It's not often anyone takes a look at the remains of an English monarch; parasites probably were commonplace.
Posted on 09/04/2013 8:34:02 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Not only was Richard III one of England’s most despised monarchs, but it now turns out the hunchback king was probably infected with parasitic worms that grew up to a foot in length.
Researchers who dug up Richard III’s skeleton underneath a parking lot in Leicester last year now report they discovered numerous roundworm eggs in the soil around his pelvis, where his intestines would have been. They compared that to soil samples taken close to Richard’s skull and surrounding his grave. There were no eggs near the skull and only traces of eggs in the soil near the grave.
In a study published online Wednesday in the journal Lancet, experts say that suggests the eggs near the skeleton’s pelvis were from an infection during the king’s life, even though it’s unlikely the worms did him any serious damage. In children, roundworm can lead to stunted growth and a reduced IQ, but for a well-fed English king, the parasites were just a minor annoyance. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
There is no evidence Richard killed his nephews. They did disappear from sight under his rule. Some people think they were escaped to Europe. Check out the Perkin Warbeck story. The children were declared illegitimate after it became clear that their father was a bigamist. No way would Richard (as protector of the realm) have allowed a “bastard” to assume the throne. That’s just the way medieval royal minds worked.
Richard instituted bail into England so that commoners would not lose their homes and farms while under arrest (usually arrested by corrupt nobles, btw). He was an outstanding soldier, well-liked by his troops, who stampeded Henry VII at Bosworth while that gentlemen hid behind a tree.
He deeply mourned the loss of his young boy and wife.
He had scoliosis - curvature of the spine; no hunchback. No withered arm, either.
Thomas More made all this stuff up because he grew up in the house of Thomas Morton - Richard’s mortal enemy.
Richard died in battle - the last English king to die in battle. He was killed by the soldiers of the usurper king, Henry VII (who did not fight - just hid behind his soldiers). When this kind of death took place, the body was put on display for several days to ensure the population knew that the king was dead. Richard, in very unusual fashion, was mutilated after death, displayed, and then thrown into a hastily-created ditch within a friary. We don’t know whether he had a Christian burial.
This was not really the digging up of a body. Richard’s remains were lost and thought to have been thrown into a river. But the Richard the Third Society tracked down where they thought he MIGHT be buried (actually, not buried but dumped) and lobbied the city of Leicester to allow them to dig so that he could be buried as an anointed king of England. The rest is grand history!
Richard was killed in the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. The victorious Tudors desecrated his body and tossed him in a ditch. I believe he was moved around a few times after death..
Thanks, but I was wondering how his remains were reburied.
His remains are currently undergoing study at the University of Leicester. Once they’ve concluded their studies, he will be reburied in a beautiful tomb in Leicester Cathedral. There is also a petition going around to have him buried in York. Richard’s home base was York.
Now are the innards of our discontent...
No, he was dumped in a hastily dug ditch within Grayfriars and he’s been there until last year.
I'll go out on a limb and guess that the parking lot wasn't there when they buried him ;-)
hey you never know, that could have been where they parked horses and carriages, 30 shillings a month.
does the 30 shillings cover the cost of a monthly wash-and-wax? They turn over the horses occasionally so that they’ll start?
ewwww thank you for telling me!!! (not!!)
lol
I’ve read a bit on it too
I’m driving in jelly stone right now
But one noble whose name escapes me claimed he did it for III
note I made clear he didn’t do it personally
And that the bard was too hard on the poor fellow
He is oft maligned and now he’s accused of worms
He stood by Eddie too against that prick Neville
There is a great book, a work of fiction, by Sharon Kay Penman about Richard III. She has also written about Empress Maude, Henry II, and Richard I. She is an excellent researcher and posits in her book that Lord Bolingbrook? Burlington, maybe? Was responsible for the nephews demise
In the 1600’s, some refurbishing of the tower found two skeletons of boys. We don’t know if they are the nephews. I love British history!
Will it be a type of official or state funeral, military honors, etc.?
Sharon pinned the murder on Buckingham - a very common suspect. Two children’s bones were found in the 1600s and were exhumed in the 1930s. Impossible to tell the sex of the bones. There were also animal bones found. They are now in an urn in the Abbey. The Queen refuses to have them exhumed.
Whoops, and thanks ButThreeLeftsDo!
As often happens when I learn a little bit about some figure in English history, I am now wanting to learn more. In all honesty, my current perception of Richard III is mostly formed from Shakespeare’s treatment of him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
