Did you see the forensic photos of the individual vertebrae? They clearly show the structural deformities leading to scoliosis.
As for how noticeable it might have been, my dad had scoliosis and you would never have known it from his appearance, with or without a shirt on. I know of it only because he told me on more than one occasion that he suffered from it.
Well, a Mortimer would argue that.
One of my best friends in high school had mild scoliosis. You couldn’t tell from looking at her at all, but she’d have terrible back pain, to the point she used to go to a chiropractor.
The Princes in the Tower? Richard was guilty as sin. I’m not saying Henry wouldn’t have done it if he hadn’t have had the chance, but for Richard to leave them alive would make no sense, and it’s almost certainly likely that the bones found were those of the princes. Richard either did it himself, or had someone do it for him. Alive, they were too much of a threat.
Besides, as ambitious as she may have been, do you really think that Elizabeth of York would have married the man who killed her brothers? Even if they WERE still alive when Henry took the throne, they’d still be children for the most part.
Ian Mortimer’s argument for that is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard. Roger Mortimer, who has everything to lose, just lets Edward II go or lets him escape, because why? Edward II wanders off into obscurity and leaves his queen, realm, and children to the tender mercies of Mortimer, because why? Nothing about it makes sense. If I had been Roger Mortimer, Edward II would’ve been dead as soon as I got my hands on him. He would’ve been dead yesterday. And someone like Edward II would not have been like “okay, cool bro!” and left Mortimer and Isabella alone if he had managed to escape/been released. Mortimer executed his lover (Hugh le Despenser) and his brother (Edmund, earl of Kent) and usurped Edward’s throne and his queen. This is not someone who its safe to leave your kids and your subjects in the hands of.
The damning thing about the skeletons found in the White Tower is, that if they are the princes, both are identifiable as pre-pubescent boys. Edward V, if he’d been alive to be killed by Henry Tudor, would’ve been fifteen and well into puberty. If that skeleton belongs to him, he must’ve been killed while being held captive by his uncle Richard III.
Golly, I just found this thread. Glad to see that great doper minds think alike. Said thread is at Straight dope on the Richardarians - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board and if anyone has anything to say I would be most obliged because it’s a damn intersting thing if I may say so!
I suspect that many of the non-UK readers here, or perhaps hypothetical UK readers in the future when the Tesco thing is forgotten, will have no idea what you’re talking about, as clear as it is to ye and me.
So here’s the link to Horse meat scandal in Europe - a SDMB thread.
Oh man I heard about it and would be rather angry so much so that I am loathe to read the thread. Listen to the BBC here in Texas
Sorry for the hijack
Capt
Any thoughts…?
What is to become of this grave-site? Surely they won’t just fill it in and repave the parking lot? Surely?
I don’t think they’re planning anything like a state funeral. Right now they’re saying he’ll be buried in Leicester Cathedral. I think I read somewhere that the royals consider a funeral service to be redundant because he probably had one when he was buried (although I don’t know if that’s the case).
I think they already did that. They’re planning to create a Richard III museum in the area, but I don’t think it’ll be where the parking lot is.
What a royal pain in the ass.
Perhaps not if you wanted the person alive and more or less functioning. I don’t think that is exactly what they had on their minds when they were holding him down and jamming a red hot poker up his bum. They were in it for the pain and damage with the end result of him dead.
Some sort of ceremony for re-interrment makes sense, but I don’t see why it would be a Catholic one; the Church of England maintains that it is the successor to the Catholic church in England, just like the Windsors are the successors to the Plantagents. Some medieval / gregorian chanting would be a nice touch.
I would say that if a member of the Royal Family is attending, it should be the Duke of Gloucester, the current holder of the title which Edward IV granted to Richard.
Nice idea!
The chances of the Queen attending the re-interment are zero. Not because of any intended snub. (I rather suspect that personally she isn’t bothered, one way or the other.) Rather the issue will be that she never attends public funerals unless they are for immediate members of her family. Her attendance at Churchill’s funeral was self-consciously an extraordinary break with protocol. Moreover, this convention is actually a relaxation of the earlier tradition. Before Edward VII attended Queen Victoria’s funeral, it was almost unthinkable for any reigning monarch to attend a funeral. Richard III himself would find the idea of the Queen attending most weird.
On the other hand, it would be equally surprising if the Duke of Gloucester doesn’t attend. That’s because he’s the Patron of the Richard III Society. The obvious solution will therefore be for the Queen to ask him to represent her.
But that’s hardly an argument to satisfy the Catholics, is it? It’s also clear that many of those Catholics who have raised this issue are acutely aware that the break with Rome was brought about by the son of the man who deposed Richard. English Catholics tend not to be big fans of the Tudors.
Sure, but both Leicester Cathedral and York Minster are C. of E., correct? If that’s where he’s ending up, a nice High Church Anglican service seems appropriate.
Monarchs who inherited their rule didn’t attend the funeral of the parent they inherited from, or the funerals of other family members? I find that difficult to believe. The funeral of a monarch is a state occasion; how could the new head of state *not *be in attendance?
The archeologists now say the grave was almost disturbed - and the late king maybe even beheaded - when the ground was earlier disturbed: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/richard-iii-skeleton-disturbance_n_3826816.html
Looks like Richard suffered from roundworms - would those hurt, or were they just disgusting?: Into the bowels: Richard III's remains riddled with roundworms