Scoliosis - Michael Jones' Theories

Michael Jones might want to consult with a scoliosis expert regarding
his theory that Richard's scoliosis may have been paining him badly by
the time of Bosworth. Something peripheral to the scoliosis, or
something entirely unrelated to it, may have been paining him at
Bosworth. (Just don't call him depressed or in mourning for his wife's
death less than six months before, because he was NOT depressed. Nope.
Not a bit. He was made of sterner stuff than that...never mind that
one of the major symptoms of bereavement as a mental disorder can be
the experience of thinking you hear the voice of, or transiently sees
the image of, the deceased person. Maybe Shakespeare [and More] was on
to something?)

It's my understanding that the scoliosis itself does not get worse
after someone finishes growing. The spine itself stops where it is
once all growth stops, it's not progressive into adulthood. The spine
curves when the bones grow and the muscles do not adjust.

If Richard's curvature was bad enough that his breathing and heart
action were compromised by his spinal curvature, it would affect his
stamina. This doesn't hold as a theory, given how well he could ride
and fight. His men would have noticed if he were gasping for breath on
a regular basis and if he had to rest frequently. I have to assume
this man practiced his battle skills in between battles. If he could
keep up with his opponents as they spared as well as during battle,
his breathing and heart action were not compromised. Adrenaline could
carry him only so far.

If Richard's hip socket(s) was affected by the shift of his pelvis as
he rode or fought (think repetitive motion, cartilage against bone
which breaks down to bone-on-bone with heavy wear), then he definitely
would have been in progressively more pain as he aged. How much pain
could only be assessed by an expert assessing whether there was
bone-on-bone contact by the time Richard died.

Until the experts analyze his bones and publish their results, I think
Mr. Jones may be letting his layman's imagination take flight. An
argument could be made just as strongly that Richard may have been
suffering from the sweating sickness at Bosworth, or his treasury was
too empty for him to run away to fight another day, or that he was
filled with hubris and arrogance and fits three other psychological
profiles when he led that charge down the hill.

As for the psychoanalysis saying Richard wasn't likely to have
murdered his nephews, it sounds like Hicks is cribbing from a
psychologist's article published earlier this year. Does Mr. Hicks
realize that Richard's psychological profile is guesswork because the
king can't take the proper tests to be analyzed?

I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that. I have a Tarot deck that might also be
useful?

I'm sorry to sound so cynical and dismissive, but I've been burned
with "cite yer sources and back up yer arguments, else yer writing
fiction" too often. Does Jones cite professional backup for any of his
theories, or is he just spinning out fiction and calling it
speculative fact?

~Weds

My mother has scoliosis. I have been her driver to the doctor for many years. She is 87, and there has been no change.
On Oct 7, 2013, at 3:31 PM, "Wednesday McKenna" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:

Michael Jones might want to consult with a scoliosis expert regarding
his theory that Richard's scoliosis may have been paining him badly by
the time of Bosworth. Something peripheral to the scoliosis, or
something entirely unrelated to it, may have been paining him at
Bosworth. (Just don't call him depressed or in mourning for his wife's
death less than six months before, because he was NOT depressed. Nope.
Not a bit. He was made of sterner stuff than that...never mind that
one of the major symptoms of bereavement as a mental disorder can be
the experience of thinking you hear the voice of, or transiently sees
the image of, the deceased person. Maybe Shakespeare [and More] was on
to something?)

It's my understanding that the scoliosis itself does not get worse
after someone finishes growing. The spine itself stops where it is
once all growth stops, it's not progressive into adulthood. The spine
curves when the bones grow and the muscles do not adjust.

If Richard's curvature was bad enough that his breathing and heart
action were compromised by his spinal curvature, it would affect his
stamina. This doesn't hold as a theory, given how well he could ride
and fight. His men would have noticed if he were gasping for breath on
a regular basis and if he had to rest frequently. I have to assume
this man practiced his battle skills in between battles. If he could
keep up with his opponents as they spared as well as during battle,
his breathing and heart action were not compromised. Adrenaline could
carry him only so far.

If Richard's hip socket(s) was affected by the shift of his pelvis as
he rode or fought (think repetitive motion, cartilage against bone
which breaks down to bone-on-bone with heavy wear), then he definitely
would have been in progressively more pain as he aged. How much pain
could only be assessed by an expert assessing whether there was
bone-on-bone contact by the time Richard died.

Until the experts analyze his bones and publish their results, I think
Mr. Jones may be letting his layman's imagination take flight. An
argument could be made just as strongly that Richard may have been
suffering from the sweating sickness at Bosworth, or his treasury was
too empty for him to run away to fight another day, or that he was
filled with hubris and arrogance and fits three other psychological
profiles when he led that charge down the hill.

As for the psychoanalysis saying Richard wasn't likely to have
murdered his nephews, it sounds like Hicks is cribbing from a
psychologist's article published earlier this year. Does Mr. Hicks
realize that Richard's psychological profile is guesswork because the
king can't take the proper tests to be analyzed?

I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that. I have a Tarot deck that might also be
useful?

I'm sorry to sound so cynical and dismissive, but I've been burned
with "cite yer sources and back up yer arguments, else yer writing
fiction" too often. Does Jones cite professional backup for any of his
theories, or is he just spinning out fiction and calling it
speculative fact?

~Weds

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was.

Marie

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Agreed, Marie. We, any of us, can suffer from depression. It is as ubiquitous as the common cold.

Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>;
To: <>;
Subject: RE: Scoliosis - Michael Jones' Theories
Sent: Tue, Oct 8, 2013 12:09:32 AM

 

Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was.

Marie

 

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Carol, Michael Jones is by far the better writer and historian. He is the author of the 'King's Mother' so often cited on here and 'Bosworth 1485'. Because he leans towards the 'Richard killed the princes' theory doesn't make him bad. He's probably done more to investigate and explain Richard, his childhood and his motives than anyone; particularly with reference to the death of Richard DOY and the effect it had on the whole family.On the contrary, I think Philippa needed some advice before she put pen to paper - she comes over more the fanatic than the objective historian. But sometimes we need fanatics to further a cause. Hilary
From: "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 7 October 2013, 22:41
Subject: RE: Scoliosis - Michael Jones' Theories
Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child Theory" and running with that." Carol responds: We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother. Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books. Carol

Weds, I think you've over-reacted against poor Michael Jones. Someone asked me for a flavour of the book so far and it was one of the 'small' things he mentions. He doesn't devote much space to it. It's with regard to the analysis done on Richard's handwriting in the 'Buckingham' letter which was seen by the analyst to indicate someone in pain. So blame the analyst.One of the things he does say is that Richard's charge at Bosworth was a well-planned thing - you couldn't do it without a lot of organisation. Since Jones earlier mooted in his 'Bosworth' that Richard might have been ill on or around the day, this is a bit of a turn around. We need the likes of Jones; he's perhaps one of the best Ricardian historians we have; despite his beliefs on the princes.
From: Wednesday McKenna <wednesday.mac@...>
To:
Sent: Monday, 7 October 2013, 21:31
Subject: Scoliosis - Michael Jones' Theories
Michael Jones might want to consult with a scoliosis expert regarding
his theory that Richard's scoliosis may have been paining him badly by
the time of Bosworth. Something peripheral to the scoliosis, or
something entirely unrelated to it, may have been paining him at
Bosworth. (Just don't call him depressed or in mourning for his wife's
death less than six months before, because he was NOT depressed. Nope.
Not a bit. He was made of sterner stuff than that...never mind that
one of the major symptoms of bereavement as a mental disorder can be
the experience of thinking you hear the voice of, or transiently sees
the image of, the deceased person. Maybe Shakespeare [and More] was on
to something?)

It's my understanding that the scoliosis itself does not get worse
after someone finishes growing. The spine itself stops where it is
once all growth stops, it's not progressive into adulthood. The spine
curves when the bones grow and the muscles do not adjust.

If Richard's curvature was bad enough that his breathing and heart
action were compromised by his spinal curvature, it would affect his
stamina. This doesn't hold as a theory, given how well he could ride
and fight. His men would have noticed if he were gasping for breath on
a regular basis and if he had to rest frequently. I have to assume
this man practiced his battle skills in between battles. If he could
keep up with his opponents as they spared as well as during battle,
his breathing and heart action were not compromised. Adrenaline could
carry him only so far.

If Richard's hip socket(s) was affected by the shift of his pelvis as
he rode or fought (think repetitive motion, cartilage against bone
which breaks down to bone-on-bone with heavy wear), then he definitely
would have been in progressively more pain as he aged. How much pain
could only be assessed by an expert assessing whether there was
bone-on-bone contact by the time Richard died.

Until the experts analyze his bones and publish their results, I think
Mr. Jones may be letting his layman's imagination take flight. An
argument could be made just as strongly that Richard may have been
suffering from the sweating sickness at Bosworth, or his treasury was
too empty for him to run away to fight another day, or that he was
filled with hubris and arrogance and fits three other psychological
profiles when he led that charge down the hill.

As for the psychoanalysis saying Richard wasn't likely to have
murdered his nephews, it sounds like Hicks is cribbing from a
psychologist's article published earlier this year. Does Mr. Hicks
realize that Richard's psychological profile is guesswork because the
king can't take the proper tests to be analyzed?

I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that. I have a Tarot deck that might also be
useful?

I'm sorry to sound so cynical and dismissive, but I've been burned
with "cite yer sources and back up yer arguments, else yer writing
fiction" too often. Does Jones cite professional backup for any of his
theories, or is he just spinning out fiction and calling it
speculative fact?

~Weds

Hilary wrote:

<> wrote:

Carol, Michael Jones is by far the better writer and historian. He is the author of the 'King's Mother' so often cited on here and 'Bosworth 1485'. Because he leans towards the 'Richard killed the princes' theory doesn't make him bad. He's probably done more to investigate and explain Richard, his childhood and his motives than anyone; particularly with reference to the death of Richard DOY and the effect it had on the whole family.On the contrary, I think Philippa needed some advice before she put pen to paper - she comes over more the fanatic than the objective historian. But sometimes we need fanatics to further a cause. Hilary
Carol responds:

I think that you've misunderstood my post. I'm not criticizing Jones as a writer (though you know how I feel about his misreading of More regarding Elizabeth Lucy and Mistress Shore). I'm simply saying that they apparently are an odd team, neither helping the other. Philippa, who strongly believes that Richard is innocent of the deaths of his nephews, did herself and her cause no favor in teaming up with a man who believes the opposite, *especially* if he is the better writer. And Jones, who wants to be taken seriously, did himself no favor by teaming up with someone already dismissed (thanks to the editing of that Channel 4 documentary) as emotional and unscholarly. Better for both, and perhaps for us as Ricardians, if they had written separate books. And you're no doubt correct that Philippa needed some advice before she put pen to paper to avoid coming across as a fanatic. Clearly, her coauthor didn't offer her any guidance. Were they in a hurry to publish, I wonder, or under deadline pressure from the publisher? Or did Michael Jones agree to work with her *because* he knew that his case would appear stronger than hers?

A blow for Ricardians in any case.

Carol, who unfortunately can't afford luxuries like books right now. Be glad you're in the UK and don't have to worry about what's happening in Washington, DC!

Marie wrote:

"Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was."

Carol responds:

Not sure who you're responding to since you don't quote anyone here, but I don't think anyone is prejudiced against depression. (I've suffered from it myself.) The point that I was making (and I believe Jan was as well) is that Richard's Bestwood (Beskwood?) letters don't indicate depression or any other mental state (including desperation, which I think is the term Skidmore actually used) but are simply form letters and resemble other commissions of array. As I said, I seem to recall Henry Tudor, calling himself king before Bosworth, issuing letters with similar wording. Do you happen to recall seeing those letters and, if so, where you read them?

As for whether Richard was genuinely depressed, he certainly had cause, but he also had very strong religious beliefs that may have protected him. It was "the will of God" to take Anne and little Edward, for example. Unfortunately, Henry had similar beliefs. It was "the will of God" for Richard to die at Bosworth and for Henry to become king. It's hard, as you know, to put ourselves into their shoes and understand their mindset. Was he depressed or wasn't he? Does it matter? The point is that the commissions of array ("letters from Beskwood") should not be read as indicators of his mental state any more than a draft notice sent to an American in the 1960s indicated the mindset of the person who sent it or the one who drafted the form letter in the first place.

Carol

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Yes, I think we're saying the same thing! I also agree about the format. It's changed again and is driving me batty. so I don't know whether you'll ever get this H. PS my daughter was in NY last week and said things were getting pretty bad

On Tuesday, 8 October 2013, 16:41, "justcarol67@..." <justcarol67@...> wrote:
Marie wrote:

"Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was."

Carol responds:
Not sure who you're responding to since you don't quote anyone here, but I don't think anyone is prejudiced against depression. (I've suffered from it myself.) The point that I was making (and I believe Jan was as well) is that Richard's Bestwood (Beskwood?) letters don't indicate depression or any other mental state (including desperation, which I think is the term Skidmore actually used) but are simply form letters and resemble other commissions of array. As I said, I seem to recall Henry Tudor, calling himself king before Bosworth, issuing letters with similar wording. Do you happen to recall seeing those letters and, if so, where you read them?
As for whether Richard was genuinely depressed, he certainly had cause, but he also had very strong religious beliefs that may have protected him. It was "the will of God" to take Anne and little Edward, for example. Unfortunately, Henry had similar beliefs. It was "the will of God" for Richard to die at Bosworth and for Henry to become king. It's hard, as you know, to put ourselves into their shoes and understand their mindset. Was he depressed or wasn't he? Does it matter? The point is that the commissions of array ("letters from Beskwood") should not be read as indicators of his mental state any more than a draft notice sent to an American in the 1960s indicated the mindset of the person who sent it or the one who drafted the form letter in the first place.
Carol



---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

It wasn't your post I was responding to, Carol, it was Wednesday's, who said he was made of "sterner stuff". My mother also had very strong religious beliefs, but they didn't protect her - may have done the opposite (ie why is God doing this to me?).

Marie

---In , <> wrote:

Marie wrote:

"Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was."

Carol responds:

Not sure who you're responding to since you don't quote anyone here, but I don't think anyone is prejudiced against depression. (I've suffered from it myself.) The point that I was making (and I believe Jan was as well) is that Richard's Bestwood (Beskwood?) letters don't indicate depression or any other mental state (including desperation, which I think is the term Skidmore actually used) but are simply form letters and resemble other commissions of array. As I said, I seem to recall Henry Tudor, calling himself king before Bosworth, issuing letters with similar wording. Do you happen to recall seeing those letters and, if so, where you read them?

As for whether Richard was genuinely depressed, he certainly had cause, but he also had very strong religious beliefs that may have protected him. It was "the will of God" to take Anne and little Edward, for example. Unfortunately, Henry had similar beliefs. It was "the will of God" for Richard to die at Bosworth and for Henry to become king. It's hard, as you know, to put ourselves into their shoes and understand their mindset. Was he depressed or wasn't he? Does it matter? The point is that the commissions of array ("letters from Beskwood") should not be read as indicators of his mental state any more than a draft notice sent to an American in the 1960s indicated the mindset of the person who sent it or the one who drafted the form letter in the first place.

Carol

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Some months ago, perhaps while you were gone, Marie, there was a huge discussion here as to whether or not Richard was/could have been depressed. Some of us got taken apart for thinking he might have been, as if he were a less than magnificent warrior if he were depressed at Bosworth...or at all. Once snarled at, twice wary.

~Weds

---In , <> wrote:

Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was.

Marie

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Weds wrote:

"Some months ago, perhaps while you were gone, Marie, there was a huge discussion here as to whether or not Richard was/could have been depressed. Some of us got taken apart for thinking he might have been, as if he were a less than magnificent warrior if he were depressed at Bosworth...or at all. Once snarled at, twice wary."

Marie responds:

Well, if that happened, Weds, that's a terrible shame and I now see where you were coming from. The public prejudice against depression never ceases to amaze and appal me. Anyone except a psychopath with no feelings is at risk of succumbing to depression given enough repeated bereavements, etc. (As for chronic depression unrelated to events, that has been known for decades to be related to abnormalities in brain neurology and chemistry, and there are starting to be indications that it may at least in some cases be due to a gut infection causing wrong messages going from the gut brain to the brain.) I know depressed people come across as self-obsessed, but that's all part of the illness. They're trapped inside a black hole where there is no reality except the horror of their own worthlessness and psychological pain. Having known people struggling with chronic major depression, I would say that those who somehow carry on with life (ie don't end it all) deserve a medal for bravery, not the scorn of the more fortunate.

When any one of us has walked a mile in Richard's 1485 shoes, then maybe we have the right to judge. He had, in the space of little over two years, lost his one remaining brother, the only child of his marriage, and his wife. Seven years earlier he had lived through one of his brothers killing the other. A couple of years ago I spoke to a psychiatrist in the Society who believes Richard probably was suffering from depression at Bosworth, but she's never had the courage to write an article about it.

Anyhow, even if Richard weren't depressed (and I'm not sure whether he was or not), he would still have been in the throes of working through the grief of perhaps the most major bereavement possible, that of his life companion, and is simply not going to have been at his best that August, not properly "with it" at the very least.

Anyway, that's my rant over.

---In , <> wrote:

Some months ago, perhaps while you were gone, Marie, there was a huge discussion here as to whether or not Richard was/could have been depressed. Some of us got taken apart for thinking he might have been, as if he were a less than magnificent warrior if he were depressed at Bosworth...or at all. Once snarled at, twice wary.

~Weds

---In , <> wrote:

Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was.

Marie

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol

Thoroughly agree, and no one will ever know for certain if he was suffering
from depression or not. Was it even recognised as such at the time? After all,
it's only been diagnosed quite recently as a proper illness - in my parents'
day you just 'pulled yourself together' and pretended there was nothing wrong.
And even if his match with Anne wasn't the love match so beloved of historical
romances, they still knew each other from childhood so the bond would still
have been strong and the loss would have been a blow to him, especially so soon
after losing his son, and indeed 2 brothers.



Sharon





Marie responds:



Well, if that happened, Weds, that's a terrible shame and I now see where you
were coming from. The public prejudice against depression never ceases to amaze
and appal me. Anyone except a psychopath with no feelings is at risk of
succumbing to depression given enough repeated bereavements, etc. (As for
chronic depression unrelated to events, that has been known for decades to be
related to abnormalities in brain neurology and chemistry, and there are
starting to be indications that it may at least in some cases be due to a gut
infection causing wrong messages going from the gut brain to the brain.) I know
depressed people come across as self-obsessed, but that's all part of the
illness. They're trapped inside a black hole where there is no reality except
the horror of their own worthlessness and psychological pain. Having known
people struggling with chronic major depression, I would say that those who
somehow carry on with life (ie don't end it all) deserve a medal for bravery,
not the scorn of the more fortunate.



When any one of us has walked a mile in Richard's 1485 shoes, then maybe we
have the right to judge. He had, in the space of little over two years, lost
his one remaining brother, the only child of his marriage, and his wife. Seven
years earlier he had lived through one of his brothers killing the other. A
couple of years ago I spoke to a psychiatrist in the Society who believes
Richard probably was suffering from depression at Bosworth , but she's never
had the courage to write an article about it.



Anyhow, even if Richard weren't depressed (and I'm not sure whether he was or
not), he would still have been in the throes of working through the grief of
perhaps the most major bereavement possible, that of his life companion, and is
simply not going to have been at his best that August, not properly "with it"
at the very least.



Anyway, that's my rant over.











---In ,
<> wrote:





Some months ago, perhaps while you were gone, Marie, there was a huge
discussion here as to whether or not Richard was/could have been depressed.
Some of us got taken apart for thinking he might have been, as if he were a
less than magnificent warrior if he were depressed at Bosworth...or at all.
Once sn arled at, twice wary.











~Weds

"Marie responds:

Well, if that happened, Weds, that's a terrible shame and I now see where you were coming from. The public prejudice against depression never ceases to amaze and appal me. Anyone except a psychopath with no feelings is at risk of succumbing to depression given enough repeated bereavements, etc. (As for chronic depression unrelated to events, that has been known for decades to be related to abnormalities in brain neurology and chemistry, and there are starting to be indications that it may at least in some cases be due to a gut infection causing wrong messages going from the gut brain to the brain.) I know depressed people come across as self-obsessed, but that's all part of the illness. They're trapped inside a black hole where there is no reality except the horror of their own worthlessness and psychological pain. Having known people struggling with chronic major depression, I would say that those who somehow carry on with life (ie don't end it all) deserve a medal for bravery, not the scorn of the more fortunate.

When any one of us has walked a mile in Richard's 1485 shoes, then maybe we have the right to judge. He had, in the space of little over two years, lost his one remaining brother, the only child of his marriage, and his wife. Seven years earlier he had lived through one of his brothers killing the other. A couple of years ago I spoke to a psychiatrist in the Society who believes Richard probably was suffering from depression at Bosworth, but she's never had the courage to write an article about it.

Anyhow, even if Richard weren't depressed (and I'm not sure whether he was or not), he would still have been in the throes of working through the grief of perhaps the most major bereavement possible, that of his life companion, and is simply not going to have been at his best that August, not properly "with it" at the very least.

Anyway, that's my rant over."

That was a beautiful rant, Marie. Thank you for expressing what are also my sentiments 100%.

Bereavement, mourning, depression... these are such complex subjects and they intertwine so differently in different individuals. Some people cope with sadness by trying to lose themselves in pragmatic and/or frenetic activity (I'm suddenly reminded of a woman who lost her husband and went into a house-cleaning frenzy), and that may well have been the case with Richard. Doing things with a purpose, and putting things in good order: that's a good way for certain personality types to try and find some comfort when the chaotic reality is just too sad to cope with. (I recognise some of this in myself, too.) But considering that heartbreaking tidbit about him and Anne going 'mad' with grief after their son's death, I don't for a minute doubt that this was a man who felt his losses very deeply indeed.

I always bring up that thing about those major grants to the Queen's College in Anne's name after their son's death, but I think the timing is significant in many ways. It may have been Richard's way of showing her that she was still his Queen (as I've always felt), but also his way of trying to show her how to mourn as he does - i.e., by *doing* useful things, and not allowing the sadness to take over their lives.

The problem with people who cope by 'doing things' is that, for many of them, the breaking point does come eventually. Sometimes physically, if not mentally. Whether that would have happened to Richard is anybody's guess, but it's hard to imagine anyone going through such prolonged, major stress - coming from so many different directions - without suffering one way or another. No matter how hard they'd try to be pragmatic and control themselves.

All of this is just speculation, of course.

Pansy

---In , <> wrote:

Some months ago, perhaps while you were gone, Marie, there was a huge discussion here as to whether or not Richard was/could have been depressed. Some of us got taken apart for thinking he might have been, as if he were a less than magnificent warrior if he were depressed at Bosworth...or at all. Once snarled at, twice wary.

~Weds

---In , <> wrote:

Sorry to see prejudice against depression, which seems very common - the idea that it only happens to those of "weak mind". There's every likelihood that Richard was depressed given his life history and the troubles piled up on top of serial bereavements; rumours that he had murdered his wife & tried to marry his niece must have been incredibly hurtful at such a time. Whether he was clinically depressed or not I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he was.

Marie

---In , <justcarol67@...> wrote:

Wednesday wrote (facetiously, I think):

"<snip> I think a profile on Richard could be made, taking the "Middle Child
Theory" and running with that."

Carol responds:

We'd have to do "Youngest Child Theory" or "Baby of the Family" if such theories exist. Just for fun, someone could apply "Middle Child Theory" to George as middle brother.

Sorry to snip the essence of your post, but I haven't read the book yet. Certainly, Philippa chose an odd co-writer. It appears that neither did the other any favors and they should have written separate books.

Carol