Potraits of Richard
Potraits of Richard
2013-06-02 13:29:33
Hello everybody,
I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my teenage days.
I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing can be deduced from them.
The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait, but it need not have been this special one.
I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
Eva
I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my teenage days.
I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing can be deduced from them.
The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait, but it need not have been this special one.
I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
Eva
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-02 13:37:51
I do so much agree. I love the SOA portrait, it has so much sensitivity to me. As you say, the NPG portrait has been so altered, the lined forehead, the compressed lips, that it looks like a careworn man of 42 - which was what was intended. The SOA shows a prince of the Renaissance.
________________________________
From: "eva.pitter@..." <eva.pitter@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013, 12:22
Subject: Potraits of Richard
Hello everybody,
I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my teenage days.
I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing can be deduced from them.
The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait, but it need not have been this special one.
I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
Eva
________________________________
From: "eva.pitter@..." <eva.pitter@...>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013, 12:22
Subject: Potraits of Richard
Hello everybody,
I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my teenage days.
I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing can be deduced from them.
The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait, but it need not have been this special one.
I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
Eva
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-02 14:43:40
One more clarification please,
I have a reference which says the "broken-sword" portrait is also Society
of Antiquaries, but I assume in your post above you are talking about the
one where Richard is wearing gold.
Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? And
I also can see in a photo taken of a display by the Society "I looked on
Richard's face" (url was www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html; haven't
checked recently to see if the link still works) that it looks as if there
was also included in a photo of another copy of this portrait described as
"Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph
taken when it was sold at St Gudule, Brussels, in 1921. Information about
the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully received."
A J
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 6:22 AM, eva.pitter@...
<eva.pitter@...>wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hello everybody,
> I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this
> forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of
> great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my
> teenage days.
> I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
> Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
> Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
> Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
> IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards
> lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less
> artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think
> that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real
> hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing
> can be deduced from them.
> The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
> but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the
> mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
> It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait,
> but it need not have been this special one.
> I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
> reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
> picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
> Eva
>
>
>
I have a reference which says the "broken-sword" portrait is also Society
of Antiquaries, but I assume in your post above you are talking about the
one where Richard is wearing gold.
Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? And
I also can see in a photo taken of a display by the Society "I looked on
Richard's face" (url was www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html; haven't
checked recently to see if the link still works) that it looks as if there
was also included in a photo of another copy of this portrait described as
"Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph
taken when it was sold at St Gudule, Brussels, in 1921. Information about
the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully received."
A J
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 6:22 AM, eva.pitter@...
<eva.pitter@...>wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hello everybody,
> I am usually a silent consumer of the very interesting postings on this
> forum. But today I have to write. The discussion of the portraits is of
> great interest for me being a painter myself and a Ricardian since my
> teenage days.
> I want to clearify the history of the paintings. According to Pamela
> Tudor Craig the tree ring dating says:Royal Collection 1518-1523,
> Society of Antiquaries 1516-1522, National Portait Gallery 1590-1600.
> Personnally Ican`t understand the preferance of some of you for the
> IMO pathetic looking NPG Portait,which also is farthest from Richards
> lifetime.And compared with th SoA painting it is of considerabel less
> artistic and technical quality. I get so agitated when some of you think
> that the rendition of the hands can tell us something about Richard`s real
> hands, for they are so poorly drawn, so anathomically wrong, that nothing
> can be deduced from them.
> The RC Poetrait is of course mutilated and not only the shoulderline
> but also the face: the eyes are made narrower, the nose bigger and the
> mouth overpainted in a simiar fashion as it was on the SoAP.
> It semms plausible that the NPG portait is a copy of a RC type portrait,
> but it need not have been this special one.
> I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
> reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
> picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.
> Eva
>
>
>
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-02 20:32:50
AJ wrote:
> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
Carol responds:
It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
Carol
> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
Carol responds:
It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-02 20:39:30
Thank you - now about that lost copy of this picture? Anyone have a photo
of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at the
old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think, in
the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
A J
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:32 PM, justcarol67 <justcarol67@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
>
> AJ wrote:
> > Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait?
> [snip]
>
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in
> the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing
> More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description,
> was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence
> in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized
> how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA
> painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at the
old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think, in
the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
A J
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:32 PM, justcarol67 <justcarol67@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
>
> AJ wrote:
> > Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait?
> [snip]
>
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in
> the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing
> More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description,
> was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence
> in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized
> how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA
> painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 09:59:05
A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 15:03:42
A J Hibbard wrote:
>
> Thank you - now about that lost copy of this picture? Anyone have a photo of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at the old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think, in the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
>
Carol responds:
The link is working today (maybe the webmasters were working on the site the other day when it didn't work for me, either). But I can't tell what's in the photo in the lower right hand corner. Can you describe what you're looking for?
Carol
>
> Thank you - now about that lost copy of this picture? Anyone have a photo of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at the old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think, in the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
>
Carol responds:
The link is working today (maybe the webmasters were working on the site the other day when it didn't work for me, either). But I can't tell what's in the photo in the lower right hand corner. Can you describe what you're looking for?
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 15:17:48
On our right (looking at the big poster) & in the lower row there's a
smaller panel showing the broken sword portrait(s). It looks as if there
are 3 separate images shown there. The top one (in color) can be
recognized as the broken sword portrait; in the row below that there are 2
black & white images, one looks similar to one I've seen demonstrating by
X-ray some of the modifications to this portrait. The very last image
(bottom corner on our right) is another image which looks different
(compare the position of the visible hand). Given its placement & the text
accompanying the broken sword portrait on the website, I'm assuming (always
dangerous) that this is the image talked about as
Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph taken
when it was sold at St. Gudule, Brussels, in 1921 [illustrated].
Information about the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully
received.
It doesn't show very well & I'm curious to get a better look at it.
A J
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:03 AM, justcarol67 <justcarol67@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> A J Hibbard wrote:
> >
> > Thank you - now about that lost copy of this picture? Anyone have a
> photo of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at
> the old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think,
> in the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
> >
> >
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
> >
>
> Carol responds:
>
> The link is working today (maybe the webmasters were working on the site
> the other day when it didn't work for me, either). But I can't tell what's
> in the photo in the lower right hand corner. Can you describe what you're
> looking for?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
smaller panel showing the broken sword portrait(s). It looks as if there
are 3 separate images shown there. The top one (in color) can be
recognized as the broken sword portrait; in the row below that there are 2
black & white images, one looks similar to one I've seen demonstrating by
X-ray some of the modifications to this portrait. The very last image
(bottom corner on our right) is another image which looks different
(compare the position of the visible hand). Given its placement & the text
accompanying the broken sword portrait on the website, I'm assuming (always
dangerous) that this is the image talked about as
Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph taken
when it was sold at St. Gudule, Brussels, in 1921 [illustrated].
Information about the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully
received.
It doesn't show very well & I'm curious to get a better look at it.
A J
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:03 AM, justcarol67 <justcarol67@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
> A J Hibbard wrote:
> >
> > Thank you - now about that lost copy of this picture? Anyone have a
> photo of the photo that was displayed as part of the exhibition featured at
> the old link (just checked it doesn't work any more), but visible, I think,
> in the lower right hand corner of the display in this picture.
> >
> >
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120512152440/http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html
> >
>
> Carol responds:
>
> The link is working today (maybe the webmasters were working on the site
> the other day when it didn't work for me, either). But I can't tell what's
> in the photo in the lower right hand corner. Can you describe what you're
> looking for?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 15:45:25
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
Carol responds:
True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
Carol
>
> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
Carol responds:
True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 16:22:42
--- In , A J Hibbard <ajhibbard@...> wrote:
>
> On our right (looking at the big poster) & in the lower row there's a
> smaller panel showing the broken sword portrait(s). It looks as if there
> are 3 separate images shown there. The top one (in color) can be
> recognized as the broken sword portrait; in the row below that there are 2
> black & white images, one looks similar to one I've seen demonstrating by
> X-ray some of the modifications to this portrait. The very last image (bottom corner on our right) is another image which looks different
> (compare the position of the visible hand). Given its placement & the text accompanying the broken sword portrait on the website, I'm assuming (always dangerous) that this is the image talked about as
>
> Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph taken when it was sold at St. Gudule, Brussels, in 1921 [illustrated].
> Information about the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully received.
>
> It doesn't show very well & I'm curious to get a better look at it.
Carol responds:
Oh, I see. Items 9, 10, and 11 all seem to be a single sheet and what you're talking about is directly below the "Broken Sword" portrait, to the right of Anthony Woodville presenting his book to E IV. However, the images are so unclear that one of them is a mere shadow (the X-ray?) and the other looks more like Edward than Richard (though now that I look closer, I can see the resemblance to the "Broken Sword" portrait) and the hands are in the wrong position.
Too bad the poster is at an angle and the photos, even enlarged, are so hard to see. And I do wish they'd chosen a different name for that exhibit! You'd think that the Richard III Society, especially Jeremy Potter, would have steered away from any hint of Shakespeare's villain.
At least the Wayback Machine is back in working order!
Carol
>
> On our right (looking at the big poster) & in the lower row there's a
> smaller panel showing the broken sword portrait(s). It looks as if there
> are 3 separate images shown there. The top one (in color) can be
> recognized as the broken sword portrait; in the row below that there are 2
> black & white images, one looks similar to one I've seen demonstrating by
> X-ray some of the modifications to this portrait. The very last image (bottom corner on our right) is another image which looks different
> (compare the position of the visible hand). Given its placement & the text accompanying the broken sword portrait on the website, I'm assuming (always dangerous) that this is the image talked about as
>
> Before the modification a copy had been made, known from a photograph taken when it was sold at St. Gudule, Brussels, in 1921 [illustrated].
> Information about the present whereabouts of this copy would be gratefully received.
>
> It doesn't show very well & I'm curious to get a better look at it.
Carol responds:
Oh, I see. Items 9, 10, and 11 all seem to be a single sheet and what you're talking about is directly below the "Broken Sword" portrait, to the right of Anthony Woodville presenting his book to E IV. However, the images are so unclear that one of them is a mere shadow (the X-ray?) and the other looks more like Edward than Richard (though now that I look closer, I can see the resemblance to the "Broken Sword" portrait) and the hands are in the wrong position.
Too bad the poster is at an angle and the photos, even enlarged, are so hard to see. And I do wish they'd chosen a different name for that exhibit! You'd think that the Richard III Society, especially Jeremy Potter, would have steered away from any hint of Shakespeare's villain.
At least the Wayback Machine is back in working order!
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 16:57:55
I find the difference between Holbein and painters who weren't that much earlier quite staggering. Their efforts look like bad attempts by a five year old in comparison. If only he'd been able to paint our Plantagenets!
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 9:59
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 9:59
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-03 17:48:06
The painting of portraits/likenesses was still fairly new during that period of art. It developed "over night," compared to the earlier, symbolic style that evolved from the Byzantine (and the painters of certain areas took to it faster than others - compare anything by Albrecht Durer to work by his contemporaries in France or the Lowlands, and the existence of "Schools" of painting becomes immediately apparent). There are always some pictures that are crudely done by any criteria...but it helps to put styles in context, and for many painters of the time, "realism" just wasn't part of their artistic vocabulary, and they'd be puzzled to be judged by it. :-)
Judy
Loyaulte me lie
________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
I find the difference between Holbein and painters who weren't that much earlier quite staggering. Their efforts look like bad attempts by a five year old in comparison. If only he'd been able to paint our Plantagenets!
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 9:59
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Judy
Loyaulte me lie
________________________________
From: liz williams <ferrymansdaughter@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
I find the difference between Holbein and painters who weren't that much earlier quite staggering. Their efforts look like bad attempts by a five year old in comparison. If only he'd been able to paint our Plantagenets!
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 9:59
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry
almost breathe.
Paul
On 02/06/2013 20:32, justcarol67 wrote:
> AJ wrote:
>> Do we have any information on the date of the "broken sword" portrait? [snip]
> Carol responds:
>
> It has been tree-ring dated to ca. 1550. (They even specify "a tree cut in the Baltic"!). There's a good write-up of the portrait here:
>
> http://makinghistory.sal.org.uk/page.php?cat=2
>
> Scroll down to the Broken Sword portrait and click "read more."
>
> The date (1550 or later) is important since Hall's chronicle, containing More's notorious "withered arm" scene and the raised shoulder description, was published in 1542, and the portrait clearly reflects More's influence in those details (though the painter, unlike More, seems to have realized how young Richard was, perhaps through the influence of the other SoA painting).
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-04 19:34:27
You mean you didn't hear the heralds as they rode from Bosworth into
Leicester shouting "Middle Ages over! The Middle Ages are finished
folks! ":-)
Paul
On 03/06/2013 15:45, justcarol67 wrote:
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
>> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
> Carol responds:
>
> True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
>
> And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
>
> It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Leicester shouting "Middle Ages over! The Middle Ages are finished
folks! ":-)
Paul
On 03/06/2013 15:45, justcarol67 wrote:
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
>> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
> Carol responds:
>
> True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
>
> And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
>
> It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-04 20:14:38
and this is why the reconstructed head, whatever its faults , is a good thing :-)
Nicole
~~~ Music is lots of sound waves coming toward us in a completely chaotic manner and somehow our brain receives that as something beautiful - Matthew Bellamy
To:
From: justcarol67@...
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 14:45:11 +0000
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
Carol responds:
True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
Carol
Nicole
~~~ Music is lots of sound waves coming toward us in a completely chaotic manner and somehow our brain receives that as something beautiful - Matthew Bellamy
To:
From: justcarol67@...
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 14:45:11 +0000
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> A pity the artist hadn't come across Holbein and his realist approach.
> The "photos" by Holbein of the men and women at the court of fat Harry almost breathe.
Carol responds:
True. Either the "Broken Sword" artist lacked Holbein's talent and training or he intended the portrait to be symbolic and therefore was not interested in realism or both.
And too bad the elder Holbein, born in 1465, wasn't about ten years older and never came to England to paint Richard and Anne! His son, of course, was not even born when Richard died.
It just occurred to me that those Holbein (the younger) portraits are one of the reasons why so many people are more familiar with the Tudors than with the Yorkist or Lancastrian kings. As you say, they almost breathe and make the sitters seem like real people rather than characters in a story (or Shakespeare play). They're also a reason why people associate the Tudors (ignoring Henry VII) with the Renaissance and Richard with the Middle Ages. If I read one more time that the Middle Ages ended on August 22, 1485, I will fling the book or computer monitor across the room. Figuratively, of course. I would never willingly destroy a computer monitor!
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-05 18:13:11
Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: eva.pitter <eva.pitter@...>
To: <>
Sent: Sun, Jun 2, 2013 8:29 am
Subject: Potraits of Richard
Hello everybody,
I>....I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.<
Eva
I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: eva.pitter <eva.pitter@...>
To: <>
Sent: Sun, Jun 2, 2013 8:29 am
Subject: Potraits of Richard
Hello everybody,
I>....I would like to ask you now to take a close look for once on a good
reproduction of SoAP. Give it a chance! For me it is such a beautiful
picture, such an intellgent sensitive face.<
Eva
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-05 20:34:26
Virginia wrote:
>
>
> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
Carol responds:
Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
Carol
>
>
> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
Carol responds:
Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-05 20:46:51
Carol asks: I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
Sandra replies: Yes, Carol, when it comes to Gloucester in March next year. No date as yet, or place, but I'll be there, white rose between my teeth.
Sandra replies: Yes, Carol, when it comes to Gloucester in March next year. No date as yet, or place, but I'll be there, white rose between my teeth.
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-05 22:03:33
Hi
I am going to see it when it is in Yorkshire between July and October.
Elaine
--- In , "SandraMachin" <sandramachin@...> wrote:
>
>
> Carol asks: I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Sandra replies: Yes, Carol, when it comes to Gloucester in March next year. No date as yet, or place, but I’ll be there, white rose between my teeth.
>
>
>
I am going to see it when it is in Yorkshire between July and October.
Elaine
--- In , "SandraMachin" <sandramachin@...> wrote:
>
>
> Carol asks: I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Sandra replies: Yes, Carol, when it comes to Gloucester in March next year. No date as yet, or place, but I’ll be there, white rose between my teeth.
>
>
>
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-06 16:08:45
There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-06 22:05:01
I suppose they needed to reference something for the surface look. Although, why they chose the NGP portrait when the earliest work was the SOA version puzzled me until you compare the reconstruction with the NPG portrait. CW and her artist probably thought it was closer in bone structure.
And it seems preference is also indicated by the angled view photo of the figure with the NPG image in the background which I believe, was part of the photos from the unveiling. The SOA has a little more length in the face, wariness in the eyes and more soul in my opinion. .Also, the hair is lighter and curlier, probably more accurate given the portraits of his brother.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
That cross-eyed look is a bit unsettling, it's confusing to follow the intended direction of the gaze. Again, there's probably a difference viewing it in person or on film as opposed to stills.
Hopefully, other artists and scientists will be granted approval for their own reconstructions from the digital scans to see what they come up with - maybe as a part of a movie project. ;>)
At one time, didn't someone from the American Branch posted something about doing a full figure from the bone scans? It was in relation to a discussion on the type of tomb to be constructed. Don't know what happened to that subject - maybe not practical.
Perhaps a copy of the brass of Richard in armor straddling his reclined boar would be appropriate for his tomb design? It might lend a touch of the era.
Unfortunately, the figure is scheduled to be in York Museum around the time of the Bosworth Battlefield reenactments when many would have a chance to see it.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 11:09 am
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
And it seems preference is also indicated by the angled view photo of the figure with the NPG image in the background which I believe, was part of the photos from the unveiling. The SOA has a little more length in the face, wariness in the eyes and more soul in my opinion. .Also, the hair is lighter and curlier, probably more accurate given the portraits of his brother.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
That cross-eyed look is a bit unsettling, it's confusing to follow the intended direction of the gaze. Again, there's probably a difference viewing it in person or on film as opposed to stills.
Hopefully, other artists and scientists will be granted approval for their own reconstructions from the digital scans to see what they come up with - maybe as a part of a movie project. ;>)
At one time, didn't someone from the American Branch posted something about doing a full figure from the bone scans? It was in relation to a discussion on the type of tomb to be constructed. Don't know what happened to that subject - maybe not practical.
Perhaps a copy of the brass of Richard in armor straddling his reclined boar would be appropriate for his tomb design? It might lend a touch of the era.
Unfortunately, the figure is scheduled to be in York Museum around the time of the Bosworth Battlefield reenactments when many would have a chance to see it.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 11:09 am
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
2013-06-06 22:18:16
>The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then
-----Original Message-----
From: fairerichard3 <fairerichard3@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 5:05 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
I suppose they needed to reference something for the surface look. Although, why they chose the NGP portrait when the earliest work was the SOA version puzzled me until you compare the reconstruction with the NPG portrait. CW and her artist probably thought it was closer in bone structure.
And it seems preference is also indicated by the angled view photo of the figure with the NPG image in the background which I believe, was part of the photos from the unveiling. The SOA has a little more length in the face, wariness in the eyes and more soul in my opinion. .Also, the hair is lighter and curlier, probably more accurate given the portraits of his brother.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
That cross-eyed look is a bit unsettling, it's confusing to follow the intended direction of the gaze. Again, there's probably a difference viewing it in person or on film as opposed to stills.
Hopefully, other artists and scientists will be granted approval for their own reconstructions from the digital scans to see what they come up with - maybe as a part of a movie project. ;>)
At one time, didn't someone from the American Branch posted something about doing a full figure from the bone scans? It was in relation to a discussion on the type of tomb to be constructed. Don't know what happened to that subject - maybe not practical.
Perhaps a copy of the brass of Richard in armor straddling his reclined boar would be appropriate for his tomb design? It might lend a touch of the era.
Unfortunately, the figure is scheduled to be in York Museum around the time of the Bosworth Battlefield reenactments when many would have a chance to see it.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 11:09 am
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then
-----Original Message-----
From: fairerichard3 <fairerichard3@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 5:05 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
I suppose they needed to reference something for the surface look. Although, why they chose the NGP portrait when the earliest work was the SOA version puzzled me until you compare the reconstruction with the NPG portrait. CW and her artist probably thought it was closer in bone structure.
And it seems preference is also indicated by the angled view photo of the figure with the NPG image in the background which I believe, was part of the photos from the unveiling. The SOA has a little more length in the face, wariness in the eyes and more soul in my opinion. .Also, the hair is lighter and curlier, probably more accurate given the portraits of his brother.
The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
That cross-eyed look is a bit unsettling, it's confusing to follow the intended direction of the gaze. Again, there's probably a difference viewing it in person or on film as opposed to stills.
Hopefully, other artists and scientists will be granted approval for their own reconstructions from the digital scans to see what they come up with - maybe as a part of a movie project. ;>)
At one time, didn't someone from the American Branch posted something about doing a full figure from the bone scans? It was in relation to a discussion on the type of tomb to be constructed. Don't know what happened to that subject - maybe not practical.
Perhaps a copy of the brass of Richard in armor straddling his reclined boar would be appropriate for his tomb design? It might lend a touch of the era.
Unfortunately, the figure is scheduled to be in York Museum around the time of the Bosworth Battlefield reenactments when many would have a chance to see it.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 11:09 am
Subject: Re: Re: Potraits of Richard
There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial
reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just
walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had
to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to
portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Paul
On 05/06/2013 20:34, justcarol67 wrote:
> Virginia wrote:
>>
>> Agreed Eva. The SOA portrait has long been my favorite for the reasons you state. The curious thing is that you get a different sence of the attitude of the subject depending on whether it is a smaller version or close up of the portrait, as well as the changes since it was cleaned. Fascinating.
>> I'm also liking certain views of the new reconstruction. It's hard to get a full appreciation of it from just looking at stills as it depends on from which angle or lighting the photos are taken.
>> I've often wondered how close they are to what Richard really looked like.
>> Good to learn the thoughts on these from an artis't's point of view. Thank you.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Considering the highly scientific tactics that Caroline Wilkerson used in creating the new facial reconstruction, I'm sure that it's at least 90 percent accurate, maybe more so given that her colleague followed the NPG portrait for eye color and skin tone. (I think that the hair of the reconstruction is a few shades too dark, and the eyes look crossed from certain angles, but they appear to be the right color if you look at a photo taken in the right light.)
>
> If we compare the portraits to the facial reconstruction, the NPG seems closer than the SoA (if you ignore the lines in his face, which make him look about forty instead of thirty-two). The SoA hair color is probably more accurate, but otherwise, it evidently doesn't closely resemble the living Richard. (I'm glad since I never liked it--sorry, ladies!)
>
> I hope to see the reconstruction up close when I go to England next summer. Is anyone planning to see it as it goes on tour?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-06 23:06:16
Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Carol responds:
Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
Carol
>
> There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
Carol responds:
Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
2013-06-06 23:39:54
--- In , fairerichard3@... wrote:
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
2013-06-07 01:22:08
No sunscreen lotion?
But on a more serious note (and this is completely an idle guess), life's stressors can affect appearance. Look at photos of US presidents, before and after. Most of them look like they've aged more than the four to eight years in office.
There's also a medieval archetype, cited by Pamela Tudor-Craig in her 1973 Catalogue to the exhibition of Ricardian pictures and objects. Known as the "Man of Care" (or Sorrows), it originated with certain medieval images of Christ. Dr. T-C theorized Richard's portraits conform to this style: thoughtful, compassionate, etc.
Judy
Loyaulte me lie
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
--- In , fairerichard3@... wrote:
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
But on a more serious note (and this is completely an idle guess), life's stressors can affect appearance. Look at photos of US presidents, before and after. Most of them look like they've aged more than the four to eight years in office.
There's also a medieval archetype, cited by Pamela Tudor-Craig in her 1973 Catalogue to the exhibition of Ricardian pictures and objects. Known as the "Man of Care" (or Sorrows), it originated with certain medieval images of Christ. Dr. T-C theorized Richard's portraits conform to this style: thoughtful, compassionate, etc.
Judy
Loyaulte me lie
________________________________
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
--- In , fairerichard3@... wrote:
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-07 09:50:21
Either way Carol, the end result of Pompeii man was extraordinary, eyes,
facial hair in particular. So I still think the results would have been
remarkable had this person had a go at Richard's image.
Paul
On 06/06/2013 23:06, justcarol67 wrote:
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
facial hair in particular. So I still think the results would have been
remarkable had this person had a go at Richard's image.
Paul
On 06/06/2013 23:06, justcarol67 wrote:
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>> There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-07 17:50:35
In Wilkerson's presentation at the society's conference at Leicester U. (and uploaded to YouTube), she said that when she saw how closely her facial reconstruction (bone and tissue, as Carol said) resembled Richard's portrait, she was concerned because she knew people would wonder if she'd been influenced by Richard's portrait. So she went back and made sure her notes contained every step she'd taken when reconstructing his face from the scanned skull.
Someone also asked her if a full-body reconstruction could be created from the scan of his bones. She said yes, but not by her as her interest in him (as a forensic specialist) was only, "From the neck up."
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
Someone also asked her if a full-body reconstruction could be created from the scan of his bones. She said yes, but not by her as her interest in him (as a forensic specialist) was only, "From the neck up."
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
2013-06-07 18:03:58
Hmm...maybe on average the commoners aged faster, given the level of hard labor they did just to stay alive, and the lack of proper nutrition.
I can't see the nobility aging faster, unless you want to argue that both a commoner and a noble woman giving birth to (example) 10 children in almost as many years ages her prematurely -- which it can do even today.
I suppose, given the harsh northern winters, an argument might be made for/against Richard's face aging faster...but it's not on record that he did, or that, say, Warwick did, or Northumberland. Maybe they all had really good moisturizers?
If you wanted to argue that Richard was in such pain from his spinal curvature that it caused him to age faster...that would be conjecture, and an argument could be made against it as well.
We just don't know how he aged. His skull isn't talking, darn it.
~Weds
> --- In , fairerichard3@ wrote:
>
>
>The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
I can't see the nobility aging faster, unless you want to argue that both a commoner and a noble woman giving birth to (example) 10 children in almost as many years ages her prematurely -- which it can do even today.
I suppose, given the harsh northern winters, an argument might be made for/against Richard's face aging faster...but it's not on record that he did, or that, say, Warwick did, or Northumberland. Maybe they all had really good moisturizers?
If you wanted to argue that Richard was in such pain from his spinal curvature that it caused him to age faster...that would be conjecture, and an argument could be made against it as well.
We just don't know how he aged. His skull isn't talking, darn it.
~Weds
> --- In , fairerichard3@ wrote:
>
>
>The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then.
Re: Potraits of Richard
2013-06-09 18:45:38
I stand corrected. :>)
-----Original Message-----
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To: <>
Sent: Fri, Jun 7, 2013 12:51 pm
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
In Wilkerson's presentation at the society's conference at Leicester U. (and uploaded to YouTube), she said that when she saw how closely her facial reconstruction (bone and tissue, as Carol said) resembled Richard's portrait, she was concerned because she knew people would wonder if she'd been influenced by Richard's portrait. So she went back and made sure her notes contained every step she'd taken when reconstructing his face from the scanned skull.
Someone also asked her if a full-body reconstruction could be created from the scan of his bones. She said yes, but not by her as her interest in him (as a forensic specialist) was only, "From the neck up."
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
-----Original Message-----
From: wednesday_mc <wednesday.mac@...>
To: <>
Sent: Fri, Jun 7, 2013 12:51 pm
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard
In Wilkerson's presentation at the society's conference at Leicester U. (and uploaded to YouTube), she said that when she saw how closely her facial reconstruction (bone and tissue, as Carol said) resembled Richard's portrait, she was concerned because she knew people would wonder if she'd been influenced by Richard's portrait. So she went back and made sure her notes contained every step she'd taken when reconstructing his face from the scanned skull.
Someone also asked her if a full-body reconstruction could be created from the scan of his bones. She said yes, but not by her as her interest in him (as a forensic specialist) was only, "From the neck up."
--- In , "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >
> > There was a BBC programme recently on Pompeii in which they did facial reconstructions of a man and a woman. The man looked as if he had just walked in off the street, and the woman was stunningly beautiful. I had to wish whoever did these could do one of Richard, with no reference to portraits or anything but the skull, as was the case with the Pompeiians.
>
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Wilkerson didn't refer to the portraits while she was putting on the muscles and skin. She treated the skull as that of an unknown man. It was as accurate and scientific a likeness as we're likely to see. Her colleague, Janice Aitken, referred to the NPG portrait only for coloring and clothing.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21350181
>
> Carol
>
Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
2013-06-09 19:05:02
The correction is on a comment I made thinking the facial age lines your wrote about refereed to the figure rather than on the portrait.
Without the statistics at hand, life expectancy was generally thought to be lower, really until modern times. Of course, there were those exceptions. My speculation is that the people then lived a more physically demanding life and therefore more wear and tear - not to mention the pressures of being a ruler in a turbulent era.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 6:39 pm
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
--- In , fairerichard3@... wrote:
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
Without the statistics at hand, life expectancy was generally thought to be lower, really until modern times. Of course, there were those exceptions. My speculation is that the people then lived a more physically demanding life and therefore more wear and tear - not to mention the pressures of being a ruler in a turbulent era.
Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: justcarol67 <justcarol67@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 6:39 pm
Subject: Re: Potraits of Richard Correction
--- In , fairerichard3@... wrote:
>
>
> >The figure's facial lines were probably an attempt to recreate the wear and care during his last years. People aged faster then<
> Ah, Carol, thought you were referring to the figure rather than the portrait. But, the same might still apply re the portrait.
Carol responds:
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be quoting yourself here rather than me. In any case, I'm not sure that people aged faster then. Do we have any evidence for that? Many lived into their eighties, especially those who escaped the ravages of disease and war, or (for women) death in childbirth. It's mainly the infant mortality rate that skews the average lifespan. But, that aside, why would they age faster? (Mature faster, yes, if you're Richard! Imagine today's typical teenager taking on the level of responsibility he faced.)
Carol
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.