steepholm: (Default)
[personal profile] steepholm
Oh, Christopher Eccleston! I quite enjoyed Richard III: the New Evidence, but how could you wind it up by describing him as "Britain's last true warrior king" because he was the last king of England to fight and die in battle? Have you forgotten Flodden Field so soon?

Okay, I realise you were just narrating and probably didn't write the script, but still, this is the kind of thing that seems likely to swing the all-important Pedant vote behind the Yes campaign.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 10:42 pm (UTC)
lilliburlero: (ollie)
From: [personal profile] lilliburlero
ARGH. (I'm just the sort of person to be swung by that sort of thing, though I don't have a vote to swing). I was once at a pub quiz (in Scotland, though the quizsetter was English) where that gaffe was made and the wrath was mighty. But really, where have all the fact-checkers gone? In a programme about Richard III you shouldn't be talking about Britain in any sense but the purely geographical.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 05:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Whoever did the historical advising on this programme wants their backside booting through their cranium!

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
That sounds more of a Channel 5 scenario!

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 05:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kalimac.livejournal.com
And besides that ...

You don't need to die in the battle to be a warrior king. Subsequent kings of England, let alone Scotland, led troops in battle, up through George II.

I would also maintain that Charles I fought and died in battle with a kangaroo court.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Indeed so.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:04 pm (UTC)
gillo: (Richard III portrait)
From: [personal profile] gillo
Are you only a warrior if you lose? Charles I fought. So did his son. And two James Kings of Scotland after 1485.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Are you only a warrior if you lose?

Given that Henry VII was also present at Bosworth, and won, I suppose so! But perhaps he only counted as king once the fighting stopped?

They suggested afterwards that later kings (of England, at least) stood well back from the lines and didn't get their hands dirty, but I don't know how true that is, or indeed whether being a general discounts you from being a warrior. Were Wellington and Napoleon not warriors?

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 07:32 pm (UTC)
gillo: (Default)
From: [personal profile] gillo
I thought Henry backdated his reign to the day before Bosworth, to give himself carte-blanche in dealing with his surviving opponents.

Interesting question as to whether generals counted as warriors? Haig? Montgomery? Rommel?

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vschanoes.livejournal.com
Ah yes, the pedant vote. Sadly, in the US, we have retreated in despair.

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
I'm sure you'll rise again!

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 06:27 pm (UTC)
sovay: (Rotwang)
From: [personal profile] sovay
"Britain's last true warrior king" because he was the last king of England to fight and die in battle?

That seems a rather defeatist definition of "warrior"!

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 08:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
We always love an underdog!

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 08:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wellinghall.livejournal.com
George VI saw action at Jutland (although not while king, admittedly).
Edited Date: 2014-08-27 08:06 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 09:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kalimac.livejournal.com
And for getting your hands dirty in the military, if not under fire, there's this: Image

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-27 09:05 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2014-08-28 06:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ethelmay.livejournal.com
I think there should be a tinted version of this, in which it becomes clear that HRH is dressed entirely in a tasteful shade of violet.

Profile

steepholm: (Default)
steepholm

April 2025

S M T W T F S
  12 3 45
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags