ozleicester Posted 7 June 2012 Author Posted 7 June 2012 No one knows why the Leicester wyvern has no legs but the description wyvern sans legs doesn't necessarily mean it hasn't got any, it could just mean they weren't depicted or they're hidden underneath the wyvern. I think it would be more interesting to find out why it's depicted as being wounded. I bet no one knows that either El empty knows.... hes just not telling
Guest Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 I know my last post was excessively long and I don't expect many will want to read it but I did essentially just say most of that. I've a lot of respect for teachers and no personal issue with SBF. Just, in this instance, he is wrong and a bit of acceptance would go a long way. sorry I have to admit that I started and then the wall yawned at me and I stopped.
flowwolf Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 Asking why the wyvern has no legs is in my opinion somewhat presumptuous. It is a mythical creature , who's to say it had any legs in the first place ? it could be part Dragon part winged demon topped of with a slugs body, hence it did not walk but simply slithered it's way into the badge. Come people try to be a bit more imaginative I know I am.
Finnegan Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 sorry I have to admit that I started and then the wall yawned at me and I stopped. That's fine, you've always struck me as the sort to struggle with too many words.
Zingari Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 I had a teacher at school who thought Princess Margaret was the Queens daughter. i suppose up until 1952 she was the queen's daughter
Webbo Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 Sexy. You'd think, but he was getting on a bit. i suppose up until 1952 she was the queen's daughter I'm not that old.
Guest Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 That's fine, you've always struck me as the sort to struggle with too many words. It's true. I see a wall of text and fall asleep part way through the second sentence. I'm a man of the new age.
Smudge Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 Here's yet ANOTHER link to back this all up, taking the tally up to three or four (I'm yet to see any source claiming it's a white Yorkshire rose.) Oh, here you go, another one. Oh and, ANOTHER one from which I quote: <3 Finners
Daggers Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 Ahh but is there any evidence to say it isn't a Yorkshire Rose? That leaves open the possibility that it is and the Yorkists got Leicester onside by all using their special mind powers & castle ghosts. Remember this was a time before we knew about quarks and so dragons really existed.
Daggers Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 Don't you think Dragons really existed? They must do, I read about them in The Hobbit. I know I exist so there must be 99 other things existing which I don't know about. But I also know that my coffee cup exists - so there's now 198 things I don't know about which exist. I bet some of them have mad, sharp teeth, so they do. And hundreds & thousands on their backs.
Guest Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 They must do, I read about them in The Hobbit. I know I exist so there must be 99 other things existing which I don't know about. But I also know that my coffee cup exists - so there's now 198 things I don't know about which exist. I bet some of them have mad, sharp teeth, so they do. And hundreds & thousands on their backs. Is that a yes.
Stadt Posted 7 June 2012 Posted 7 June 2012 For the last time, it has nothing to do with the War of the Roses or the Tudor dynasty and it has nothing to do with Yorkshire. If you're teaching your children that you're teaching them wrong (which sadly wouldn't surprise me, I was correcting my history teacher on Welsh history when I was 13!) It is a cinquefoil, it is the arms of the Beaumont Earls of Leicseter and as both myself and Smudge have said, it long pre-dates the 15th century. Why is everyone so desperate to clutch to this being some sort of famous Roses significance instead of just taking a bit of pride in the city's own traditions? We don't need to pretend we're anything we aren't. Here's yet ANOTHER link to back this all up, taking the tally up to three or four (I'm yet to see any source claiming it's a white Yorkshire rose.) Oh, here you go, another one. Oh and, ANOTHER one from which I quote: *Cough Cough Large Al*
GH1 Posted 10 June 2012 Posted 10 June 2012 Best thread of the summer so far , I've learnt so much. Can we move on to John o'Gaunt now, these bite size history lessons are great
Guest Posted 10 June 2012 Posted 10 June 2012 Beaumont used to shit on Brierley. Not whilst I was there. And having thought about it pretty sure the other house was Melton - not Brook.
Zingari Posted 10 June 2012 Posted 10 June 2012 Not whilst I was there. And having thought about it pretty sure the other house was Melton - not Brook. Walter Brierley was the famous York architect who designed Burrough Court , Melton , maybe that's the connection
Webbo Posted 10 June 2012 Posted 10 June 2012 Not whilst I was there. And having thought about it pretty sure the other house was Melton - not Brook. I was talking to my sister tonight about this and she couldn't remember either.
artursteppe Posted 12 June 2012 Posted 12 June 2012 And, of course, Henry ( 7th ) - House of York, white rose, beat Richard 3rd - House of Lancaster, red rose at Bosworth Field or many would now say more likely near Stoke Golding ( definitely in Leicestershire ) in 1485 I think.
Guest Posted 12 June 2012 Posted 12 June 2012 I was talking to my sister tonight about this and she couldn't remember either. I sent an email off to the new college - no response.
Merging Cultures Posted 12 June 2012 Posted 12 June 2012 While we're at it, does anyone know how old the flag of Leicestershire is? Is it at all historic or did the council cobble one together because everyone else had a flag? I am glad this is only 80 years old, means we are not attached to it and can get rid of the 'maunch'. It looks like a burnt chicken wing.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.