Dick Dastardly the Third

In my soppy southerner way I have always felt vaguely sorry for Richard III.  I have tended, lazily, to swallow whole the notion that ‘our Will’ traduced his character in his eponymous play as a means of currying favour with the Tudors who moved in and, so to speak, ‘took over the block’ after Richard was slaughtered at Bosworth.  Slanderous vilification of the Yorkist house would have tickled ‘good’ Queen Bess no end and ‘our Will’ was always meticulous in keeping in with the current regime despite whatever private thoughts he might have entertained.

So, I was slightly surprised at the barrage of criticism aimed at the perpetrators of the parade through Leicester on Sunday in which Richard’s bones were born in state and placed in Leicester Cathedral to await reburial on Thursday  Two historians, Michael Thornton in The Mail and Sean McClynn in ‘The Speccie’, lay into the loonies, as they call them, of the Richard III Society and remind the rest of us that ‘His late Maj’ was not only a wholesale murderer but also, crime of crimes these days, a ‘kiddie-winkie’ killer!

So, perhaps ‘our Will’, sly fellow though he was, might have been nearer the truth in his entertaining play than I had supposed.  In the meantime, I really ought to brush up on my Plantagenet history but, dammit, it's so complicated it's like trying to straighten out a bowl of spaghetti!  Anyway, now for sure is 'the winter of Richard's discontent'!

 

Comments

[jimmy glesga]

I watched the pathetic woman from the R 111 society crying when the alleged bones were laid out. The men who died with him were left to rot. Under the car park was the best place for him. And how shameful for the RC Archbishop to do the service but what do you expect from this malicious organisation with centuries of blood on their hands. The only good result was that Enery V111 came to power and kicked the corrupt Vatican into touch.

[Uncle Mort]

It seems quite likely that my wife parked on top of him from time to time. In our minds he'll always be associated with a rusty Austin A40.

[David Duff]

Now then, Jimmy, we don't want a re-run of the Saturday night 'Glasgie' wars of old!

Ah, poor little Austin A40:

"These eyes could not endure that beauty's wrack;
You should not blemish it if I stood by."
I.ii.27-28

[Michael Adams]

Do people still believe that Richard III killed the princes? I thought that that calumny had been laid to rest.

[AussieD]

Will Spokeshave and the Tudors did a right job on poor Dick's reputation. Suppose they had to as Henry's claim to the throne was about as tenuous as my claim for the Papacy.

If Bill and Tom Stanley hadn't been treacherous bastards at Bosworth there would have been no Tudor dynasty and Lizzie 1 could have lived a peaceful life and got herself laid.

I'm with Michael on the Princes in the Tower.

[David Duff]

From Sean McGlynn's article:

"Pro-Ricardians repeatedly cite the lack of hard proof for Richard killing his nephews in the Tower of London, conveniently ignoring that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and, worse still, wilfully ignoring common sense. The murder of the princes in the tower had in all likelihood been committed by October, 1483, four months after Richard had usurped the throne and the time of the Duke of Buckingham’s revolt against the new king. Richard did what any monarch did in his position: kill anyone who had a strong counter-claim to the throne and was thus a figurehead of rebellion. Thus, pace some revisionist claims to the contrary, Edward II was murdered after his deposition; Richard II was killed, probably, starved to death, by Henry IV; and Henry VI was almost certainly killed by Edward IV in the Tower."

[jimmy glesga]

We should all appreciate that we now have her majesty QE11 and long may she reign.

[David Duff]

Well said, Sir Jimmy!

(Er, it is Sir Jimmy, isn't it? Not Lord Jimmy?)

[Whitewall]

David, "Lord" is the rank for SoD. Careful lest He find out.

[jimmy glesga]

Lord Jimmy sounds good I would not like to be confused with the christian Sir Jimmy!

[AussieD]

the lack of hard proof for Richard killing his nephews in the Tower of London, conveniently ignoring that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

The statement may be correct but try that argument in a court and you soon find out the meaning of "burden of proof".

[Juliet46]

I recommend The Daughter of Time, by Josephine Tey regarding Richard III's alleged crimes - below first a link to a free ebook edition, the second to the Wicki page:

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/t/tey/josephine/daughter_of_time/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daughter_of_Time

[David Duff]

Jimmy, perhaps 'Laird Jimmy of Sauchiehall Street' would be appropriate!

AussieD, he had the policeman's favourite three: means, motive and opportunity.

Juliet, welcome to D&N and thank you for your links, especially the book because the 'Memsahib' is a voracious reader of historical novels even if she has to surround herself with charts of the Plantagenet family tree in order to remind who is marrying/murdering whom!

[David Duff]

Juliet, a double thank you because the 'Memsahib' has already bought the book and started reading it - and it's making her laugh! Needless to say, I took all the credit so I am quids in!