Posted on 02/17/2008 6:44:21 PM PST by blam
Abbey body identified as gay lover of Edward II
By Laura Clout
Last Updated: 1:06am GMT 18/02/2008
A mutilated body found in an abbey graveyard has been identified as that of a notorious medieval villain rumoured to have been the gay lover of Edward II.
The remains, which bear the hallmarks of having been hanged, drawn and quartered, are thought to be those of Sir Hugh Despenser the Younger, who was executed as a traitor in 1326.
Sir Hugh was executed after Edward II [above] was deposed from the throne in 1326
Sir Hugh had been favourite of Edward II - who was widely believed to have been homosexual - but was brutally executed before a mob after the king was ousted from the throne.
The decapitated remains, buried at Hulton Abbey, Staffs, have intrigued experts since they were uncovered during the 1970s and now Mary Lewis, an anthropologist, says she has uncovered compelling evidence of their true identity.
The manner of execution, carbon-dating of the bones, and the absence of several parts of the body all point towards Sir Hugh being the victim, she said.
"If the remains are those of Sir Hugh Despenser the Younger, then this is the first time such an execution victim has been identified," she added.
Sir Hugh insinuated himself into the king's favour by backing him in his battles with the barons. Through a series of ruthless deals, he consolidated a huge fortune, winning himself a legion of enemies in the process, including Edward's wife, Queen Isabella.
His downfall came when the queen and her ally, Roger Mortimer, deposed the king in 1326.
Sir Hugh was judged a traitor and a thief. He was hanged and, still conscious, castrated, disembowelled and then quartered before his head was displayed on London Bridge.
Miss Lewis, a biological anthropologist at the University of Reading, found that the Staffordshire skeleton had been beheaded and chopped into several pieces with a sharp blade, suggesting a ritual killing.
There was also evidence of a stab wound to the stomach.
She said: "This form of public execution was high theatre that aimed to demonstrate the power of government to the masses. High treason dictated that the perpetrator should suffer more than one death."
Radiocarbon analysis dated the remains to between 1050 and 1385 and subsequent tests suggested that the male was over 34 years old. Sir Hugh was 40 when he was killed.
"Dating of the Hulton Abbey skeleton indicates that he died no later that 1385, when this brutal and very public form of execution was handed out only to the most notorious political prisoners. This suggests that the skeleton at Hulton Abbey was a well-known political figure," Miss Lewis added.
Sir Hugh's wife asked for his bones to be buried on his family's Gloucestershire estate but only the head, a thigh bone and a few vertebrae were returned to her. These are the bones that are missing from the Hulton Abbey skeleton.
In addition, the abbey formed part of the estate of Sir Hugh's brother-in-law, Hugh Audley, and it is thought the family may have chosen to bury what remained of their disgraced relative there.
If Edward 2 didn’t sire Edward 3 then who the daddy
Mel Gibson! Sheesh! Don't you know anything about history?
Mark
Actually I think he did, he was a French Adventurer, but if I recall he was actually killed out of the castle,by agents of ole’ Longshank.
It’s the Medieval Matthew Sheppard!!!
bookmark
I was referring to the descendants of Sir Hugh asking for reparations, not the descendants of Edward II—although I guess one could charge the government for it if the Queen wanted to? :-)
[Fwap!!] upside the head with a nerf baseball bat!! ;-)
Disemboweling could leave marks on the ribs behind the stomach, I suppose, but you don't have to cut into the stomach area that deeply to disembowel someone.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks kalee. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
“The present queen of Great Britain is a direct descendant of Edward II (assuming Edward III was actually his son).”
Exactly! The history of English monarchs is very interesting. I always enjoyed reading about the various intrigues involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_of_Elizabeth_II_from_Cerdic
“He was hanged and...castrated...”
Beginning the old saying, “Balls,” said the Queeen. “If I had them, I’d be King.”
Maybe they put panties on his head, too.
Well.....I'm averaging about 40 pages a day.
So it will be a while before I get back to ya. :)
The best way to approach Braveheart is to assume up front that nothing in the movie is true, and work backward from that. William Wallace existed, and, well, that's about it for the movie.
It wouldn't be so bad but for the fact that the moron who wrote the screenplay (NOT Mel Gibson) has tried to insist that "hey, some of it could have been true!"
Great movie, lousy history.
Olive Hugh.
:)
It took me a while to get through that book as well. I started calling it “Book Without End.” Good read and after I was done, I started reading some non-fiction about that period of time (about the Plagues in particular).
Yes, young Edward II must have been 100% gay to be able to refrain from spending his entire life in bed with HER......
Spoiler Alert!
:)
GENEALOGY n. The tracing of descent from ancestors; alternatively, a particular account of such tracing for a specific individual or family. In the English-speaking world, all those who take up this pursuit announce sooner or later that they can trace their descent back to Edward III. This should surprise no one with a rudimentary knowledge of mathematics; there are probably one or two well-bred basset hounds who could also trace their descent back to Edward III. What is really surprising is that Edward III seems to be regarded as some kind of ultimate antecedent beyond whom the genealogist does not venture, even though anyone descended from Edward III is also descended from his father Edward II, and so on. The author can guess only that the prudery of the late Victorian age (when genealogy became a family pastime) chose to draw a veil before the memory of Edward II in view of the sybaritic Plantagenet’s bisexual reputation and appalling death (see impalement).— Peter Bowler, The Superior Person’s Book of Words.
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.