
but surely Starkey would know he had close connections to Morton as a young boy). He
goes on to trot out the old chestnuts such as Richards habits of chewing on his his bottom
lip, continuously pulling his ring up and down on his finger and his dagger in and out of
its sheaf (all at the same time?) - why not add he also suffered from a tic - after all they
made it up as they went along. I scarcely could recognise Elizabeth Woodville - portrayed
as a quiet & gentle woman, looking sadly on as her little son is led away by a malevolent
looking Uncle - we also see her looking shocked as she reads a letter warning her that
Richard, on hearing the news of his brothers death is rushing down from the north with a
huge band of followers intent on taking the throne. We are later shown the two lifeless
little bodies of the princes lying, deaded, on their bed, smothered by cruel brutes (it was
at this juncture I was expecting/hoping to see Blackadder pop up from behind a curtain).
We are however (make thanks for small mercies) spared the sight of Richard pouring
poison down his wife's throat. Whether or not he chose to portray Richard drooling whilst
rubbing his hands gleefully together as he lusted after his young neice I neither know nor
care as at this point I reached for the remote control.
If Starkey can make such glaring inaccuracies in this period of history what other mistakes
has he made in the rest of the series Majesty. Perhaps he should consider a new career -
writing Pantos - there are even a few roles he could take on - he would make a marvellous
Widow Twankey - picture him in those huge bloomers!!
Eileen
Loyalte me lie
>

you've sent this to the wrong email address...!



--- eileen <ebatesparrot@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
--- In , "Brian
Wainwright" <Brian@g...> wrote:
> Didn't watch it. I am sure Dr Starkey is a highly
intelligent man, and that his stage
performance as a pompous ass is just that. However,
Atenolol has brought my blood
pressure down to a healthy level and I have no desire
to damage my health by watching
him act it again.
>
> Brian
>
Intelligent maybe, but credible historian - nah!
No historian worth his salt would choose Sir Thomas
Mores version of events (lovely man
but surely Starkey would know he had close connections
to Morton as a young boy). He
goes on to trot out the old chestnuts such as Richards
habits of chewing on his his bottom
lip, continuously pulling his ring up and down on his
finger and his dagger in and out of
its sheaf (all at the same time?) - why not add he
also suffered from a tic - after all they
made it up as they went along. I scarcely could
recognise Elizabeth Woodville - portrayed
as a quiet & gentle woman, looking sadly on as her
little son is led away by a malevolent
looking Uncle - we also see her looking shocked as she
reads a letter warning her that
Richard, on hearing the news of his brothers death is
rushing down from the north with a
huge band of followers intent on taking the throne.
We are later shown the two lifeless
little bodies of the princes lying, deaded, on their
bed, smothered by cruel brutes (it was
at this juncture I was expecting/hoping to see
Blackadder pop up from behind a curtain).
We are however (make thanks for small mercies) spared
the sight of Richard pouring
poison down his wife's throat. Whether or not he
chose to portray Richard drooling whilst
rubbing his hands gleefully together as he lusted
after his young neice I neither know nor
care as at this point I reached for the remote
control.
If Starkey can make such glaring inaccuracies in this
period of history what other mistakes
has he made in the rest of the series Majesty.
Perhaps he should consider a new career -
writing Pantos - there are even a few roles he could
take on - he would make a marvellous
Widow Twankey - picture him in those huge bloomers!!
Eileen
Loyalte me lie
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]





SPONSORED LINKS
United
kingdom calling card
United kingdom flower delivery
Call united kingdom
United kingdom
florist United
kingdom phone card
United kingdom hotel


---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "" on the
web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.


---------------------------------

I am going to be a little controversial here. Having met Starkey in Ipswich last October, I am going to watch him avidly tonight because I hear that he will be putting the boot into Henry VIII. My view is that Starkey's opinion of Richard is derived from his fondness for the last T****.
----- Original Message -----
From: eileen
To:
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: That Programme!


--- In , "Brian Wainwright" <Brian@g...> wrote:
> Didn't watch it. I am sure Dr Starkey is a highly intelligent man, and that his stage
performance as a pompous ass is just that. However, Atenolol has brought my blood
pressure down to a healthy level and I have no desire to damage my health by watching
him act it again.
>
> Brian
>
Intelligent maybe, but credible historian - nah!
No historian worth his salt would choose Sir Thomas Mores version of events (lovely man
but surely Starkey would know he had close connections to Morton as a young boy). He
goes on to trot out the old chestnuts such as Richards habits of chewing on his his bottom
lip, continuously pulling his ring up and down on his finger and his dagger in and out of
its sheaf (all at the same time?) - why not add he also suffered from a tic - after all they
made it up as they went along. I scarcely could recognise Elizabeth Woodville - portrayed
as a quiet & gentle woman, looking sadly on as her little son is led away by a malevolent
looking Uncle - we also see her looking shocked as she reads a letter warning her that
Richard, on hearing the news of his brothers death is rushing down from the north with a
huge band of followers intent on taking the throne. We are later shown the two lifeless
little bodies of the princes lying, deaded, on their bed, smothered by cruel brutes (it was
at this juncture I was expecting/hoping to see Blackadder pop up from behind a curtain).
We are however (make thanks for small mercies) spared the sight of Richard pouring
poison down his wife's throat. Whether or not he chose to portray Richard drooling whilst
rubbing his hands gleefully together as he lusted after his young neice I neither know nor
care as at this point I reached for the remote control.
If Starkey can make such glaring inaccuracies in this period of history what other mistakes
has he made in the rest of the series Majesty. Perhaps he should consider a new career -
writing Pantos - there are even a few roles he could take on - he would make a marvellous
Widow Twankey - picture him in those huge bloomers!!
Eileen
Loyalte me lie
>





SPONSORED LINKS United kingdom calling card United kingdom flower delivery Call united kingdom
United kingdom florist United kingdom phone card United kingdom hotel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "" on the web.

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:
> I am going to be a little controversial here. Having met Starkey in
Ipswich last October, I am going to watch him avidly tonight because
I hear that he will be putting the boot into Henry VIII. My view is
that Starkey's opinion of Richard is derived from his fondness for
the last T****.

You may be interested to hear that my cassette was worn out and I
only saw three worthwhile minutes of the programme.

On another point, the website says that Prince Arthur was born today
in 1486, less than thirteen months after the battle. Was he
premature? When was the earliest that he could have been conceived? I
can picture H7 putting "procreate" on his agenda and making regular
appointments with his Queen!

Stephen

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: eileen
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: That Programme!
>
>
> --- In , "Brian Wainwright"
<Brian@g...> wrote:
> > Didn't watch it. I am sure Dr Starkey is a highly intelligent
man, and that his stage
> performance as a pompous ass is just that. However, Atenolol has
brought my blood
> pressure down to a healthy level and I have no desire to damage
my health by watching
> him act it again.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> Intelligent maybe, but credible historian - nah!
> No historian worth his salt would choose Sir Thomas Mores version
of events (lovely man
> but surely Starkey would know he had close connections to Morton
as a young boy). He
> goes on to trot out the old chestnuts such as Richards habits of
chewing on his his bottom
> lip, continuously pulling his ring up and down on his finger and
his dagger in and out of
> its sheaf (all at the same time?) - why not add he also suffered
from a tic - after all they
> made it up as they went along. I scarcely could recognise
Elizabeth Woodville - portrayed
> as a quiet & gentle woman, looking sadly on as her little son is
led away by a malevolent
> looking Uncle - we also see her looking shocked as she reads a
letter warning her that
> Richard, on hearing the news of his brothers death is rushing
down from the north with a
> huge band of followers intent on taking the throne. We are later
shown the two lifeless
> little bodies of the princes lying, deaded, on their bed,
smothered by cruel brutes (it was
> at this juncture I was expecting/hoping to see Blackadder pop up
from behind a curtain).
> We are however (make thanks for small mercies) spared the sight
of Richard pouring
> poison down his wife's throat. Whether or not he chose to
portray Richard drooling whilst
> rubbing his hands gleefully together as he lusted after his young
neice I neither know nor
> care as at this point I reached for the remote control.
> If Starkey can make such glaring inaccuracies in this period of
history what other mistakes
> has he made in the rest of the series Majesty. Perhaps he should
consider a new career -
> writing Pantos - there are even a few roles he could take on - he
would make a marvellous
> Widow Twankey - picture him in those huge bloomers!!
> Eileen
> Loyalte me lie
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS United kingdom calling card United kingdom
flower delivery Call united kingdom
> United kingdom florist United kingdom phone card United
kingdom hotel
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> a.. Visit your group "" on the web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>
>
>
>
>

--- In , "Stephen Lark"
<smlark@t...> wrote:

On another point, the website says that Prince Arthur was born today
> in 1486, less than thirteen months after the battle.

It was also less than nine months after the wedding, and after
Parliament had petitioned Tudor to kindly get on with the marriage.

Was he premature?

Probably, IMHO. It seems he was weak or sickly all his short life,
so a premature birth is not out of the question.

When was the earliest that he could have been conceived?

Good question. I'm sure someone can tell us when she was brought
down from Sheriff Hutton to meet her fate and her future bridegroom.

Katy



>