Log in

No account? Create an account

Don't Eat With Your Mouth Full

Where can we live but days?

steepholm steepholm
Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Lots of Islands have a North
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.

Whoever did the historical advising on this programme wants their backside booting through their cranium!

That sounds more of a Channel 5 scenario!

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.

Indeed so.

Are you only a warrior if you lose? Charles I fought. So did his son. And two James Kings of Scotland after 1485.

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?

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?

Ah yes, the pedant vote. Sadly, in the US, we have retreated in despair.

I'm sure you'll rise again!

"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"!

We always love an underdog!

George VI saw action at Jutland (although not while king, admittedly).

Edited at 2014-08-27 08:06 pm (UTC)

And for getting your hands dirty in the military, if not under fire, there's this:


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.