Richard !!! Dug Up Edition

[Svartalf]

Now what will the street lads use for a soccer ball?

Yorick

[Callan]

Hmmmm. Let's see if I can be brief...

More's Life of Richard (on which Shakespeare's play is based, and which influenced all subsequent biographies until the 20th century) is nothing more than backstairs gossip presented as an eyewitness account. More himself was a child in 1485 (when Richard died at Bosworth) and got his info from Morton, Bishop of Ely, in whose household More was a page. Morton loathed and was loathed by Richard, and had a vested interest in promoting and legitimising the new Tudor regime - which in fact had no better claim on the throne than I do. Morton was later created Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor of England by Henry Tudor. Who says treachery doesn't pay?

We can dispose of the hunchback question in two points: a) How would a scoliotic have become what even his enemies acknowledged as the greatest warrior of his age? (ever tried even lifting a 15th century broadsword, let alone killing somebody with it?) and b) If you're thinking of the portrait in the Royal Collection, x-rays have shown that it was altered by a later hand to make one shoulder higher than the other and thus toe the Tudor party line.

And as for the dear little Princes in the Tower - bollocks. They'd been declared illegitimate and so were no threat to Richard's throne at all. It was in fact in his best interests to keep them alive so no-one could use them as a focus for rebellion - as later happened to Henry Tudor, with monotonous regularity. Indeed, the only person who stood to gain from the princes' removal was... yeah, you guessed it: Henry Tudor.

Um - that's horribly simplistic, sorry, but it's the best I can do at short notice! Read the book - it's good stuff. It's what taught me at the age of 11 not to trust accepted truths. Or dramatists!

[Horwood Beer-Master]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/02/0 ... -for-work/

ATOS declare Richard III fit for work

A severely disabled Leicester King faces having to find work after being declared fit to work by French firm ATOS Healthcare despite being registered dead and suffering severe 550-year-old sword wounds to the head.

The dead monarch, Richard Plantagenet, was called for a reassessment of his fitness for work by ATOS – which carries out disability assessments on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) - after it was discovered the deposed King had spent years lying around a Leicester City Council car park doing absolutely nothing.

As a result of the reassessment by ATOS, the last royal descendant of the House of York was shocked to receive a letter this week telling him he had been given a score of zero in all criteria, which means he is considered to be fit to work.

The letter from the DWP states it considers Mr Plantagenet’s lack of eyes doesn’t prevent him from “finding his way around familiar and unfamiliar places” and the fact he is bereft of life does not mean his “capability for work is limited.”

However, the deceased king has questioned the disability assessment, claiming he has been registered dead since he was killed and crudely buried by his successor Henry VII during the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.

[klr]

"Now it is winter in a Leicester car park ..."

[Jason]

"There's something rotten in a Leicester car park ..."

[Callan]

They reckon he keeled over when he saw the parking charges.

[Jason]

"Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this Leicester car park ..."

[klr]

They reckon he keeled over when he saw the parking charges.

No wonder he was looking for a horse ...

[Jason]

"Great Birnam cars to Leicester car park shall come ..."

[Jason]

“Out of my sight! Thou dost infest mine car park ...”

[Jason]

There is no creature loves me, and if I die no soul will park me. And wherefore should they, since that I myself find in myself no parking to myself?”

[klr]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the cark park attendants!"

[hadespussercats]

Hmmmm. Let's see if I can be brief...

More's Life of Richard (on which Shakespeare's play is based, and which influenced all subsequent biographies until the 20th century) is nothing more than backstairs gossip presented as an eyewitness account. More himself was a child in 1485 (when Richard died at Bosworth) and got his info from Morton, Bishop of Ely, in whose household More was a page. Morton loathed and was loathed by Richard, and had a vested interest in promoting and legitimising the new Tudor regime - which in fact had no better claim on the throne than I do. Morton was later created Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor of England by Henry Tudor. Who says treachery doesn't pay?

We can dispose of the hunchback question in two points: a) How would a scoliotic have become what even his enemies acknowledged as the greatest warrior of his age? (ever tried even lifting a 15th century broadsword, let alone killing somebody with it?) and b) If you're thinking of the portrait in the Royal Collection, x-rays have shown that it was altered by a later hand to make one shoulder higher than the other and thus toe the Tudor party line.

And as for the dear little Princes in the Tower - bollocks. They'd been declared illegitimate and so were no threat to Richard's throne at all. It was in fact in his best interests to keep them alive so no-one could use them as a focus for rebellion - as later happened to Henry Tudor, with monotonous regularity. Indeed, the only person who stood to gain from the princes' removal was... yeah, you guessed it: Henry Tudor.

Um - that's horribly simplistic, sorry, but it's the best I can do at short notice! Read the book - it's good stuff. It's what taught me at the age of 11 not to trust accepted truths. Or dramatists!

Well, I don't argue there's a lot of bollocks written about just about any powerful figure, probably more in times when fact-checking is difficult to do. I also reiterate my earlier comment about Shakespeare being a PR man, and (re)writing history to please his patrons.

BUT. One of my best friends, a skilled craftsman I used to work with a few years ago, has a serious hunch. He's tall, but he'd probably be at least a foot taller if he could stand up straight. And dude is crazy strong. Part of his job when we worked together was being to one to move around the heavy stuff. He could pick me up like I was some anorexic ballerina.

So... there's that.

[mistermack]

I would say that it's highly likely to be the bones of dick the shit.

They knew what they were looking for, and where to look, so there must have been records of it.
Then there is the dna, which matches as it should.
Then there is the curvature of the spine.
Then there are the fatal war wounds on the body.

How many hunchbacks died in battle?

Anyway, his reputation as a fighter is as suspect as the shakespeare stories. The british aristocracy ALWAYS engineered a reputation for prowess, and that was still happening when Churchill was young, and it's still happening now.

Who believes that Prince Harry would have made it as a helicopter pilot gunner, if he wasn't royal? He would have been lucky to make squaddie.

In his lifetime, Richard's hunchback would have been hardly mentioned. After his death, it would have been stressed, to rubbish his reputation. That's perfectly normal.

[Jason]

True. It's the Scots and the Welsh that really built the British Empire.