jazzy_dave: (Default)
[personal profile] jazzy_dave
Some pics taken recently, two in Rochester and two in St.Leonard's on Sea.



I wonder if this shop was once owned by the Charmed Ones.



Rochester High Street on Sunday. I passed the Eagle pub and they had a jazz band playing in there. They do this every Sunday.



St. Leonard's main shopping area.


Date: 2015-09-01 04:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
King John was able to destroy the bridge to prevent possible support from London to cross the river. He also scared away 700 riders of actual support from there by sending rumor that he is heading towards to intercept them. So it seems that castle defenders couldn't hold or protect the bridge. They could possibly make the water crossing difficult by shooting arrows from the walls, so it was necessary to capture the walls, but was it necessary to sit there another month sieging the keep?

Date: 2015-09-01 04:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
I think John must have thought it worth the time, but I suspect he may have been wrong.

Date: 2015-09-01 05:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
He managed to recapture all the territory within two following months and prince Lois arrived a half a year later. He could save some time and forces to deal with the rest.

Date: 2015-09-01 05:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Although he died in Newark within a few months- legend is that he was poisoned, although it's most likely he died of 'camp fever' (amoebic dysentery) and exhaustion.

Date: 2015-09-01 05:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
He died a year after the siege of Rochester and soon after that defeat on the sea. With an additional month who knows, may be prince Lois would decide do not intervene like he didn't claim the throne after all.

Date: 2015-09-01 05:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
That's a question to which we'll never know the answer, although it did at least leave us with Magna Carta! :o)

Of one thing there is no doubt though- John was certainly a tyrant.

Date: 2015-09-01 05:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
About questions, did some scientists try to inspect his remains to find the reason of his death?

Of one thing there is no doubt though- John was certainly a tyrant. Sure.

starring: a lion as king John and a wolf as sheriff of Nottingham.

Date: 2015-09-02 07:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
It's known where his remains lie of course but I'm not sure anyone has. Kings still get treated with a certain respect.

King John was not a good man —
He had his little ways.
And sometimes no one spoke to him
For days and days and days.
And men who came across him,
When walking in the town,
Gave him a supercilious stare,
Or passed with noses in the air —
And bad King John stood dumbly there,
Blushing beneath his crown.

Date: 2015-09-02 11:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
Sure, with respect. I guess when the remains of king Richard III were found three years ago they were treated with respect by scientists.

Date: 2015-09-02 12:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
And given a reburial in a decent tomb afterwards- they had to check it was him and it was.

Interestingly, he DID have a slight shoulder disability although not the gross hunchback of Shakespeare's Richard.

He now lies in Leicester Cathedral

Image

Date: 2015-09-02 12:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
Looking on the picture of the skeleton I say that his spine was terribly bended which gave him a big hunchback.

Anyway king Richard had his decent tomb and it was not his or those people fault that descendants decided to destroy a church and a graveyard and build a parking on that place.

So, I do not think it would be a big disrespect to clarify was king John murdered or died from a disease and for this to open his tomb and take some probes.

Date: 2015-09-02 12:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Intriguingly enough, they found a young man who has exactly the same deformity of the spine and built him a suit of armour based on a surviving example of Richard's.

He found that it supported his back in such as way that he could ride a horse and handle a sword- so the disability wouldn't have stopped Richard in battle.

The young man, Dominic Smee, doesn't have a gross visible deformity either but he has the same scoliosis as Richard- this article might interest you:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11038600/Richard-III-the-hunchback-king-really-could-have-been-a-formidable-warrior-...-and-his-body-double-can-prove-it.html

Date: 2015-09-02 01:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
Well, yes. Mr. Smee has the same type of spinal problem and on the photo he has no terribly visible hunchback which is formed in such cases by bulging out shoulder blade. If there is king Richard's cuirass survived until now, one can estimate how big the hunchback of the owner was.
Anyway, William Shakespeare had written his piece using some lie and slander that John Morton spread out about king Richard, so there is some poetical exaggeration.

Date: 2015-09-02 01:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Just a bit!

As a historian, I'm always aware of and suspicious of contemporary propaganda, especially as I study civil war, revolution and rebellion as a specialism.

Date: 2015-09-02 05:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
History is written by winners.

Date: 2015-09-02 06:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
Hence e the idea of alternative histories from other voices.

Date: 2015-09-02 06:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
Alternative history is a bit discredited term connected mainly with some fantastic theories without any facts or basis.

One cannot exclude history from politics it will always be used to serve current political interests so one shall wait till only history remains.

Date: 2015-09-02 07:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
So they say- it's a historian's job to unpick what gets said. :o)

Date: 2015-09-02 07:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
So everybody says. By simple logic people who betrayed their king tried to capture and imprison him and invited a foreign army to invade their country by promising a foreign prince a throne are usually called traitors. Does anyone ever call baron d'Aubigny or William Marshal traitors? No, they are heroes, so it was, so it will ever be.

Well, I've heard that resigned king Edward VIII had in planes to cancel Magna Carta and dismiss parliament but I guess it was rather wishful thinking from his side than planes.

Date: 2015-09-03 07:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Earl William managed to die in his bed- quite an achievement for someone of that sort!

By the time Edward had any power, there were only three clauses of Magan Carta left on the statute book anyway so I don't think anyone would have noticed.........

Date: 2015-09-03 03:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] evilzerg-r.livejournal.com
Yes, to die in own bed by natural causes was rare those times for warriors. Speaking about this, what is more amazing that is mother of king John who managed to defend her castle against her grandson's army at the age of 80.

For king Edward it would be rather symbolic revenge.

Date: 2015-09-03 03:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Just so.

Profile

jazzy_dave: (Default)
jazzy_dave

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 6th, 2025 09:20 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios