Richard III could have decided fate of Newport ship

NEWPORT LINK: Richard III NEWPORT LINK: Richard III

HIS reign was immortalised by Shakespeare and there were national headlines this week when remains found in a Leicester car park were confirmed as those of the last Plantagenet king Richard III.

And now it appears he could be the man responsible for the mystery of why the Newport ship survived on the banks of the River Usk for 550 years.

After experts this week confirmed bones found in Leicester belonged to the monarch, killed at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, a historian called for Newport to be included in any future heritage trail in search of Richard III.

Caerleon-based Bob Trett, the former curator at Newport Museum believes there is a good chance that it was the king who was responsible for work stopping on the ship, meaning it was left on the banks of the Usk until the Riverfront Theatre was built in 2002.

Mr Trett said the damaged ship came to Newport in 1469, with a letter written by the Earl of Warwick stating he wanted to see it rebuilt in the city.

However, he died at the Battle of Barnet in 1471 and from that year until 1473, the future Richard III, the Duke of Gloucester, was given control of the lordship of Newport. During this time, he seized castles in South Wales and was chief justice.

Mr Trett said: "There is nothing to say he personally came to Newport, but he was the man in authority and made the ultimate decision on what to do with the ship. I’m guessing they suddenly stopped working, with it possibly too difficult to repair."

However, this opens a new mystery. After work stopped, the process of demolishing the ship began.

Mr Trett said: "The odd thing is, they only destroyed half of it and left the rest. The iron nails were worth a fortune and the timbers could have been re-used, so it wasn’t the kind of thing you left lying around.

"The decision to simply abandon it could only have come from the person in authority. And at the time, that was Richard III."

Comments(6)

paddyparry says...
8:21am Sun 10 Feb 13

This is pure hokum. This has is based on as much historical fact as the Kennedy assassination being a plot hatched by the CIA, Cuba and the Mafia. You cannot be included on a heritage trail based on pure speculation. Then again, when has that ever stopped people believing in any old rubbish.

In other news... Newport should be included in the Bible because Jesus may have landed here in the Newport Ship, whilst on his way to visit cousin Itzik in Glastonbury.

roseofyork says...
8:37am Sun 10 Feb 13

This poor man seems to be blamed for all manner of things - many of which will never be determined.
However with his DNA we can determine one thing.
The possible identity of the remains in Westminster Abbey alleged to be those of the 'little princes'.
It won't help the Newport ship but it can at least let us know whether the Princes died as claimed, or died at all although who 'dun it' will have to wait another day.
Please sign
http://www.thepetiti
onsite.com/244/828/1
08/king-richard-iii-
and-the-princes-in-t
he-tower/

gathin says...
8:47am Sun 10 Feb 13

Could have done this could have done that?!
C'mon report something reporting as this is a non-story.
History is just someone's version of events sort of like this story.

Fairy Nuff says...
11:44am Sun 10 Feb 13

Apparently Ian Duncan Smith is sending him for the disability test.

gathin says...
11:45am Sun 10 Feb 13

Boom boom!

The Red Claw says...
8:05am Mon 11 Feb 13

Letter? What letter? Could we see a copy of it please? Blatant attempt to try to cash in on one of the greatest historical finds in Great Britain this century. Almost on a par with the email Richard the Third sent from his laptop, claiming to have once had a pie and chips on Brynmawr Square.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree