A History of Royals discussion

I'm sure most of us Royalty junkies have heard and/or read the news by now, but here is a link to the article I read about the identification of Richard III's bones.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/wor...

Looks like he did have scoliosis pretty badly.

Anyone else have any news, articles, links, or thoughts? Post them here.

Lyn M wrote: "Looks like he did have scoliosis pretty badly. ."

I've heard a range of views expressed about this - ranging from the "no one would have even noticed until they stripped the corpse" to the "ha! not tudor propaganda after all!!" Here's what the Uni of Leicester has to say http://www.le.ac.uk/richardiii/scienc...

I like that article, Darkpool. It is interesting and makes me wonder how much it really would have affected his everyday living. It also makes me wonder exactly when it began since it wasn't at birth. It would be interesting to me to know that as the effect that it had on his life might have been drastically different depending on when it occurred.

Yeah, me too. The idea that it may have been progressive is a particularly interesting one to me.

I know. It could explain a lot, or bring up a lot of questions.

Now I am in the mood for a Richard III book, lol. I may have to go find one.

Heh, I've just this morning started This Time. Sadly I don't think I can use it for the "Reading through the ages" challenge.

Darkpool wrote: "Lyn M wrote: "Looks like he did have scoliosis pretty badly. ."

I've heard a range of views expressed about this - ranging from the "no one would have even noticed until they stripped the corpse" ..."

I don't see why the two would be mutually exclusive. Even if it was not very noticeable with clothes on, you'd think the Tudor documents which mention his "hunchback" are obviously in reference to the scoliosis, which they probably would have considered a hunchback even if we today do not. Whether it was noticed before or after his death is rather irrelevant regarding the issue of Tudor propaganda - he DID have what they considered a "hunchback" and therefore the references to it are not completely fabricated after all.

I don't know much about Richard III, but I have a hard time getting past what happened to his nephews to think that some of his reputation wasn't earned. :) I would imagine there will be some more books about him coming out in the next year or two with this find.

Yes, I had read an article on this, I think in the WSJ but your article had all the information and more! Yours was much better. Thanks!

Robin wrote: "Darkpool wrote: "Lyn M wrote: "Looks like he did have scoliosis pretty badly. ."

I've heard a range of views expressed about this - ranging from the "no one would have even noticed until they stri..."

Oh, I tend to agree with you Robin. It seems apparent now that there is validity in the Tudors description of Richard. I remember the movie The Goodbye Girl and the off-off-broadway production of Richard III that was part of the movie. They were making it seem so ridiculous that anyone would see Richard that way. Not so ridiculous now. :)

E.S. wrote: "I don't know much about Richard III, but I have a hard time getting past what happened to his nephews to think that some of his reputation wasn't earned. :) I would imagine there will be some more ..."

I am willing to be the same thing, many more books about Richard coming out, and/or the ones that are out there getting revived.

Lyn, the Sunne in Splendour is a great Richard III novel.... ;) this is so surreal. After reading Sunne, I became super interested in Richard III and have done quite a bit of research on him. I too thought the hunchback thing was Tudor propaganda, so it's kinda hard to get that out of my head that it's not. I still don't think that he did the murders of the Princes in the Tower for which is he constantly accused. I just can't get over that they found him. Wow. My mind is blown. This is the coolest thing ever.

My mom and my sister have read/are planning to read the Josephine Tey "mystery" - apparently she works through why it is unlikely Richard III killed his nephews and apparently lots of historians have come to the same conclusion. Interesting that a lot of the account I have read recently don't say anything about that!

Guess I will have to check that it too! It's name is Daughter of Time

Aly wrote: "Lyn, the Sunne in Splendour is a great Richard III novel.... ;) this is so surreal. After reading Sunne, I became super interested in Richard III and have done quite a bit of research on him. I ..."

I know, Aly. I couldn't believe it when I first saw your FB post. It is really neat and mind boggling at the same time. It really makes Richard seem even more real. I definitely want to get back to reading Sunne sometime soon. Maybe this year??

E.S. wrote: "My mom and my sister have read/are planning to read the Josephine Tey "mystery" - apparently she works through why it is unlikely Richard III killed his nephews and apparently lots of historians ha..."

I have that book on my TBR, too. It may be time to bump it up some.

We have to bear in mind, though, that in the MA, people often saw physical deformities as the outer manifestation of inner evil. So by portraying Richard as deformed--with a withered arm and humped back and born with a full set of teeth or being in his mother's womb for two years--the Tudor propagandists made it easier for people to accept their view of him as this monster. And then Shakespeare came along and made up the minds of the rest of us! I don't blame Will, though, for he was a dramatist, not a historian, and the only sources he had were biased Tudor ones.
During Richard's lifetime, it was observed that one shoulder was higher than another, which we now know was due to the scoliois. (In Sunne, I went with a childhood fall in which his shoulder was not set properly) I never even thought of scoliosis, and maybe I should have since I have it, too. In my case, no uneven shoulders, just a lot of pain. it did not really bother me, though, until I hit my forties. So maybe Richard "lucked out" by dying at 32. Of course I suspect his was worse than mine, and so my heart goes out to him, living in an age without chiropractors!

Sharon wrote: "We have to bear in mind, though, that in the MA, people often saw physical deformities as the outer manifestation of inner evil. So by portraying Richard as deformed--with a withered arm and humpe..."

I am so glad you weighed in on this Sharon. I was wondering what your take on it would be since Sunne is a lot of our members favorite book about Richard. You bring up a good point that people in those days thought that physical deformities meant that you were evil in general.

I'm delighted with the discovery, of course,Lyn. I confess I never expected them to find anything, but as soon as they described the bones, I had no doubts whatsoever that it was Richard. It is fascinating to know now that he had scoliosis or that he was 5 feet, 8 inches tall, but it is gruesome to know that he had 10 wounds, making it all too easy to imagine what his last moments of life were like. But I think the reconstruction is what intrigues me the most. The portrait in the National Portrait Galley in London was not contemporary and it was proved that it had been tampered with to make him look more sinister, in keeping with the Tudor image of him as evil incarnate. But it also made him look older than God, and the reconstruction looks startlingy young to anyone familiar only with that portrait.
My British publisher is doing something remarkable; they get the rights to Sunne back this year and were planning to reissue it in paperback. Instead, they have decided to publish a special hardback edition this September--30 years after it first came out (And yes, that makes me feel very old) I am starting on revisions to the galley proofs next week and plan to make some changes to the dialogue. I'd love to be able to introduce scoliosis into the story, but that would require too much rewriting, so I'll have to settle for mentioning it in a preface. Several of my friends have commented upon the extent of the media coverage both in the US and the UK, saying it is so nice that something of historical interest is getting attention. I suspect it is due in part because Richard is one of the better known medieval kings, thanks to Shakespeare, for better or worse. And of course the circumstances--the king in the car park--make it a good human interest story that lends itself to humor. I've seen several funny cartoons, my favorite being the one showing a sign that lists the parking fees and then adds, "No burying of dead kings here."

I had to laugh at the sign about no burying of dead kings. I have seen some good ones, too. People have such great imaginations when it comes to these things. I am glad that your publisher in the UK is going to publish a special edition of Sunne this fall. Will it be available only in the UK, or in both the UK and the US? It would be cool if you could work the scoliosis into the story, but I'm sure that would take more re-writing than you have time for.

No, it is only in the UK, unfortunately. But of course my American readers will be able to buy it since those ludicrous e-book restrictions won't apply. And they can even buy it from Book Depository, which ships books around the world free of charge. One of my favorite book sites!
Meanwhile, my British readers can take advantage of a great bargain, for the Sunne e-book is still being offered for downloading for only 74 pence. They won't let me do it, though, since I live on the wrong side of the Atlantic.

That is too funny, Sharon. You can't even download your own book. I will be looking for the special Sunne on Book Depository (also one of my favorite sites).

Some of my Australian friends figured out how to game the system, Lyn, and buy books from the Amazon mother ship, which they'd normally not be allowed to do.

I have to admit, I really don't understand all of the rules, regulations, restrictions, etc. I just want to be able to get the books I want, lol.

What makes it so unfair in Australia is that they have to pay higher prices for books because they can't order them elsewhere. But whenever I get too vexed about it, I remind myself how much easier it is to buy books on-line. In the old days, I'd spend most of my time on trips to the UK hunting for books I neeeded in second-hand bookstores since they'd be long out of print. Then I'd have to pack them up and ship them home myself since most small booksellers didn't offer that service then. But then the web came along. My favorite book hunt story occurred when I was writing Devil's Brood. I wanted to find a book that had been written by a monk who'd known Thomas Becket and compiled all of the alleged miracles that were supposed to have happened at his tomb. This book was done in the 12th century, in Latin, of course, but a Victorian historian translated it into English. I wanted it for Henry's penance scene at Canterbury Cathedral. I'd just about given up hope when I found it offered by a Tokyo bookstore. Not only was I able to make use of the monk's stories, I even let him intrude upon Henry in the penance scene. I loved the improbable nature of it all--a book written by a medieval monk and translated by a Victorian historian and then bought by an American author from a Tokyo bookseller!

That is really cool, Sharon. And you are so right, the advent of the internet does make things so much easier. There have been many times that I have been able to get out of print or hard to find books by finding sellers on the internet. In fact, I have found a couple of people who will "find" a book for me if I let them know what I am looking for. I really love that when I am trying to buy antique books as gifts.

A lot has happened since they announced those bones were Richard's. There has been a court case to where those bones are going to be buried now. I can see this case being a long and drawn out affair. York Minster is have been lukewarm response in reinterring those bones in Cathedral. The Plantagenet Alliance went on a march but not very many turned up to support them. I think the mood of people have changed and they are not so excited as they were back then. Maybe it was a twisted spine of a agenda to get the tourist flocking to Leicester.

readinghearts (Lyn M) wrote: "E.S. wrote: "I don't know much about Richard III, but I have a hard time getting past what happened to his nephews to think that some of his reputation wasn't earned. :) I would imagine there will ..."
I have written a book called Richard, the man behind the myth. Andrea Willers. It's a book for any Richardian.

It there a book that you would recommend to me if i want to know more about Richard? I didn't read a lot about him yet so you can recommend to me everything.
Maybe there is a Richardian "bible" that everyone should read ?

I am sorry, Johanna, but I have not kept up with the Ricardian books since Sunne was published; if I had, I'd never have had time to write another book. I would suggest that you visit the Richard III Society website, for they keep track of all that has been written about Richard, both pro and con. It is one of the best sources for finding out more about the last Yorkist king, with dozens of articles available and book recommendations as well.

Sharon wrote: "I am sorry, Johanna, but I have not kept up with the Ricardian books since Sunne was published; if I had, I'd never have had time to write another book. I would suggest that you visit the Richard ..."

Thank you for this tip Sharon.. I will try it!

Johanna wrote: "It there a book that you would recommend to me if i want to know more about Richard? I didn't read a lot about him yet so you can recommend to me everything.
Maybe there is a Richardian "bible" tha..."

I myself would suggest Sharon's book, The Sunne in Splendour if you are looking for a good fiction book. Otherwise, I concur with Sharon's suggestion that you visit the website.

Thanks, Lyn!

I concur The Sunne is Splendour is one of the best historical fiction books on Richard III. I really loved it and read it twice, my niece also really enjoyed it(it is so nice that generations are enjoying your book, Sharon, don't you think?).

Another book I liked was 'Queen by Right' by Anne Easter Smith, and I do have other books by this author on my TBR list.

Unfortunately though many authors seem to be obsessed with the Tudors and yet the Plantagenet's are by far the most fascinating people who lived in history.

Anyway I hope that helps:)

Rebecca wrote: "I concur The Sunne is Splendour is one of the best historical fiction books on Richard III. I really loved it and read it twice, my niece also really enjoyed it(it is so nice that generations are e..."

The last two books that I read on the Plantagenets were the non-fiction history books written by Dan Jones: The Plantagenets: The Warrior Kings and Queens Who Made England and Wars of the Roses, The: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors. Both were excellent. In fact, I received Advanced copies for review and liked them so much I actually purchased the hardbacks to have for my bookshelf.

Johanna wrote: "It there a book that you would recommend to me if i want to know more about Richard? I didn't read a lot about him yet so you can recommend to me everything.
Maybe there is a Richardian "bible" tha..."

I don't know if there's something that people consider a Ricardian bible... I know that Paul Murray Kendall's biography of Richard III, published in the 1950s, is well regarded. I've bought it very recently but I haven't started it yet, I have a few other books to get through first. Out of the newer Ricardian authors, there's Annette Carson with "The Maligned King" and John Ashdown-Hill, who's done a lot of research and was one of the people instrumental in the project of searching for Richard's remains. His "The Mythology of Richard III", where he dispels various myths about Richard, is pretty good. He's written several other books about subjects relating to Richard III, the York dynasty and the Wars of the Roses.

On the subject of the mystery of the 'Princes in the Tower', I recommend Bertram Fields' "Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes". Even though he's a lawyer rather than a professional historian, it's really thorough and excellent - and maybe the fact he's a lawyer actually helps, he analyses things very logically in all aspects, considers various possibilities of what may have happened and the probability for each (without claiming to know exactly what happened, like some other professional and amateur historians) and generally makes a lot of sense, and it's a very approachable and exciting book to read - I finished it in two days. He does a really good job of dismantling the traditional view and showing why it doesn't make sense to simply assume even that the boys were murdered, let alone that Richard III murdered them, when there are multiple different possibilities and no proof.

The Richard III Society website has a lot of articles in PDF, you can download and read many of them.

I don't know if I should reply to 2 years old posts, but anyway: it's strange to read that his remains proved that the Tudor descriptions of him are right, when in fact, they proved that the Tudor descriptions of him are wrong (other than the earliest ones that merely said he had one shoulder higher than the other). He did not have a withered arm, nor was he hideously deformed etc. and in fact, his "deformity" didn't prevent him from any activity and wasn't visible to any of his contemporaries unless he took his shirt off (unless someone has a good explanation why Nicholas von Poppelau would describe Richard's build in detail - and very accurately, as it turns out - but miss the fact he was noticeably deformed... or why nobody supplied Mancini with gossip about the king's deformity).

But no, in fact they did not consider scoliosis hunchback; the Tudor historians and propagandists called him "crookbacked". The first one to call him hunchbacked was Shakespeare (who was probably satirizing his contemporary, Robert Cecil, who did in fact have a hunchback). And also added a limp, made him so deformed dogs bark at him (LOL), made his own mother hate him and call him a monster, went on and on about Richard's supposed anger about his deformed appearance since birth (in fact, Richard's scoliosis only started in adolescence) and inability to be a "lover" (yes, that seems right, what with his two recognized illegitimate children by the age of 19, and subsequent marriage to Anne, which was absolutely nothing like Shakespeare described it.. it doesn't seem the real Richard had any trouble attracting women).

If they laughed about how ridiculous Shakespearean description of Richard is in "Goodbye Girl" (I don't remember I saw the movie but many, many years ago), that's because it IS absolutely ridiculous. It never made any sense to claim that he had a hunchback, a withered arm, a limp was incredibly deformed etc. while not denying the well known facts about his prowess in battle and accomplishments as a warrior.

Ivana wrote: "Johanna wrote: "It there a book that you would recommend to me if i want to know more about Richard? I didn't read a lot about him yet so you can recommend to me everything.
Maybe there is a Richar..."

Thanks for the excellent suggestions, Ivana. I am always looking for new non-fiction books to shed light on the various Royals from the past.

I am especially interested in taking a look at the Bertram Fiellds book about the princes in the tower. I think that you are right that a lawyer would have a different way of looking at things, treating data as "evidence" would give a different perspective.

I will be looking into these books for myself!

Ivana wrote: "I don't know if I should reply to 2 years old posts, but anyway: it's strange to read that his remains proved that the Tudor descriptions of him are right, when in fact, they proved that the Tudor ..."

No worries about the two year old discussion....it is always great to have someone jump in and rekindle a discussion. I will admit up front, that I need to do a LOT more research and reading on Richard III before I can speak with any authority. As for scoliosis, I have a nephew who has scoliosis pretty badly and you are right that it does not manifest itself physically for the most part. He does have a bit of an uneven shoulder, but you cannot tell unless he decides to "show" it to you. It is also true that it doesn't hamper his physical activity in the big picture...he was even able to play football and basketball in high school. He does, however suffer from major bouts of pain to the extent that he cannot sleep at night (it causes pain for him to lay down). In addition, it makes it easier for his back to "go out" just doing normal activities. As yet, they have not been able to find any drugs that can mask the pain, either. In that respect, it does impinge on his life quite a bit, so I can only wonder what effect it may have had on Richard's life. He may still have been able to do most things and hide it, but I am willing to bet that he had to live with significant amounts of pain, whether acknowledged or not.