Re: facial reconstruction

Dear Marion,

> do think that a computer enhancement of the skull might be
> interesting, to see how alike the face is to the pictures, but we
> must remember these are human bones,

Yes, and?

A bust would be good, too (as a basis for the full-length armoured
effigy I would sooooo love to see!).

I don't understand the qualms some people have about investigation of
human remains. People like our boy here are the real-life 'time-
travellers': they've been away from us for a long time, and now they
can share with us so much about their lives and teach us about
themselves. That is the real marvel.

cheers,
Marianne

Dear Carol,

> I love the idea of making a full head/facial portrait from a skull.
> Ive seen fascinating work done
> by experts in this field.

This is one of the things I'm most excited about! I'm sure it will be
done (either from a cast or a computer-generated reconstruction)! How
could they resist?!

When I was a student, I attended a lecture by Richard Neave of the
Manchester team that pioneered a lot of this kind of work ý it was
fascinating! They did the Philip of Macedon reconstruction.

But I wish there could be a proper Plantagenet Project of
palaeopathology, like the Italian ones that have been done on the
Medici and others.

best wishes,
Marianne

Marrianne, Its great to receive such positive return on the idea of facial reconstruction. But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before such great ideas can become reality. What can we do&to make sure this might be addressed, or done? Im just sitting here in Texas, and can only offer up ideas&..someone has to be in Leister at least, to implement things. I didn't know about the Medici facial reconstructions!!!! I adore Lorenzo de Medici. He was one of my childhood heroes. Growing up in Europe, I had a different set of heroes than the average American kid! :-) How can I access this information? Back to Richard&.can we start a thread to pursue the idea of facial reconstruction from the skull in Leister? Carol

Surly reconstructive forensic pathology has both the ability to reconstruct the scull without any problem of inter-fearing with both the structural integrity or feelings of current authorities I believe that Manchester University has such a unit this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to look at the face of Richard iii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction


On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Carol Darling <cdarlingart1@...> wrote:

> Marrianne, Its great to receive such positive return on the idea of facial reconstruction. But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before such great ideas can become reality. What can we do&to make sure this might be addressed, or done? Im just sitting here in Texas, and can only offer up ideas&..someone has to be in Leister at least, to implement things. I didn't know about the Medici facial reconstructions!!!! I adore Lorenzo de Medici. He was one of my childhood heroes. Growing up in Europe, I had a different set of heroes than the average American kid! :-) How can I access this information? Back to Richard&.can we start a thread to pursue the idea of facial reconstruction from the skull in Leister? Carol
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

We Ricardian folk might offer help to fund such a reconstruction, if it's not already "on the table." It needn't be an official Society project - just something spearheaded by trustworthy people willing to pass the proverbial hat and make the proper arrangements. Ms. Langley may be in a position to facilitate this.

A certain percentage of the facial recreation would remain speculative. Even an extremely well preserved skull cannot tell the forensics' artist all the fleshly details. For those things, the artist must still consult the portraits, etc., and make educated choices. But the proportions, the depth and set of the eyes, the lines of the cheekbones, the shapes of brow, jaw, and chin, and so forth will help enormously.

Judy 
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Dr M M Gilchrist <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, October 8, 2012 12:03 PM
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

Dear Carol,

> I love the idea of making a full head/facial portrait from a skull. 
> Ive seen fascinating work done
> by experts in this field.

This is one of the things I'm most excited about! I'm sure it will be 
done (either from a cast or a computer-generated reconstruction)! How 
could they resist?!

When I was a student, I attended a lecture by Richard Neave of the 
Manchester team that pioneered a lot of this kind of work  it was 
fascinating! They did the Philip of Macedon reconstruction.

But I wish there could be a proper Plantagenet Project of 
palaeopathology, like the Italian ones that have been done on the 
Medici and others.

best wishes,
Marianne





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Yes, and I think facial reconstruction can be done from computer scans. Once
the scans are made from the bones, the remains (except perhaps for the small
sample retained for future research) could be reburied fairly quickly - but
not so quickly that I don't have a chance to get over there to witness the
service!

Regarding the Queen being conservative - yes, that's true, but these are
different times. Note that Charles was able to marry Camilla. (smile)

Johanne
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of George
Butterfield
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 2:52 PM
To:
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

Surly reconstructive forensic pathology has both the ability to reconstruct
the scull without any problem of inter-fearing with both the structural
integrity or feelings of current authorities I believe that Manchester
University has such a unit this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to look
at the face of Richard iii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction


On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Carol Darling <cdarlingart1@...> wrote:

> Marrianne, Its great to receive such positive return on the idea of facial
reconstruction. But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before
such great ideas can become reality. What can we do.to make sure this might
be addressed, or done? Im just sitting here in Texas, and can only offer up
ideas...someone has to be in Leister at least, to implement things. I
didn't know about the Medici facial reconstructions!!!! I adore Lorenzo de
Medici. He was one of my childhood heroes. Growing up in Europe, I had a
different set of heroes than the average American kid! :-) How can I
access this information? Back to Richard..can we start a thread to pursue
the idea of facial reconstruction from the skull in Leister? Carol
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

He was also allowed to sleep with Camilla on the night before his wedding. (To Diana).
Royalty are allowed to do a lot of things, as long as the public don't get to know about it.

There is a problem with Charles becoming king: he wants to become a Muslim, at any rate to be "defender of ALL faiths", rather defender of the Protestant faith only.

But if non-protestants can become monarch, it immediately drops Charles way down the list for direct succession from medieval rulers, below all those currently barred as Catholics.

The legitimacy of Edward IV has been challenged, which if proved false would make the descendants of George of Clarence first in line; unless you consider the attainder of 1478 to be still operative (most attainders were reversed after a generation or two.) 

If Henry VII was king by right of conquest, does that mean we should have accepted Hitler as rightful ruler if the Germans had arrived in 1940?

There were, in fact, no hard and fast rules of succession before 1688. That's why there were so many civil wars over who should wear the crown.

I think the Queen has done a magnificent job for the Royal family, which is richer and more influential than ever before. Above all, by willingly facilitating the cult of personality built around her family, she ensures the long term survival of the British class system built around the monarchy, and that the county continues top be the most divided and unequal in the developed world. 


I still don't see the need for a facial reconstruction for Richard; there's no reason to suppose the (undoctored) contemporary portraits of him are in any way inaccurate. The usual reconstruction methods are bound to insist he looked like Patrick Stewart. Moreover, I do not believe the people performing the reconstruction would be able to ignore those portraits when finishing the image; they would make the face a lot thinner than they usual do because we already know that Richard was thin faced from the portraits; so really what's the point?

________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 8 October 2012, 19:28
Subject: RE: facial reconstruction


 

Yes, and I think facial reconstruction can be done from computer scans. Once
the scans are made from the bones, the remains (except perhaps for the small
sample retained for future research) could be reburied fairly quickly - but
not so quickly that I don't have a chance to get over there to witness the
service!

Regarding the Queen being conservative - yes, that's true, but these are
different times. Note that Charles was able to marry Camilla. (smile)

Johanne
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of George
Butterfield
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 2:52 PM
To:
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

Surly reconstructive forensic pathology has both the ability to reconstruct
the scull without any problem of inter-fearing with both the structural
integrity or feelings of current authorities I believe that Manchester
University has such a unit this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to look
at the face of Richard iii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction

On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Carol Darling <cdarlingart1@...> wrote:

> Marrianne, Its great to receive such positive return on the idea of facial
reconstruction. But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before
such great ideas can become reality. What can we do.to make sure this might
be addressed, or done? Im just sitting here in Texas, and can only offer up
ideas...someone has to be in Leister at least, to implement things. I
didn't know about the Medici facial reconstructions!!!! I adore Lorenzo de
Medici. He was one of my childhood heroes. Growing up in Europe, I had a
different set of heroes than the average American kid! :-) How can I
access this information? Back to Richard..can we start a thread to pursue
the idea of facial reconstruction from the skull in Leister? Carol
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Becoming Defender of all the faiths is hardly the same as becoming a Muslim, although I beleive he does have some kind of interest in Islam.     Fat Henry was given the title Defender of the Faith by the Pope and the "faith" referred to is the Catholic one; it has now been taken over by the Protestants so refers already to two faiths, why not another couple?
 
In case you can't tell, I am not religious.


________________________________
From: david rayner <theblackprussian@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 8 October 2012, 19:53
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

 
He was also allowed to sleep with Camilla on the night before his wedding. (To Diana).
Royalty are allowed to do a lot of things, as long as the public don't get to know about it.

There is a problem with Charles becoming king: he wants to become a Muslim, at any rate to be "defender of ALL faiths", rather defender of the Protestant faith only.

But if non-protestants can become monarch, it immediately drops Charles way down the list for direct succession from medieval rulers, below all those currently barred as Catholics.

The legitimacy of Edward IV has been challenged, which if proved false would make the descendants of George of Clarence first in line; unless you consider the attainder of 1478 to be still operative (most attainders were reversed after a generation or two.) 

If Henry VII was king by right of conquest, does that mean we should have accepted Hitler as rightful ruler if the Germans had arrived in 1940?

There were, in fact, no hard and fast rules of succession before 1688. That's why there were so many civil wars over who should wear the crown.

I think the Queen has done a magnificent job for the Royal family, which is richer and more influential than ever before. Above all, by willingly facilitating the cult of personality built around her family, she ensures the long term survival of the British class system built around the monarchy, and that the county continues top be the most divided and unequal in the developed world. 

I still don't see the need for a facial reconstruction for Richard; there's no reason to suppose the (undoctored) contemporary portraits of him are in any way inaccurate. The usual reconstruction methods are bound to insist he looked like Patrick Stewart. Moreover, I do not believe the people performing the reconstruction would be able to ignore those portraits when finishing the image; they would make the face a lot thinner than they usual do because we already know that Richard was thin faced from the portraits; so really what's the point?

________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier <mailto:jltournier60%40hotmail.com>
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, 8 October 2012, 19:28
Subject: RE: facial reconstruction


 

Yes, and I think facial reconstruction can be done from computer scans. Once
the scans are made from the bones, the remains (except perhaps for the small
sample retained for future research) could be reburied fairly quickly - but
not so quickly that I don't have a chance to get over there to witness the
service!

Regarding the Queen being conservative - yes, that's true, but these are
different times. Note that Charles was able to marry Camilla. (smile)

Johanne
-----Original Message-----
From: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
[mailto:mailto:%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of George
Butterfield
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 2:52 PM
To: mailto:%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

Surly reconstructive forensic pathology has both the ability to reconstruct
the scull without any problem of inter-fearing with both the structural
integrity or feelings of current authorities I believe that Manchester
University has such a unit this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to look
at the face of Richard iii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction

On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Carol Darling <mailto:cdarlingart1%40mac.com> wrote:

> Marrianne, Its great to receive such positive return on the idea of facial
reconstruction. But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before
such great ideas can become reality. What can we do.to make sure this might
be addressed, or done? Im just sitting here in Texas, and can only offer up
ideas...someone has to be in Leister at least, to implement things. I
didn't know about the Medici facial reconstructions!!!! I adore Lorenzo de
Medici. He was one of my childhood heroes. Growing up in Europe, I had a
different set of heroes than the average American kid! :-) How can I
access this information? Back to Richard..can we start a thread to pursue
the idea of facial reconstruction from the skull in Leister? Carol
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

there are or were tv programs originating from the uk where they were doing facial reconstruction of assorted human remains. i.e. a celtic village, a monastary, etc.

in a male presenters voice.."shall we see what an 8th woman from this village would have looked like? oh look we have a cloak broach too. shall we do a bust of this woman and play dolly dressup." (snide snicker from me). the program then jumps from the dig to facial reconstruction techniques, to style of clothing and "practical jewelry accessories" such as broaches and belt buckles.

i think if the "leicester remains" do prove to be richard's, there will be a huge amount of interest generated...translation..oppportunity for a tv production company to capitalise.

should this occur, then the tv production company should be paying for the reconstruction. simply because they will be making money from the project.

roslyn

--- On Mon, 10/8/12, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:

From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
Subject: Re: Re: facial reconstruction
To: "" <>
Received: Monday, October 8, 2012, 2:15 PM
















 









We Ricardian folk might offer help to fund such a reconstruction, if it's not already "on the table." It needn't be an official Society project - just something spearheaded by trustworthy people willing to pass the proverbial hat and make the proper arrangements. Ms. Langley may be in a position to facilitate this.



A certain percentage of the facial recreation would remain speculative. Even an extremely well preserved skull cannot tell the forensics' artist all the fleshly details. For those things, the artist must still consult the portraits, etc., and make educated choices. But the proportions, the depth and set of the eyes, the lines of the cheekbones, the shapes of brow, jaw, and chin, and so forth will help enormously.



Judy 

 

Loyaulte me lie



________________________________

From: Dr M M Gilchrist <[email protected]>

To:

Sent: Monday, October 8, 2012 12:03 PM

Subject: Re: facial reconstruction



Dear Carol,



> I love the idea of making a full head/facial portrait from a skull. 

> Ive seen fascinating work done

> by experts in this field.



This is one of the things I'm most excited about! I'm sure it will be 

done (either from a cast or a computer-generated reconstruction)! How 

could they resist?!



When I was a student, I attended a lecture by Richard Neave of the 

Manchester team that pioneered a lot of this kind of work  it was 

fascinating! They did the Philip of Macedon reconstruction.



But I wish there could be a proper Plantagenet Project of 

palaeopathology, like the Italian ones that have been done on the 

Medici and others.



best wishes,

Marianne







------------------------------------



Yahoo! Groups Links

Maybe but . . . I tend to be suspicious if something is funded for commercial purposes, unless it's maybe National Geographic or some other similar institution. I would think that the university somebody mentioned having a center for such reconstruction . . . was it Manchester? . . . would be the ones to be in charge. Perhaps it could be a cooperative project with a TV production company, like Michael Wood's documentaries. I would think there should have been some planning for TV production going on long before this! Taking footage of the various aspects of the project all along. It will be fascinating in the end, especially if the result of the tests is what we hope it will be.



Johanne



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of fayre rose
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 4:34 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: facial reconstruction





there are or were tv programs originating from the uk where they were doing facial reconstruction of assorted human remains. i.e. a celtic village, a monastary, etc.

in a male presenters voice.."shall we see what an 8th woman from this village would have looked like? oh look we have a cloak broach too. shall we do a bust of this woman and play dolly dressup." (snide snicker from me). the program then jumps from the dig to facial reconstruction techniques, to style of clothing and "practical jewelry accessories" such as broaches and belt buckles.

i think if the "leicester remains" do prove to be richard's, there will be a huge amount of interest generated...translation..oppportunity for a tv production company to capitalise.

should this occur, then the tv production company should be paying for the reconstruction. simply because they will be making money from the project.

roslyn

--- On Mon, 10/8/12, Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@... <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com> > wrote:

From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@... <mailto:judygerard.thomson%40yahoo.com> >
Subject: Re: Re: facial reconstruction
To: " <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> " < <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> >
Received: Monday, October 8, 2012, 2:15 PM



We Ricardian folk might offer help to fund such a reconstruction, if it's not already "on the table." It needn't be an official Society project - just something spearheaded by trustworthy people willing to pass the proverbial hat and make the proper arrangements. Ms. Langley may be in a position to facilitate this.

A certain percentage of the facial recreation would remain speculative. Even an extremely well preserved skull cannot tell the forensics' artist all the fleshly details. For those things, the artist must still consult the portraits, etc., and make educated choices. But the proportions, the depth and set of the eyes, the lines of the cheekbones, the shapes of brow, jaw, and chin, and so forth will help enormously.

Judy



Loyaulte me lie

________________________________

From: Dr M M Gilchrist <[email protected] <mailto:docm%40silverwhistle.free-online.co.uk> >

To: <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Monday, October 8, 2012 12:03 PM

Subject: Re: facial reconstruction

Dear Carol,

> I love the idea of making a full head/facial portrait from a skull.

> Ive seen fascinating work done

> by experts in this field.

This is one of the things I'm most excited about! I'm sure it will be

done (either from a cast or a computer-generated reconstruction)! How

could they resist?!

When I was a student, I attended a lecture by Richard Neave of the

Manchester team that pioneered a lot of this kind of work  it was

fascinating! They did the Philip of Macedon reconstruction.

But I wish there could be a proper Plantagenet Project of

palaeopathology, like the Italian ones that have been done on the

Medici and others.

best wishes,

Marianne



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

david rayner wrote:
>
> <snip>
> The legitimacy of Edward IV has been challenged, which if proved false would make the descendants of George of Clarence first in line; unless you consider the attainder of 1478 to be still operative (most attainders were reversed after a generation or two.) 

Carol responds:

If I'm not mistaken, Henry VIII reversed the attainder so that Clarence's daughter, Margaret, could claim one of her titles (Countess of Salisbury) and some of her lands. Her brother, Edward, was long dead by that time and Margaret was at the time a close associate of Catherine of Aragon and her young daughter, Mary. (Whether Margaret's own, much later attainder for treason [read devout Catholicism and Plantagenet blood] would affect her descendants' claims, I don't know. Probably not, given the amount of time that has passed and her own claims to sympathy. I doubt that even the most adamant Tudor partisan thinks that Henry's action was justified in this instance.)

David wrote:

> If Henry VII was king by right of conquest, does that mean we should have accepted Hitler as rightful ruler if the Germans had arrived in 1940?

Carol:

A rhetorical question, I assume! I don't think that anyone here is defending the Tydder's claim or rejoicing that he "won" Bosworth through the treachery of a few nobles.


David:
> There were, in fact, no hard and fast rules of succession before 1688. That's why there were so many civil wars over who should wear the crown.

Carol:

Agreed.

David:
<snip>
> I still don't see the need for a facial reconstruction for Richard; there's no reason to suppose the (undoctored) contemporary portraits of him are in any way inaccurate. The usual reconstruction methods are bound to insist he looked like Patrick Stewart. Moreover, I do not believe the people performing the reconstruction would be able to ignore those portraits when finishing the image; they would make the face a lot thinner than they usual do because we already know that Richard was thin faced from the portraits; so really what's the point?

Carol responds:

Actually, not even the earliest extant portrait of Richard is contemporary. All of them are copies of, I think, two or three originals. It seems unlikely to me that the Broken Sword portrait (obviously painted after Richard's death given the deformities, now painted over) or the National Portrait Gallery portrait come from the same source as the miniature in which he's wearing cloth of gold.

Although we can see resemblances in the facial features of these portraits (even the Broken Sword one), they are all somewhat amateurish copies. Unfortunately, Richard had no official court painter with the skill of a Hans Holbein or even a Michel Sittow, the painter (as far as I can determine through a quick Google search) of the portrait of Henry VII that we all love to hate. Of course, there's no guarantee that such a work would have survived, and we're lucky to have any portraits at all. It would be even more fortunate if we had a skilfully carved bust of him like the one of Henry VII, which is so realistic that it must have startled poor Elizabeth of York is she ever came upon it unexpectedly.

Lacking such portraits for Richard, we would benefit, I think, from a closer approximation of what he looked like, especially if we could also see the extent (small, I'm sure) to which his shoulder would have appeared raised when he was fully dressed. Only then will we be rid of the foolish idea that he was an elderly, hunchbacked ogre.

I looked up Richard III on dictionary.com and was appalled to encounter a sketch of a deformed, sixty-something midget: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Richard+III

BTW, I e-mailed them through the Contact Us link but received no response.

Carol

Just to clarify: the Salisbury attainder was reversed in 1554 but the Clarence attainder is still extant.

----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction



david rayner wrote:
>
> <snip>
> The legitimacy of Edward IV has been challenged, which if proved false would make the descendants of George of Clarence first in line; unless you consider the attainder of 1478 to be still operative (most attainders were reversed after a generation or two.)Â

Carol responds:

If I'm not mistaken, Henry VIII reversed the attainder so that Clarence's daughter, Margaret, could claim one of her titles (Countess of Salisbury) and some of her lands. Her brother, Edward, was long dead by that time and Margaret was at the time a close associate of Catherine of Aragon and her young daughter, Mary. (Whether Margaret's own, much later attainder for treason [read devout Catholicism and Plantagenet blood] would affect her descendants' claims, I don't know. Probably not, given the amount of time that has passed and her own claims to sympathy. I doubt that even the most adamant Tudor partisan thinks that Henry's action was justified in this instance.)

David wrote:

> If Henry VII was king by right of conquest, does that mean we should have accepted Hitler as rightful ruler if the Germans had arrived in 1940?

Carol:

A rhetorical question, I assume! I don't think that anyone here is defending the Tydder's claim or rejoicing that he "won" Bosworth through the treachery of a few nobles.

David:
> There were, in fact, no hard and fast rules of succession before 1688. That's why there were so many civil wars over who should wear the crown.

Carol:

Agreed.

David:
<snip>
> I still don't see the need for a facial reconstruction for Richard; there's no reason to suppose the (undoctored) contemporary portraits of him are in any way inaccurate. The usual reconstruction methods are bound to insist he looked like Patrick Stewart. Moreover, I do not believe the people performing the reconstruction would be able to ignore those portraits when finishing the image; they would make the face a lot thinner than they usual do because we already know that Richard was thin faced from the portraits; so really what's the point?

Carol responds:

Actually, not even the earliest extant portrait of Richard is contemporary. All of them are copies of, I think, two or three originals. It seems unlikely to me that the Broken Sword portrait (obviously painted after Richard's death given the deformities, now painted over) or the National Portrait Gallery portrait come from the same source as the miniature in which he's wearing cloth of gold.

Although we can see resemblances in the facial features of these portraits (even the Broken Sword one), they are all somewhat amateurish copies. Unfortunately, Richard had no official court painter with the skill of a Hans Holbein or even a Michel Sittow, the painter (as far as I can determine through a quick Google search) of the portrait of Henry VII that we all love to hate. Of course, there's no guarantee that such a work would have survived, and we're lucky to have any portraits at all. It would be even more fortunate if we had a skilfully carved bust of him like the one of Henry VII, which is so realistic that it must have startled poor Elizabeth of York is she ever came upon it unexpectedly.

Lacking such portraits for Richard, we would benefit, I think, from a closer approximation of what he looked like, especially if we could also see the extent (small, I'm sure) to which his shoulder would have appeared raised when he was fully dressed. Only then will we be rid of the foolish idea that he was an elderly, hunchbacked ogre.

I looked up Richard III on dictionary.com and was appalled to encounter a sketch of a deformed, sixty-something midget: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Richard+III

BTW, I e-mailed them through the Contact Us link but received no response.

Carol

"Stephen Lark" <wrote:
>
> Just to clarify: the Salisbury attainder was reversed in 1554 but the Clarence attainder is still extant.

Carol responds:

Thank you, Stephen. Can you provide some details and/or links?

Thanks,
Carol

Dear Carol,

> But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before such great
> ideas can become reality.

Most unlikely. It will doubtless take ages for a reburial to be
organised wherever it is, in terms of what kind of send-off the boy
gets, and they'll either make a cast first or do it on computer.

The Medici haven't had facial reconstruction, to my knowledge, but a
full-on medical examination project. http://www.paleopatologia.it has
some great stuff on it in Italian and English, and on lots of other
wonderful palaeopathology projects.

cheers,
Marianne

If the DNA tests come up three sevens (for those of you who have ever been to Vegas), I predict that all kinds of imaging will be done on the remains, along with the DNA results being lateraled to that group that's just developed a way to reconstruct facial features based no DNA analysis (a handy thing to have figured out just now). I would anticipate that such detailed investigation, pre-re-interment, would be conducted at no cost to the public at large, because how many times do you find the real, true, honest last resting place of the only lost English king?

If I'm remembering this correctly, it's possible to determine the subject's height with great accuracy from measuring the femur, so that will be one of the easy parts.

It may be more of a challenge to do a facial reconstruction, but that's all software-based any more, starting with the type of detailed scans they will not omit should there be even half a reason, DNA-istically speaking, to perform them. They'll be able to do pretty much everything along the principles of NDT--non-destructive testing--with the obvious exception of the DNA tests. That means that, instead of subjecting the fragile remains to possible damage from calipers and casting, they will scan them with minimal physical contact (and no physical stress), create a complete set of detailed electronic files, and output facsimiles with a 3D printer. The files would be available should later investigative teams wish to marry the scans with the DNA to do, say, a detailed 3D reconstruction of any part of the subject that can be recreated through skeletal remains. If there is any reason to do such a reconstruction, I imagine it would be no more than five years out, and probably a lot sooner.

--- In , Dr M M Gilchrist <docm@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Carol,
>
> > But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before such great
> > ideas can become reality.
>
> Most unlikely. It will doubtless take ages for a reburial to be
> organised wherever it is, in terms of what kind of send-off the boy
> gets, and they'll either make a cast first or do it on computer.
>
> The Medici haven't had facial reconstruction, to my knowledge, but a
> full-on medical examination project. http://www.paleopatologia.it has
> some great stuff on it in Italian and English, and on lots of other
> wonderful palaeopathology projects.
>
> cheers,
> Marianne
>
>
>

On Clarence, I have been verbally assured by JA-H and others. On the Countess of Salisbury, I read it in a biography of Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon.

----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction



"Stephen Lark" <wrote:
>
> Just to clarify: the Salisbury attainder was reversed in 1554 but the Clarence attainder is still extant.

Carol responds:

Thank you, Stephen. Can you provide some details and/or links?

Thanks,
Carol

I am assuming you mean post-1066, because I doubt if the resting places of numerous earlier English monarchs are known - starting with Harold II Godwinson and working backwards.

Post-1066, there is Edward V for starters - are the resting places for all the others in that period known for sure ?

Richard G

--- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" <mcjohn@...> wrote:
>
> how many times do you find the real, true, honest last resting place > of the only lost English king?

"Stephen Lark" wrote:
>
> On Clarence, I have been verbally assured by JA-H and others. On the Countess of Salisbury, I read it in a biography of Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon.

Carol responds:

I just rechecked the biographical article on Margaret Pole in the "Ricardian Register" for Winter 1995. You're right, it was the attainder of Edward, Earl of Warwick, that was reversed (not, however, in 1554, thirteen years after Margaret's death, but in 1513) by Henry VIII (who ostensibly regretted his father's judicial murder of young Warwick), not the Clarence attainder.

Carol

You are right as well.
Clarence was attainted in 1477/8, never reversed.
Warwick was attainted in 1499, reversed in 1513.
Salisbury was attainted in 1541, reversed in 1554.

----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: facial reconstruction



"Stephen Lark" wrote:
>
> On Clarence, I have been verbally assured by JA-H and others. On the Countess of Salisbury, I read it in a biography of Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon.

Carol responds:

I just rechecked the biographical article on Margaret Pole in the "Ricardian Register" for Winter 1995. You're right, it was the attainder of Edward, Earl of Warwick, that was reversed (not, however, in 1554, thirteen years after Margaret's death, but in 1513) by Henry VIII (who ostensibly regretted his father's judicial murder of young Warwick), not the Clarence attainder.

Carol

Facial reconstructions can be done using computer programs to build up muscle and fat layers over a 3D scan of human remains, according to racial type.

At the Richard III Society AGM two weekends ago it was said a facial reconstruction would be done, should the skeletal remains prove to be Richard III's. The television production company filming the excavation and follow-up is Darlow Smithson, a company with a track record in historical documentary - I can't see them missing a trick, or a publicity opportunity, provided by looking on the face of a king for the first time in 500 years.

Kate, from York - and new to the forum


--- In , "mcjohn_wt_net" <mcjohn@...> wrote:
>
> If the DNA tests come up three sevens (for those of you who have ever been to Vegas), I predict that all kinds of imaging will be done on the remains, along with the DNA results being lateraled to that group that's just developed a way to reconstruct facial features based no DNA analysis (a handy thing to have figured out just now). I would anticipate that such detailed investigation, pre-re-interment, would be conducted at no cost to the public at large, because how many times do you find the real, true, honest last resting place of the only lost English king?
>
> If I'm remembering this correctly, it's possible to determine the subject's height with great accuracy from measuring the femur, so that will be one of the easy parts.
>
> It may be more of a challenge to do a facial reconstruction, but that's all software-based any more, starting with the type of detailed scans they will not omit should there be even half a reason, DNA-istically speaking, to perform them. They'll be able to do pretty much everything along the principles of NDT--non-destructive testing--with the obvious exception of the DNA tests. That means that, instead of subjecting the fragile remains to possible damage from calipers and casting, they will scan them with minimal physical contact (and no physical stress), create a complete set of detailed electronic files, and output facsimiles with a 3D printer. The files would be available should later investigative teams wish to marry the scans with the DNA to do, say, a detailed 3D reconstruction of any part of the subject that can be recreated through skeletal remains. If there is any reason to do such a reconstruction, I imagine it would be no more than five years out, and probably a lot sooner.
>
> --- In , Dr M M Gilchrist <docm@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Carol,
> >
> > > But, Im afraid that the reburial will take place before such great
> > > ideas can become reality.
> >
> > Most unlikely. It will doubtless take ages for a reburial to be
> > organised wherever it is, in terms of what kind of send-off the boy
> > gets, and they'll either make a cast first or do it on computer.
> >
> > The Medici haven't had facial reconstruction, to my knowledge, but a
> > full-on medical examination project. http://www.paleopatologia.it has
> > some great stuff on it in Italian and English, and on lots of other
> > wonderful palaeopathology projects.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Marianne
> >
> >
> >
>

Hi, Kate from York -



Welcome to the Forum!



And thanks for your advice! That's pretty much what I expected - it would
have been foolish not to involve a production company right from the git-go,
and since there is one involved, and the Society and Leicester University
are involved, if the remains are Richard's, they will surely do a facial
reconstruction.



And I would say if for some reason there's some doubt - I don't know, for
instance, how certain the Ibsens' descent from Richard's sister is - that
the "powers that be" will look at the preponderance of the other evidence,
which tends to support the identity as RIII, and do the facial
reconstruction. And that may also help support the identity of the remains
as being Richard.



Johanne from Cambridge (Nova Scotia, that is J)



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of katewescombe
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 3:44 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All
Done with CGI Nowadays







Facial reconstructions can be done using computer programs to build up
muscle and fat layers over a 3D scan of human remains, according to racial
type.

At the Richard III Society AGM two weekends ago it was said a facial
reconstruction would be done, should the skeletal remains prove to be
Richard III's. The television production company filming the excavation and
follow-up is Darlow Smithson, a company with a track record in historical
documentary - I can't see them missing a trick, or a publicity opportunity,
provided by looking on the face of a king for the first time in 500 years.

Kate, from York - and new to the forum

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group//spnew;_ylc=X3oDMTJmYzJ
haTltBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGw
Ec2xrA3ZwaG90BHN0aW1lAzEzNDk4MDgyNTk-> New Photos 1

.
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJna2k
1Y3NqBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGw
Ec2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzQ5ODA4MjU5> New Files 2


<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWJka21iB
F9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA
3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM0OTgwODI1OQ--> Visit Your Group


<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkb2JhMzNtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1M
jc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzQ5ODA4MjU5>
Yahoo! Groups

Switch to:
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20
Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delive
ry:%20Digest> Daily Digest .
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscri
be> Unsubscribe . <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use .
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20r
edesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback

.


<http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId
=16746/stime=1349808259/nc1=5008814/nc2=4025373/nc3=3848621>

I'm sure this has been posted before but it's quite interesting: the Jude Maris facial reconstruction of Eleanor of Aquitaine on YouTube. The accuracy of course is open to question. There is also one of Richard I.

http://youtu.be/NVOFwLfchWA

That's a lovely, respectful presentation. Presumably it relied on the sculpture, rather than skeletal remains, but it's worth seeing nevertheless. Let us hope "Richard" is treated with similar care.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Florence Dove <mdove9@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 
I'm sure this has been posted before but it's quite interesting: the Jude Maris facial reconstruction of Eleanor of Aquitaine on YouTube. The accuracy of course is open to question. There is also one of Richard I.

http://youtu.be/NVOFwLfchWA

Not sure how much we can trust these sculptures. Mind you, portraits are not always useful. Just look up the official "portraits" of Charles II's mistresses: they all look exactly the same (and amazingly unattractive).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125878/Racy-exhibition-reveals-court-Charles-II-Tudors-look-like-amateurs.html



________________________________
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2012, 21:27
Subject: Re: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 
That's a lovely, respectful presentation. Presumably it relied on the sculpture, rather than skeletal remains, but it's worth seeing nevertheless. Let us hope "Richard" is treated with similar care.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie

________________________________
From: Florence Dove <mdove9@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 
I'm sure this has been posted before but it's quite interesting: the Jude Maris facial reconstruction of Eleanor of Aquitaine on YouTube. The accuracy of course is open to question. There is also one of Richard I.

http://youtu.be/NVOFwLfchWA

Unfortunately, the skull does not yield all facial details with the finesse we hope for. Even tiny variants can produce very different looks. Choices will be made about things like lip width, certain portions of the nose, etc., and the CGI artists will probably seek "hints" from portraits, not merely those of the individual but of other, closely related persons. It's too bad the House of York did not enjoy the services of a Holbein or a Durer.

As an aside, I was looking at a copy of a copy of that picture of George, Duke of Clarence...and then came upon a photo of a painting of Margaret d'York in later life. Comparing the two (and despite the inadequacies of the artists), there is a certain slight resemblance between the two. So while artwork can't be given much weight in determining "true" appearance, neither can it be wholly disregarded.

Judy

And as for the Merrie Monarch's mistresses, maybe he favoured a definite "type," and the painters were under instruction to reflect that :-)  We've all known people who fall for the "same person," over and over....


 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: david rayner <theblackprussian@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 
Not sure how much we can trust these sculptures. Mind you, portraits are not always useful. Just look up the official "portraits" of Charles II's mistresses: they all look exactly the same (and amazingly unattractive).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125878/Racy-exhibition-reveals-court-Charles-II-Tudors-look-like-amateurs.html

________________________________
From: Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2012, 21:27
Subject: Re: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 
That's a lovely, respectful presentation. Presumably it relied on the sculpture, rather than skeletal remains, but it's worth seeing nevertheless. Let us hope "Richard" is treated with similar care.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie

________________________________
From: Florence Dove <mdove9@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays

 
I'm sure this has been posted before but it's quite interesting: the Jude Maris facial reconstruction of Eleanor of Aquitaine on YouTube. The accuracy of course is open to question. There is also one of Richard I.

http://youtu.be/NVOFwLfchWA

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:.
>

>
> And as for the Merrie Monarch's mistresses, maybe he favoured a definite "type," and the painters were under instruction to reflect that :-)  We've all known people who fall for the "same person," over and over....


All of Elizabrth I's portraits, at least after she became queen, were the work of one or two official royal artists, or copies thereof. No one else was permitted to produce depictions of her.

I suspect, therefore, that her beauty may have been a bit idealized and that we might nor recognize the real Elizabeth if we met her at the bus stop.

Katy

And yet, there are certain features that are similar to her paternal grandfather's.... Yes, she'd be less glamourized, but you might recognize the bridge of the nose, the deeply set eyes with their "hooded" eyelids, etc.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: Facial Reconstruction: It's All Done with CGI Nowadays


 


--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:.
>

>
> And as for the Merrie Monarch's mistresses, maybe he favoured a definite "type," and the painters were under instruction to reflect that :-)  We've all known people who fall for the "same person," over and over....

All of Elizabrth I's portraits, at least after she became queen, were the work of one or two official royal artists, or copies thereof. No one else was permitted to produce depictions of her.

I suspect, therefore, that her beauty may have been a bit idealized and that we might nor recognize the real Elizabeth if we met her at the bus stop.

Katy