The Tower
The Tower
2002-04-23 20:08:28
Get your pens at the ready, and pour yourselves a stiff drink, for next
Tuesday, 30 April, at 20.00hrs, Channel 4's series about the Tower of London
reaches the episode they have called "Bloody Tower".
The Radio Times (that's our best programme news in the UK in case you didn't
know) blurb says the following:-
"The Tower is notorious as a place of execution. Tonight's frank look at
this aspect of the building's history ranges from the murder of the princes
to the beheadings of the Earl of Essex and Lady Jane Grey. Experts piece
together the exact diary of an execution."
The case spelling is exactly as it is in the periodical.
No 'experts' names are mentioned but my guess is we'll be in for he usual
suspects.
The producer's name in Bill Locke, and the production company Lion
Television,191 ASKEW ROAD, LONDON W12 9AX, just around the corner from me.
I've even worked for them in the past, but didn't know this was on the cards
when I was there last year, otherwise....
I've found the series a bit dull to date, but if any episode gets the
punters to watch it'll be the promised bloody one!
I'll publish what it says once it has gone out so we can all get busy, if we
have to that is.
Paul
Tuesday, 30 April, at 20.00hrs, Channel 4's series about the Tower of London
reaches the episode they have called "Bloody Tower".
The Radio Times (that's our best programme news in the UK in case you didn't
know) blurb says the following:-
"The Tower is notorious as a place of execution. Tonight's frank look at
this aspect of the building's history ranges from the murder of the princes
to the beheadings of the Earl of Essex and Lady Jane Grey. Experts piece
together the exact diary of an execution."
The case spelling is exactly as it is in the periodical.
No 'experts' names are mentioned but my guess is we'll be in for he usual
suspects.
The producer's name in Bill Locke, and the production company Lion
Television,191 ASKEW ROAD, LONDON W12 9AX, just around the corner from me.
I've even worked for them in the past, but didn't know this was on the cards
when I was there last year, otherwise....
I've found the series a bit dull to date, but if any episode gets the
punters to watch it'll be the promised bloody one!
I'll publish what it says once it has gone out so we can all get busy, if we
have to that is.
Paul
Re: The Tower
2002-05-04 00:49:03
A deadly dull series. I felt sorry about Jane Grey, so frightened &
young (15) to be beheaded. I suppose a DNA test on the supposed
princes' remains would be of interest, but why did the programme go on
& on about comparing with DNA from Edward V's sister Katherine, when
sister Elizabeth is just a few feet away in Westminster Abbey? Why
don't they just do it? The 1933 investigation indicated the right
ages and a relationship and the velvet found with the remains suggest
important children post 1400 pre 1674 and of course the location in
the Tower suggests the princes. However, after all the tests done on
King Tut, why should the British be so reticent over this far more
famous mystery, if that's what you call it.
Some Ricardians were wheeled out saying that butter wouldn't melt in
Richard's mouth, but he'd experienced violence throughout his life to
his family & in battle and if he felt it necessary to execute Grey he
certainly must've felt it necessary to eliminate the bigger fish:
Grey's half brother, Edward V & his brother. Richard certainly had
the opportunity and never demied it.
young (15) to be beheaded. I suppose a DNA test on the supposed
princes' remains would be of interest, but why did the programme go on
& on about comparing with DNA from Edward V's sister Katherine, when
sister Elizabeth is just a few feet away in Westminster Abbey? Why
don't they just do it? The 1933 investigation indicated the right
ages and a relationship and the velvet found with the remains suggest
important children post 1400 pre 1674 and of course the location in
the Tower suggests the princes. However, after all the tests done on
King Tut, why should the British be so reticent over this far more
famous mystery, if that's what you call it.
Some Ricardians were wheeled out saying that butter wouldn't melt in
Richard's mouth, but he'd experienced violence throughout his life to
his family & in battle and if he felt it necessary to execute Grey he
certainly must've felt it necessary to eliminate the bigger fish:
Grey's half brother, Edward V & his brother. Richard certainly had
the opportunity and never demied it.
The Tower
2018-02-28 00:21:07
Quick question prompted by just finishing a new book (fiction). I seem to recall the the Tower wasn't considered a wretchedly horrible prison (as Newgate, etc.) - or, in fact, anything but the primary Royal Residence in London (wasn't that Buckingham's argument to the council?) until long after 1485. Of course, I'm remembering Thomas More, Walter Raleigh - to have been confined, but not to unpleasant quarters). So, I had a problem with Clarence being shut up and left to filth and madness. Didn't make sense to me - or am I flaunting my ignorance?
Re: The Tower
2018-02-28 11:46:18
Hi Nance, it's Henry VIII who gave the Tower such a reputation. It was indeed the primary royal residence - kings spent the night there before their coronation. It also housed a menagerie, the armouries and the Mint, with about 100 people or more working there on a daily basis. So a million miles from Newgate and the Fleet.
What few historians ever mention is that people like bishops and indeed Thomas More kept 'heretic' priests chained in their basement, often before execution. Things got so bad that the young Henry VIII (yes him in his better days) had to step in and try to regulate things.
I don't think you're flaunting your ignorance; the Tower is the sort of stuff 'popular historians' trying to make dramatic programmes love to portray in the way you describe. H
On Wednesday, 28 February 2018, 00:39:39 GMT, 'Nance Crawford' Nance@... [] <> wrote:
What few historians ever mention is that people like bishops and indeed Thomas More kept 'heretic' priests chained in their basement, often before execution. Things got so bad that the young Henry VIII (yes him in his better days) had to step in and try to regulate things.
I don't think you're flaunting your ignorance; the Tower is the sort of stuff 'popular historians' trying to make dramatic programmes love to portray in the way you describe. H
On Wednesday, 28 February 2018, 00:39:39 GMT, 'Nance Crawford' Nance@... [] <> wrote:
Quick question prompted by just finishing a new book (fiction). I seem to recall the the Tower wasn't considered a wretchedly horrible prison (as Newgate, etc.) - or, in fact, anything but the primary Royal Residence in London (wasn't that Buckingham's argument to the council?) until long after 1485. Of course, I'm remembering Thomas More, Walter Raleigh - to have been confined, but not to unpleasant quarters). So, I had a problem with Clarence being shut up and left to filth and madness. Didn't make sense to me - or am I flaunting my ignorance?
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.